What does it mean to 'respect women'?

[Emerald]

5 hours ago, Hardkill said:

Do you think that having casual sex with women is always disrespectful? Do you think it makes women feel like sex objects?

No to the first question… and not always to the second question.

As long as she’s on board with it, it can still be mutually respectful to engage in casual sex.

[Emerald]

2 hours ago, mr_engineer said:

@Emerald Okay, this is really big talk. 

Let's make this even more practical. 

Do you have respect for a mosquito in the moment that it's sucking your blood?! 

If not, if you say 'I'm not there in my ability to offer unconditional respect yet', will you ever get there? 

Does the lion disrespect the gazelle when he eats him to survive?

My philosophy on survival and boundaries is that every animal gets to protect themselves and survive. And every species gets to prioritize members of their own species.

For example, I don’t eat meat because I am in a fortunate enough position to not need to eat animals to survive.

So, to justify eating an animal to myself,  I would have to engage in hierarchical thinking and a disrespect to the animal where I place my desire for 10 minutes of sensory enjoyment over the value of the animal’s entire life. 

But if I were in a situation where I had to eat an animal to survive, I wouldn’t have any qualms about it. That’s just the nature of survival. And each human and non-human animal is entitled to a fair crack at survival.

This is the way that Animistic cultures have viewed things like hunting. It’s always with a deep respect to the wisdom of nature and the circle of life. And it’s to understand that sometimes you eat the lion and sometimes the lion eats you.

So, I will swat the mosquito for my own survival. But the mosquito will suck my blood for it’s survival.

And that’s just how things are.

But I don’t disrespect the mosquito to swatting it away… any more than the gazelle disrespects the lion by running away. 

I can still recognize the validity of their existence, but still maintain my own survival.

Edited February 10, 2023 by Emerald

[mr_engineer]

46 minutes ago, Emerald said:

I can still recognize the validity of their existence, but still maintain my own survival.

If you recognize the validity of their existence but still maintain your own survival, what this means is that you are recognizing their existence as an entity that's separate from you. If you didn't recognize the 'separateness', i.e. the opposite of your oneness with it, you would not have to also maintain your own survival, right?! 

And, the Absolute Truth, is that this is wrong. Because separation is an illusion. 

If you define 'respect' like this, it fundamentally goes against your desire to define 'Respect' with a capital 'R'. A 'Respect' without an opposite. Because, when you embody it, you are willing to recognize the validity of the 'other' party's agenda, even though it is separate from you, cuz you have your own survival to maintain too. This neglects the reality that the 'other' side is 'disrespecting' you in the relative domain, precisely because your absolute definition of 'Respect', when applied to the relative realm, does not have an opposite! So, you will have this blindspot, in practice, when you define it like this. 

In other words, you are compromising with 'the reality of conflict', in the way you define 'respect'. This is the failure of your theory, when applied to practice. Because, the point of this concept of 'respect', is to get along with each other, have a consensus and not be conflicted. To not have war, to have peace. And to therefore form a strong team-dynamic between people, get shit done together and create a utopian world. 

Edited February 10, 2023 by mr_engineer

[Rafael Thundercat]

On 08/02/2023 at 8:49 PM, mr_engineer said:

@Emerald Okay. Let me rephrase the question.

Are all identities respectable? (Not even remotely implying anything about gender.) 

If not, what does it take for someone to earn respect? 

Every one can have their own different list of what one need to be or do to earn respect. For exelample for me if a person men or woman keep coming with double standards, sneakyness and manipulation they lost credit with me in a fair amount, and I try to not contact to much with them or ignore completly in case the situation is super toxic. 

In the end of the day is up to you as Leo said to come up with you list of what a women need to do or be to earn your respect, if you dont  want to give for free is up to you to set up the terms and conditions of the negociation, or just dont do bussiness with someone you feel is not deserving your time and energy. Let go and follow your path.

[Emerald]

1 hour ago, mr_engineer said:

If you recognize the validity of their existence but still maintain your own survival, what this means is that you are recognizing their existence as an entity that's separate from you. If you didn't recognize the 'separateness', i.e. the opposite of your oneness with it, you would not have to also maintain your own survival, right?! 

And, the Absolute Truth, is that this is wrong. Because separation is an illusion. 

