May 21, 2006 at 5:25 pm #14301
Ahhh, Pietro. We just can’t agree on anything.
I’m putting up the discussion we had from the other thread because you said some good stuff that will probably get missed.
P:I don’t think Emelgee was acting particularly manly. I think you are just using a joke I was making to bring on your sexual retentive agenda.
Emelgee was not acting manly- she was acting dominant which is a male trait. And I can find no ‘retention agenda’ in my post- just your inability to relate 🙂
P:I also don’t think women want to take any more the traditional feminine role.
Of course they do. They just don’t have any real man to do it with.
P: And not so much because men are not ‘MEN’ anymore, for they really were not that much different 50 or 100 years ago. But because, for cultural reasons, and social reasons they just cannot dream happily of themselves in that role. That model has lost its magic for them.
Well, the body is still male but what you call ‘man’ is just a piece of personality left after spending time grabbing his crotch and scratching himself while watching a game and drinking beer with his buddies. So much for cultural and social reasons… What is there to do for a woman but to become a ‘leader of the pack’?
P: Now they want to play being masculine. And be the bread winner. If we didn’t have technology this would not be possible, as they were chained to their role by the need of their home work. But as technology gave them time to think they wanted to change. Not because men were different, but because now they could and before they couldn’t. Read ‘A People’s History of the United States’.
I don’t care about money making. A woman can make all the money in the world and still can surrender to you at the end of the day if you are worthy enough. Most man are not. If you watch American TV you can see how they reward men to be submissive, basically a doormat. ‘Everybody loves Raymond’ comes to mind. It looks funny on a screen, even if a woman slaps a man. You know why? Because men became their bitches by choice.
P: So if women don’t want to take a traditional role what shall we, as men, do?
Don’t want? You gave them no choice. There can’t be 2 ‘women’ in the house.
P: Just becoming more manly will make them buddies, and competitors in work. I don’t think that you can really stop a person from assuming a role just by assuming it yourself. Also, since you are so much in sexual retention, in my experience yes retention would make women more intrigued by you.
People usually assume a role based on the environment they’re in. Women have a great sense to perceive a weakness and use it to their advantage. If you are not confident in yourself and the way you are, why would a woman love and follow you? You can’t even love yourself.
Retention definitely helps you to be strong but it’s just a part of the whole package. You can surrender your heart to a woman and have great connection if she does the same, but as soon as you surrender who you are, she will leave you.
P: But if you are forcing it on yourself, at any level, then your nervous system will scream, and no women wants to be near a man whose nervous system screams.
Being relaxed is a part of being confident. You can’t force on yourself being something else. It’s in you through your growth and experience living life. The woman will see right through you unless she is drunk. Anyone wants to go to a bar to pick up some chicks?
P: You want an example: just look how Wendy reacts to Ron. She practically attacks him on sight. And he should be your role model? Good luck! And Wendy is a spiritual women, with a husband who at home is the king of the reign, as she describes him.
Girls like Wendy will end up being with guys like Ron because they are confident, strong, dominant etc. Spirituality doesn’t matter much here, or are you one of those people who still thinks that just because you’re sensitive and meditate, girls will be attracted to you? Maybe at first, but you will be one lonely man after a week or two, watching Ron taking your ex away.
P: So, it’s not a matter of stepping up, it’s a matter of slowly growing into the role.
Absolutely. As long as you are making steps, it’s only a matter of time.
P: But the fact of having women in the job and in our life every day is also making things more complicated in other ways: it is making us become more and more unreactive toward female figures. Having to have women in short skirt in the office, and always explain to our hormonal system that it is just fashion. Is rewiring us in ways that are not that good. I personally already daily avoid body messages signaling interest, toward me from women. But it is not only me: there are more and more men that between 25 and 35 just give up on sex, and become ‘sexual anorexic’. There was an interesting article in italian, just on this. Not because we ejaculate too much, but because we are under siege with all those images of women and we cannot act our desires out. Men have always ejaculated, and it never was a problem. But now the problem of stimulus-response vs stimulus-ignoreit has assumed such epic proportion that you have people like Jonathan who’s only way out is realising how the images are not true, and the stimulus are not real. And the result is that he needed to clarify what is real and what is not. Like we both did. (Although you don’t believe that I did). But once a person has the ability to be unresponsive to stimulus the temptation is to just avoid to pick up any stimulus. And what does this brings us to? A generation of people who at 35 are ready to close themselves in the cloister. Maybe this is ok for you who are actively following the way of the monk. But I believe that it should be a choise, not a social requirement.
I really like what you wrote here. Couldn’t said it better myself.
I don’t think I can ever become a monk but why is it when you do retention everybody is putting you in the ‘monk’ category? It takes the right partner to do it with, that’s all. Kind of like finding the Dao.May 21, 2006 at 8:20 pm #14302
This was an interesting post. It appears that you have rather rigid views of what the roles in a relationship should be. I gather that the man is supposed to be dominant and the woman submissive?
This reflects a cosmology that rejects the physical or yin aspect, and tends towards excess yang, or intellectual understandings, as most “life is suffering/emptiness is the only true reality” types do.
My opinion is, surprise, that relationships should seek balance; five element astrology is helpful with this. If a man cannot relate to a woman straight up, or to anyone without putting up a front on how they are “supposed to be”, sooner or later this front will become a major problem. It is better to find someone who you can honestly relate to unless you are only looking for sex, which is a valid thing people need, but may not be lasting.
