Feminism. Stage blue and red istead of greem?

[Emerald]

@SFRL Your profile picture makes so much sense.

[Emerald]

17 hours ago, Edvard said:

What if it turns out feminism doesn't work just according to the ideology/book of feminism? That's why I think it's silly to give it such a colored word.  Just why? And why no blackism, disableism, gayism? BTW. 

It is also silly in the sense that it's just divisive. It just scares Orange and Blue people away. But then again, this is Green and not Yellow.

Also, what man/masculine person calls himself a feminist? 

What about just subscribing to whatever-works-ism? 

I have nothing against women being equal though. I think that would be best, but what that means I don't know. I just care about equal opportunities. But you can't be too fundamentalistic here either. There are biological differences that we know of and don't know of. No reason to commit to anything here.

So, there may be no such thing as blackism, disableism, or gayism. But there's also no such thing as "womanism" either.

But esoterically speaking, Feminism is a perfect word because it strikes right at the core of the end game of the movement. Most people in the movement aren't aware of this yet, but it's about the reintegration of the feminine principle, just as much as it's about gender equality. Society doesn't like the feminine principle as much as the masculine principle, and this imbalance causes a ton of issues from gender inequality, planetary destruction, imperialism, constant warfare, corporate greed, extreme poverty adjacent to extreme wealth, human objectification and exploitation, etc. 

Also, there are a ton of male Feminists out there. It's pretty common actually. It's basically anyone that allies themselves with the cause of gender equality and sometimes equality in general. 

Also, Feminism is a very effective 'whatever-works-ism'. That's why there's so much of a backlash against it. It's because it's being very effective at changing the status quo toward more consciousness around women's issues. And Intersectional Feminism is getting very popular too, which contextualizes all imbalances in power and examines their causes and unique problems. And it gives voice to so many perspectives that just weren't really mainstream before. 

But to focus only on giving equal opportunities is a very narrow and ineffective application of Feminism for our modern issues. Now, back in the 1960s, that's a different story. It was all about equal opportunities and making sure that women have a place in the workplace. But in our current era, it's much more about understanding and dismantling barriers to systemic inequalities that plague our society. And if we focus only on "glass ceiling" issues, it misses so much about a society that creates so many barriers to the reintegration of the Divine Feminine in society at large. And it also creates fragments in individuals (male and female) who are largely unaware of their feminine sides or are actively repressing them due to anti-feminine attitudes that proliferate within society. 

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, Freakrik said:

But i think it's stupid that you have to call yourself something. And i am talking about what the feminist movement are doing in action. Not on papper

You wouldn't think it stupid if you were an oppressed woman with no voting rights and few legal or financial rights.

You think it's stupid because it doesn't fit your ego's agenda. From your ego's POV, there's nothing wrong and no need for equality because you already have a decent position in the game.

But if you were a woman in Saudi Arabia with no right to drive or open a bank account, you might feel otherwise.

Or if you had a couple of daughters who get sexually harassed, you might start to see things differently. Now your ego will have some skin in the game. Now it will be personal for you, whereas before it was academic.

What feminist movements are doing in action is creating more equal rights for women. On paper, they have all kinds of academic theories. But in action, women today enjoy many benefits the couldn't imagine 100 years ago.

To understand feminism you have to step outside your male perspective. It ain't about you.

[MisterMan]

A lot of women use masculine energy of the warrior to surpress masculinity.

[Leo Gura]

12 minutes ago, MisterMan said:

A lot of women use masculine energy of the warrior to surpress masculinity.

That's a gross generalization, coming from ego.

Nobody really cares about your masculinity but you.

[MisterMan]

I would assume you don't agree with the book "king, warrior, poet, magician" ? Speaking of how different archetype operate within us all and it made the point to adress that in feminism there is a channeling of the warrior archetype that focuses on predominantly ending masculine aggressiveness completely. Both sides of the coin are channeling the same archetype. 

My point was more seeing an underlying connection in how people operate.
 