If you define 'respect' like this, it fundamentally goes against your desire to define 'Respect' with a capital 'R'. A 'Respect' without an opposite. Because, when you embody it, you are willing to recognize the validity of the 'other' party's agenda, even though it is separate from you, cuz you have your own survival to maintain too. This neglects the reality that the 'other' side is 'disrespecting' you in the relative domain, precisely because your absolute definition of 'Respect', when applied to the relative realm, does not have an opposite! So, you will have this blindspot, in practice, when you define it like this. 

In other words, you are compromising with 'the reality of conflict', in the way you define 'respect'. This is the failure of your theory, when applied to practice. Because, the point of this concept of 'respect', is to get along with each other, have a consensus and not be conflicted. To not have war, to have peace. And to therefore form a strong team-dynamic between people, get shit done together and create a utopian world. 

Separation and oneness are two sides to the same coin. One is relative and the other is absolute.

We live in a world where (in order to function) we must respect the separateness and boundaries of objects and beings. So, the relative truth is that we are separate because we function as separate.

And within that separation comes duality and relationship to the other. And this is where respect comes in and can be given and received between self and other.

But in the absolute sense, everything is one. And we are all parts within a greater whole.

Respect in my definition, means to recognize the oneness/sacredness of the other through the lens of separation and relationship.

[mr_engineer]

1 hour ago, Emerald said:

Separation and oneness are two sides to the same coin. One is relative and the other is absolute.

There is 'separation' and 'oneness' in the relative domain, which are two sides to the same coin. Then, there is 'Oneness' with a capital 'O'. It does not have an opposite. There is no other side to the coin of 'Oneness' with a capital 'O'. 

1 hour ago, Emerald said:

We live in a world where (in order to function) we must respect the separateness and boundaries of objects and beings. So, the relative truth is that we are separate because we function as separate.

And within that separation comes duality and relationship to the other. And this is where respect comes in and can be given and received between self and other.

But in the absolute sense, everything is one. And we are all parts within a greater whole.

I agree with the theory. 

1 hour ago, Emerald said:

Respect in my definition, means to recognize the oneness/sacredness of the other through the lens of separation and relationship.

Wait. Through the lens of separation? 

Either this is a strange-loop or a contradiction. I'm thinking contradiction. If you said 'the lens of Oneness, with a capital O', cuz that's how I'd expect to be able to see someone's oneness/sacredness, it would make perfect sense to me. Because to be able to have access to that lens, you would also have to have Infinite Self-Respect, or Respect for yourself as the God-self. 

Because, when I put on the lens of separation, I don't get this magnanimous view of someone's oneness/sacredness. It's just me and the finite reality around me. 

[Emerald]

4 hours ago, mr_engineer said:

There is 'separation' and 'oneness' in the relative domain, which are two sides to the same coin. Then, there is 'Oneness' with a capital 'O'. It does not have an opposite. There is no other side to the coin of 'Oneness' with a capital 'O'. 

I agree with the theory. 

Wait. Through the lens of separation? 

Either this is a strange-loop or a contradiction. I'm thinking contradiction. If you said 'the lens of Oneness, with a capital O', cuz that's how I'd expect to be able to see someone's oneness/sacredness, it would make perfect sense to me. Because to be able to have access to that lens, you would also have to have Infinite Self-Respect, or Respect for yourself as the God-self. 

Because, when I put on the lens of separation, I don't get this magnanimous view of someone's oneness/sacredness. It's just me and the finite reality around me. 

To use your capital thing… oneness and separation are both part of Oneness. Just as the finite and the infinite are both part of the Infinite.

And what I try to practice is to see myself as the god-self and others as the god-self… And to keep this in my awareness as I interact with others. 

And through this separation the god-self can experience itself as a twoness and be in relationship to itself. And god both gives love/worship to itself and receives love/worship from itself.

It can really be summed up in the word Namaste as a reverence that comes up between individuals as they remind each other of the oneness that isn’t so obvious when immersed in the dualistic realities of human life.

This is what I mean by unconditional respect. And it is why I do my best to practice it as such.

It’s that, no matter what form it comes to me in, it is always god and it is always me. And the root of that thing is Love… even as it comes up in forms that seem unloving.

And if I am to show disrespect to another, it is really me that I’m showing disrespect to.

Edited February 10, 2023 by Emerald

[Hardkill]

13 hours ago, Emerald said:

No to the first question… and not always to the second question.