I recall a story about this white guy from my highschool who everyone derided as being effeminate and a geek, they were all surprised some years later to find that had this extra hot asian girlfriend. On another note, you could be with some just because they are hot and after a while it becomes a drag because you can’t relate, and have nothing to do together.
Choose your ideologies wisely and/or know what you want because that is what you will get whether you like it or not.May 22, 2006 at 2:45 am #14304
“Nothing in the world is softer and weaker than water, but for attacking the hard and strong, there is nothing like it!” – Lao Zi
>>”Do you want to compare who got more hot girlfriends- effeminate and geeky people or dominant and strong?”
Max, you are confusing having a strong will with having a dominant personality. Each person will choose or find someone who reflects whatever particular internal pattern they have or they will go through torture trying to adapt themselves to their “chosen” girlfriend or boyfriends lifestyle (who wants to meditate, why not watch TV?). People can often make bad choices too, based on what they think they should be or have.
>>”And so my friend, to summarize what I said. Being a leader in a relationship is not a head game- it’s the outcome of your cultivation practices where inner strength and wisdom shines through. People will surrender to you for guidance and support, and you will accept it with gratitude, love and respect, and, that my friend, what is called “being spiritually evolved”.”
It’s ok, you don’t have to get all buddy buddy with me, I don’t need your secrets; evidently you would enjoy being a guru with all those people at your feet (I am not one of them).
There is a difference between being a leader and a butcher as Lao Zi was so apt to put it: I prefer to let people be independent and choose their own path without having to hang on to their teacher’s achievements.
“The highest type of ruler is one of whose existence people are barely aware.
Next comes the one who they love and praise.
Next comes the one whom they fear.
Next comes the one whom they despise and defy.
When you are lacking in faith, others will be unfaithful to you.
The sage is self-effacing and scanty of words.
When his task is accomplished, and things have been completed,
All the people say, “we ourselves have achieved it!”.
– Lao ZiMay 22, 2006 at 8:07 am #14306
Interesting topic I will add my two cents:
Relationships should come natural if you have to force it to happen or force it to conform to your ideals it will eventually create inner resitance and resentment from your partner and ultimately will be a huge mess. I believe each should have equal roles in the partnership and thats what it is a “partnership” you will have your life, she/he will have hers and ultimately you have yours together. This will is what I believe in and has worked for me.
Being “dominant” both have this within themselves, but really what are we trying to control ourself, them?; probally it is the lack within; or suppressed emotional patterns that have been suppressed that have probaly never been resolved and we act out on the ones we say we love.
True Leaders set the example and really don’t do anything but guide their group in the right direction based on their expertise, a great example of a true leader is when they are absent things are as if they were there & they undserstand the “end game”.
My expierence with Dominant masters, partners, CEO’s etc is that in the end they are the most ungrounded, and flighty personality’s out there; they aspire to be a leader because they have a lack of control within themselves..
Everyone has to be authentic and true to their own path; realtionships should come natural, be balanced and ENJOYABLE! Following a system it should be flexible for your needs and space. A true Master will guide you in the right direction but it really is up to the student to bring their teachings to a new level and to be actualized into your lifestyle.
We are a human magnet and we are constantly attracting to us people
whose charcters harmonize with ourself; join with them & harmonize! – Napoleon Hill
SnowlionMay 22, 2006 at 11:05 am #14308
I am leaving the forum, this battle field is all yours, I wish Emelgee all the very best, I like your style sister! I wish Fajin all the best on his Journey and for those who like to ‘communicate’ you can reach me: email@example.comMay 22, 2006 at 12:10 pm #14310
Good luck Wendy with your kids and husband. I wish you a happy life and don’t take too many things to heart, otherwise there will be too much pain! I am staying for just today and then I’m gone, but will be back maybe you’ll reconsider. See ya!
JinMay 22, 2006 at 7:56 pm #14312
Pietro – this is just my guess…
But maybe Wendy is sick of being the woman who seems to be used as a reference in discussions relating to women? Surely you guys must know other ladies!
All this talk about men and women when (possibly) the talk could just be about *people*…surely there is something that is universal in us all?
EmelgeeMay 22, 2006 at 8:18 pm #14314
Listen, you two- Earlier today there was a VERY offensive piece of “self-expression” by Paolino Luna which has since been removed which insulted both Wendy and Pietro. I wrote to Wendy personally and asked her if that was the final straw. Her answer was yes. -AlexanderMay 22, 2006 at 8:59 pm #14316
I’m going today but here’s my solution. Just report it to Michael when he gets back and he’ll kick out Paulino and in exchange Wendy will return. Good idea?May 22, 2006 at 11:45 pm #14318
what is the big gender confusion?
men are testosterone yang
women are estrogenous yin
men mars, women venus..
big question is whether we should go through androgynous phases or whether androgyny is good..
I highly doubt it.. balance is great but sex is best when poles go maximum in my opinion.. everything accentuates during the sex actMay 23, 2006 at 12:51 am #14320
Everything is a process, we all learn from each other whether it is negative or positive. I reacted in the way I did because of the perception of a sometimes condescending attitude.
I didn’t say there was anything inherently wrong with teaching, but see it more as a responsibility and part of the prodess of my refinement than a submission on the students part. The teacher learns from the process of teaching about themselves. The teacher of whom one is “barely aware” is the one who gives more responsibility for the students to achieve their own learning process whenever possible.May 24, 2006 at 3:27 am #14322
I have been teaching martial arts (capoeira angola, and stopped in 2000), music and meditation since 1997.
In short, the experience of teaching quickly shows you your own weaknesses, and places to work on.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.