[Javfly33]

6 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

You wouldn't think it stupid if you were an oppressed woman with no voting rights and few legal or financial rights.

You think it's stupid because it doesn't fit your ego's agenda. From your ego's POV, there's nothing wrong and no need for equality because you already have a decent position in the game.

But if you were a woman in Saudi Arabia with no right to drive or open a bank account, you might feel otherwise.

Or if you had a couple of daughters who get sexually harassed, you might start to see things differently. Now your ego will have some skin in the game. Now it will be personal for you, whereas before it was academic.

What feminist movements are doing in action is creating more equal rights for women. On paper, they have all kinds of academic theories. But in action, women today enjoy many benefits the couldn't imagine 100 years ago.

To understand feminism you have to step outside your male perspective. It ain't about you.

Obviously there is nothing wrong with feminism from the point of view of the women. They will do the neccesary things to do in order to see themselves as equally as men.

The problem is, as you said when you talk about spirtuality and normal life, while you might want to reach enlightment or being as conscious as you can, you still have to go to work and eat and feed your children.

While western-culture feminism might be justified from the point of view of women and progress, if you are a men you will react to it, but I dont see it as a vilified reaction of the ego, but rather a natural one. (of course if we dont talk from a radical perspective, since from a radical one ALL reactions of ego are "bad", but i guess we are not talking from that yet since 99.9% of people are not enlightened yet). Let me explain myself:

 

This is actually the politically correct , and accepted hate-speech narrative of the feminism movement in West Culture: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-cant-we-hate-men/2018/06/08/f1a3a8e0-6451-11e8-a69c-b944de66d9e7story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.89d7a438db9b

 

Don´t need to read the whole thing, I Quote from the autor:

Quote

So men, if you really are #WithUs and would like us to not hate you for all the millennia of woe you have produced and benefited from, start with this: Lean out so we can actually just stand up without being beaten down. Pledge to vote for feminist women only. Don’t run for office. Don’t be in charge of anything

As I was saying, if anybody its enough "enlightened" that they sacrifice themselves and  will lean out for women, then great for him. But I doubt 1% of people who support western feminism would actually do it.

You see counter-feminism as a problem of the ego, but I think its not even a problem, its a natural response. If Ku Klux Klan would conquer america, would you accuse black men of being too EGO-centric if they started to be against it? In a radical sense, YES YOU COULD! But jesus, I think the reaction of his ego would be so obvious that to use it as an argument to criticise the attitude of the black people would be preposterous. Yet you are doing exactly the same with the attitude of men who stand against feminism when they see that his rights get ripped apart (or suffer political and judiciary discrimination) because of it. Turns out 99.9% both feminism supporters and not supporters are not enlightened yet and both respond to his ego. Then who are we bullshitting?

If anybody wants to actually want to really submit to feminism and conquer his ego, great for him, but the ones who dont, please stop being so hypocrite.

Edited July 5, 2018 by Javfly33

[Zweistein]

@Emerald Do you notice how we as women get very emotional about this topic and tend to argue with a long list of arguments to defend ourselves? Do you notice that this behavior triggers men really badly actually?

Maybe it's actually good that I didn't read so much about this topic yet, because then I might have a better chance to dive into the viewpoint of someone who has never bothered to research feminism. 

I found another version of the picture regarding equality vs. equity vs. liberation. The 3 people stop watching the game (which was a distraction), face each other and have an actual conversation and notice there are more people! ? 

I'm getting very eager to re-paint this including females, wheelchairs, people from all sorts of cultures. But hey, I'm the Mom of two small kids so I don't have as much time as some of you guys/girls! Take this idea and make yourself famous! And If you are following the scientific method, you are welcome to reference to me as source, lol.

Edited July 5, 2018 by Zweistein

[Zweistein]

[Freakrik]

8 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

You wouldn't think it stupid if you were an oppressed woman with no voting rights and few legal or financial rights.