As long as she’s on board with it, it can still be mutually respectful to engage in casual sex.

So, how do you think some women are able to enjoy casual sex without ever feeling like a sex object or feeling like the guy they had sex with was just using her body for sex?

[Emerald]

7 hours ago, Hardkill said:

So, how do you think some women are able to enjoy casual sex without ever feeling like a sex object or feeling like the guy they had sex with was just using her body for sex?

Sometimes some women just want sex. So, communicate about that. And you’d have to show mutual respect.

I’ve had hook ups in the past, and there were a couple that I felt disrespected in because of the attitude the guys had towards women in general.

But most of them, I felt we were on the same wave length and that they didn’t respect me less for sleeping with them.

[Hardkill]

2 hours ago, Emerald said:

Sometimes some women just want sex. So, communicate about that. And you’d have to show mutual respect.

I’ve had hook ups in the past, and there were a couple that I felt disrespected in because of the attitude the guys had towards women in general.

But most of them, I felt we were on the same wave length and that they didn’t respect me less for sleeping with them.

Yeah, I've also hooked up with a few girls in the past who just wanted sex with me and nothing more.

So, then how would I communicate that to a girl I want to have casual sex with in a way that doesn't objectify her or disrespects her?

What kinds of things did those guys who made you feel disrespected say or do to you to make you feel that way?

 

[Emerald]

9 hours ago, Hardkill said:

Yeah, I've also hooked up with a few girls in the past who just wanted sex with me and nothing more.

So, then how would I communicate that to a girl I want to have casual sex with in a way that doesn't objectify her or disrespects her?

What kinds of things did those guys who made you feel disrespected say or do to you to make you feel that way?

It’s not really what the disrespectful guys said. It’s their overall attitude and way of thinking about sex/women that comes through in all their actions.

Like if they see sex/women through an objectifying lens of status seeking and conquest, that’s going to come across in subtle ways.

And with the guys who were respectful, they just viewed me as a normal human being who’s seeking an enjoyable experience… just like them. And because of this, there was a casual friendliness about those experiences.

But eye to eye communication and mutual respect is key. Just understand that women are people too who have similar motives to you. And don’t get too worried about it. Just be social, fun, and friendly and learn about social cues.

[Hardkill]

4 hours ago, Emerald said:

It’s not really what the disrespectful guys said. It’s their overall attitude and way of thinking about sex/women that comes through in all their actions.

Like if they see sex/women through an objectifying lens of status seeking and conquest, that’s going to come across in subtle ways.

And with the guys who were respectful, they just viewed me as a normal human being who’s seeking an enjoyable experience… just like them. And because of this, there was a casual friendliness about those experiences.

But eye to eye communication and mutual respect is key. Just understand that women are people too who have similar motives to you. And don’t get too worried about it. Just be social, fun, and friendly and learn about social cues.

What actions did some of those guys do to make you feel objectified?

Did they mislead you about their intentions with you?

Did they not check to make sure you're doing okay after hooking up? 

[mr_engineer]

On 2/10/2023 at 9:06 PM, Emerald said:

To use your capital thing… oneness and separation are both part of Oneness. Just as the finite and the infinite are both part of the Infinite.

And what I try to practice is to see myself as the god-self and others as the god-self… And to keep this in my awareness as I interact with others. 

And through this separation the god-self can experience itself as a twoness and be in relationship to itself. And god both gives love/worship to itself and receives love/worship from itself.

It can really be summed up in the word Namaste as a reverence that comes up between individuals as they remind each other of the oneness that isn’t so obvious when immersed in the dualistic realities of human life.

This is what I mean by unconditional respect. And it is why I do my best to practice it as such.

It’s that, no matter what form it comes to me in, it is always god and it is always me. And the root of that thing is Love… even as it comes up in forms that seem unloving.

And if I am to show disrespect to another, it is really me that I’m showing disrespect to.

Alright. What this sounds like is that you see 'giving respect' as a good spiritual practice that you feel intuitively called to do and you're saying something spiritual to justify it. Nothing wrong with that, as long as you're doing it because you truly want to do it. Because if you don't truly want to do it, you'll become a codependent. I don't know how you'll discern between when you're being codependent vs when you're doing it out of your own volition, you're saying you'll switch back to a survival-oriented frame yourself if someone else disrespects you. You probably have your way of handling that. I don't get it, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. 