You think it's stupid because it doesn't fit your ego's agenda. From your ego's POV, there's nothing wrong and no need for equality because you already have a decent position in the game.

But if you were a woman in Saudi Arabia with no right to drive or open a bank account, you might feel otherwise.

Or if you had a couple of daughters who get sexually harassed, you might start to see things differently. Now your ego will have some skin in the game. Now it will be personal for you, whereas before it was academic.

What feminist movements are doing in action is creating more equal rights for women. On paper, they have all kinds of academic theories. But in action, women today enjoy many benefits the couldn't imagine 100 years ago.

To understand feminism you have to step outside your male perspective. It ain't about you.

That is not really What i meant. Sexuall harasment is a Very real problem. But Why do i have to have to call myself a feminist for common sense stuff. Here in sweden They did a study where only 27% call themself a feminist. (Both men and women). I am not talking old School feminism. I am talking 3th generation feminism. Only a small minority of feminists talk about saudia arabia. Witch is a Very real problem. Things like letting women to vote etc are common sense stuff and feminism has some Very Good parts. But Things like 72 genders is just pure nonsense

Edited July 5, 2018 by Freakrik

[Emerald]

3 hours ago, Zweistein said:

@Emerald Do you notice how we as women get very emotional about this topic and tend to argue with a long list of arguments to defend ourselves? Do you notice that this behavior triggers men really badly actually?

Maybe it's actually good that I didn't read so much about this topic yet, because then I might have a better chance to dive into the viewpoint of someone who has never bothered to research feminism. 

I found another version of the picture regarding equality vs. equity vs. liberation. The 3 people stop watching the game (which was a distraction), face each other and have an actual conversation and notice there are more people! ? 

I'm getting very eager to re-paint this including females, wheelchairs, people from all sorts of cultures. But hey, I'm the Mom of two small kids so I don't have as much time as some of you guys/girls! Take this idea and make yourself famous! And If you are following the scientific method, you are welcome to reference to me as source, lol.

I have two kids also. My daughter is almost seven and my son is three. They're definitely a handful. So, I totally get the lack of time.

The thing is, I've been exploring the ins and outs of this topic for quite some time. So, I do get emotional about it, but probably not in the ways you might think I do. Also, vocal inflection doesn't really come across through the internet either. My emotions are more about, "How can I explain this topic so that well-meaning but unconscious people understand?" And then getting frustrated when I fail.

But I am highly invested in this topic because it's such a huge bottleneck to our integration as individuals (for men and women both) and the health and wholeness of humanity at large. And it's also just really clear that if we continue to orient in the masculine-principle-oriented way that we are now, that it will eventually lead to irreparable damage to the Earth's system. Also, it's weighing on our conscious awareness so heavily even as we speak and I feel it acutely. So, once I realized that humanity is in a trap, I've tried lots of things to get myself and others out of that trap. So, in every argument that I make, my ultimate goal is always that.

Also, I've truly explored all the counter-arguments I'm aware of relative to my views on Feminism and its purpose in relation to the greater goal of the societal and individual integration of the Divine Feminine in grave detail. I even explore the ones that are really draconian and conceive of women as being inherently inferior to men. So, I look at no perspective as being irrelevant to my understanding of the entire system of this consciousness trap and how it works. And I see no aspect of history as being invalid. 

And I've asked a ton of uncomfortable questions to get deeper answers on this topic by allowing myself to sit with awareness in discomfort while I explore ideas that are deeply antagonistic to my very existence as what I am.

And luckily, as a woman, there is no place yet in my journey into the depths of this topic for me to get 100% comfortable. So, I have to keep boring deeper and deeper into the topic and its many truths. Men are more likely to explore this topic, because there aren't a ton of uncomfortable truths for men relative to it. It's not as scary. But their bottleneck is that they often only go one or two layers down into the topic and basically settle in and get 100% comfortable and assured of the answers they've received.

Some men even explore the topic simply to get confirmation of their own superiority to mask over deep feelings of insecurity and inferiority. And they get stuck in a part of the internal landscape that I call, "The Beautiful Nasty Place." But from the male perspective, it's mostly just "The Beautiful Place." This place has a strong animalistic, libidinal, psycho-sexual allure to it. For women, it has that same libidinal magnetism but is deeply tainted with the ancestral memory of the repressed and subjugated feminine. So, for a woman to stay in this place is a tepid mix of immense pleasure and immense pain. For men, it's a tepid and constant pleasure with a very manageable amount of pain that can be easily ignored. So, this place is often what puts men to sleep. 

This is because "What if I am actually superior?" is a much less effective tool for exploration of this topic than "What if I am actually inferior?" It's a bit easier to stay awake with the latter. 

So, the main way that I get emotional is that I get frustrated when I've tried to show people things I've discovered, and their worldview/beliefs gets in the way of their ability to even hear what I'm saying. Like, I say one thing. Then, they give me a completely unrelated argument to anything that I've just told them, because they didn't hear what I was actually saying... they only heard what their minds told them I was saying.

And so, when some men get triggered by these topics, I see that it's just par for the course. It's part of the process. And I have a ton of empathy for it, but not really a lot of sympathy. It's like waking someone up and them hating it. Tons of empathy toward that experience because everyone's been there, but very little sympathy because it's not really that big a deal. Comfort zones must be left behind. But it's just an inevitability that some people will vigorously resist becoming aware. People don't like to come out of their comfort zone.

People don't like being woken up. And a sleeping person will be able to rationalize in the most non-sensical ways to justify sleeping longer.

For example, one time I fell asleep on the couch and my husband tried to wake me up and told me to go sleep in the bedroom instead. And I told him I couldn't because "the bedroom filter" was all wrong. I was working as a graphic design teacher at the time, and I was basically assured that the Photoshop filter that was (definitely) over-layed onto the bedroom just made it a bad place to sleep in. The couch made so much more sense because its Photoshop filter was better... apparently. But this rationalization only makes sense to a sleeping person. Really, I just didn't want to face the discomfort of waking up and moving to a different spot. So, my mind just came up with a reason to keep me asleep.  

And people who are invested in an aspect of the status quo, don't want the status quo to change. They don't want to be woken up. But it's not going to hurt them to wake up. It'll just make them uncomfortable in a way their not acclimated to. And if they can endure the discomfort and triggering, they will be rewarded with a deeper and broader understanding of themselves and humanity as a whole as well as living a much more integrated experience. 

So, if people are getting offended, it means that 'waking up' is happening. 

[Zweistein]

@Emerald hehe, here we go again, aren't we? ?

Can you tell me=you=everyone in one sentence why we "should" (?) read it all? (I know this sounds mean, I'm sorry ?)

Edited July 5, 2018 by Zweistein

[Zweistein]

Haha, I just read it all now ?

But think about it, a picture says more than 1000 words. If you have time and Photoshop ready, take the graphic and change it. I think the boxes should actually be included, too. It shows the disadvantages better.

Edited July 5, 2018 by Zweistein

[Emerald]

4 hours ago, Zweistein said:

@Emerald hehe, here we go again, aren't we? ?

Can you tell me=you=everyone in one sentence why we "should" (?) read it all? (I know this sounds mean, I'm sorry ?)

My policy is to be thorough and honest. So, I often write long posts. And people have usually been really receptive to them, probably because of these two factors. At one point in time, when there were still '+' ratings, I used to have the most points on the entire forum other than Leo and like one other person who had a lot more posts than mine. So, I write the way that I do because people seem to respond well to it. 

But specifically for you, it would be nice for you to read it because you asked me questions and I took the time to answer them in great detail. For others, they can read it if they're interested and it would help them look at the situation more systemically and in ways they haven't before. And doing so, would also prevent people from falling into the most common spiritual, social, and political traps. But it was specifically for you and your questions. 