Do you think others should emulate what you're doing? Do you see yourself as a good role-model for others? Are you a good practitioner of this practice or do you have some distance to go on this front? If you were to teach it to someone else, would you be able to use your spiritual justification to convince them to do as you're saying? Would you know how it applies to their context? 

Edited February 12, 2023 by mr_engineer

[Emerald]

16 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

Alright. What this sounds like is that you see 'giving respect' as a good spiritual practice that you feel intuitively called to do and you're saying something spiritual to justify it. Nothing wrong with that, as long as you're doing it because you truly want to do it. Because if you don't truly want to do it, you'll become a codependent. I don't know how you'll discern between when you're being codependent vs when you're doing it out of your own volition, you're saying you'll switch back to a survival-oriented frame yourself if someone else disrespects you. You probably have your way of handling that. I don't get it, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. 

Do you think others should emulate what you're doing? Do you see yourself as a good role-model for others? Are you a good practitioner of this practice or do you have some distance to go on this front? If you were to teach it to someone else, would you be able to use your spiritual justification to convince them to do as you're saying? Would you know how it applies to their context? 

This isn’t something that can be emulated or pretended to. It’s a practice that requires LOTS of practice.

And being able to practice it wisely, comes from the awareness that arises from the direct experience of Oneness and unconditional love as the core nature of all things… and seeing firsthand how that seemingly contradictory reality coexists with the (often brutal) practical realities of living a separate human life.

Had I not had these experiences and had I not had a decades long practice of unconditional love and had I not grappled with the paradoxical realities of separation and oneness… then I probably would still struggle to implement this well.

And without that lived wisdom, I might push myself into self-sacrifice and codependency. 

But I’m now as anchored in my sovereignty as ever before and as unconditionally loving as I have ever before been. 

Sovereignty-wise, I’m pretty rock solid about what I feel and what I want without having to outsource my decision making to others. I hold much less of an illusion that absolute authority can be found outside of myself in other people.

That’s taken a while to ferment.

But I only really got clear about holding space for this paradox of boundaries and oneness 7 or 8 years ago. 

I had my first awakening 13 years ago where I recognized the oneness of all things. And afterwards, I foolishly sought to rid myself of all boundaries and tried to live my life impractically… to try to re-access that state.

And I would think that, in order to achieve such a state of oneness… what would stop me from walking into traffic? And I was baffled by how to maintain oneness whilst not throwing myself into the meat grinder.

I had no idea how to hold space for both truths and how to navigate paradigms.

I first decided to be unconditionally accepting 21 years ago when I was 12. And I ran into so many codependency/self-sacrifice traps because I didn’t know the first thing about what that even meant. I was just trying to emulate the IDEA of what Christ and the Buddha were doing so that I could build an identity of it.

I had no idea about God, love, and oneness. All I could do was emulate the behavior… but I had no access to the levels of consciousness needed to actually practice unconditional love.

Then at age 20, I awoke to the oneness and the unconditional love for the first time. And I saw that there was no distinction between my inner world and the outer world. And I saw that any sense of separation I seemed to have with the rest of reality was an illusion.

But I was not yet wise enough to understand how to integrate that insight. So, it took me until I was 26 to build out my mental framework to become mutiperspectival.

And I spent about 3 years of that time under the impression that I needed to supplant the practical truths of day to day living for the spiritual truths.

And then, in that 7-8 years there’s been a deepening of authority that I’ve been tapping into… because I am more anchored in Self and Oneness… which are one and the same.

And from that, there is a recognition that failing to revere others is also a failure to revere myself... and vice versa.

So, to practice conditional respect would diminish me in so many ways.

And I see this self-diminishing in people who have a policy of conditional respect… especially those who take that as a matter of pride.

[mr_engineer]

@Emerald I see that you have some experience embodying your definition of 'respect'. That's good work. 

Do you have a vision for what the world should look like, what society should look like, what relationships should look like? And, if so, how that can be actualized? With all of this experience, if you just have a vision, I'm sure you'll have a way to actualize it. 

The reason I'm asking you about role-modelling and emulating is that practically, this is what I have seen to work to change relationship-dynamics and to improve them. Do you have other ways in which you change relationship-dynamics for the better? 

[mr_engineer]