[Clayman]

In my observations. People I had contact with. 90% of them were excesses of red, blue, or orange. Big chunk of them not even having traces of, or the antenna for orange. Understandable ... most of them were like... 20 years old. Ideas and movements do not seem to belong to some groups who own the spiral stages. I think we all get that. Also I had a few contacts, what I would guess were a healthy manifestation of green, witch were feminists in a particular ways, but not in others, some views were even opposite to their red/blue sisters.

[Zweistein]

@Emerald I will get back to you - let me do some research first. I wanna take a look/read the books you suggested. ?

In the meantime, I also found these lovely videos:

 

[Guest Quanty]

Feminism is dangerous. An ex-feminist is speaking  

Almost got killed and in the path of never awakening because of feminism and the so-called "responsibility" and the overprotection of women. 

[Zweistein]

@Emerald

Now I had more time to take a closer look at what you had written. Thank you for all your explanations! I still have a lot to learn obviously! I don’t want to come across as arrogant or as a moralizer / know-it-better - I’m aware that I probably do, so I want to apologize for that. 

Of course, I’m a feminist, too and I agree with many things you said! And yes, probably the word “Feminism” was (or still is) needed as it strikes more at the core of the movement than the word "Equitism". I assume that my problem is that I’m still a bit too impatient – maybe it can be called “Equitism” once humanity, or let's say enough people, have reached stage yellow/turquoise? Maybe we could agree on that?

On 4.7.2018 at 0:56 PM, Emerald said:

So, it doesn't actually matter what you call it. The people who are against it now because it's called Feminism would be against it if it were called Equitism too. This is because if Equitism were truly about acheiving equity in an effective way and not just about pretending that we've already achieved equity, women's issues would still be focused upon disproportionately because women are disproportionately negatively affected by the dis-integration of the Divine Feminine. So, those that think in terms of Feminism focusing on women's issues unfairly, would still perceive this disproportionate attention to women's issues in Equitism as unfair and would be against it.  But this common mistake, is just lack of nuance and not thinking systemically about societal issues. 

You are absolutely right here! At the moment, men are still learning about the issues women are facing. And women are learning about the issues men are facing. And white people are learning about the issues black people and other minorities are facing. And so on... let's not forget about LGBT! And let's not forget about people with all sorts of disabilities/impairments!

Then the question becomes - how do we actually learn this? Apparently, one thing that works quite well, is when we seriously attempt to step into each others shoes. I remember that there was a Twitter thread at some point, where a male coworker answered the emails a female coworker got:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/what-happened-when-a-man-signed-work-emails-using-a-female-name-for-a-week_us_58c2ce53e4b054a0ea6a4066?guccounter=1

I will probably get a lot of BS for this statement now, but I openly admit here, that I have put my husband on purpose in situations, where he had to take on the female role, i.e. making dinner with two screamy/hungry kids surrounding him while I was working in another room. It may feel like moralizing big time, but to me it seemed like I had no other choice. I tried to talk to him about it (so many freaking times, seriously!), but I didn’t feel understood or even heard! But guess what, since ever I decided to do that – things are actually changing! Plus, may I dare to say that I have a much better understanding for his side as well.  

So yes, I wish more men would discover their feminine sides! Please, men – start crying! Show us your feelings! I’m quite sure that most women would actually appreciate that (I guess especially once a woman has reached stage green).

Ok, so now I will go and read some Jean Benedict Raffa ? Just downloaded the "Dream theaters of the soul".

[Zweistein]

Oh jeeze - that sounded arrogant again, didn't it?

I know I'm more of a masculine woman and I need to show my emotions more, too.

[Emerald]

30 minutes ago, Zweistein said:

Oh jeeze - that sounded arrogant again, didn't it?

I know I'm more of a masculine woman and I need to show my emotions more, too.

No worries. I didn't take it that way.  I read your message earlier. But I've been working really hard on editing a video for my channel. So, I haven't had the opportunity to reply. I'll probably get to it tomorrow or the next day. I'm going out of town tomorrow, but I may be able to carve out some time.