Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Anything Else...
Chat
Hot topic arena
Sex, Gender, and Sexuality: Prescriptions and Possibilities
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Modcleopatra" data-source="post: 224881" data-attributes="member: 7059"><p>Thanks so much for sharing! I agree very fascinating.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I worry about a sexless society. I think if I could decide how things are, I'd say we simply need to become more sensitive with what we make sex mean. I think neutrality is trap, absolves us of responsibility, personal awareness, and communal/global connectiveness.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I like that you say there is no sexuality here, it's just prana and flows of energy that has not become harnessed or connected to the person as an expression of sexual desire. I do think it's problematic how we as a Global Society try to begin this process of programming via or depictions of gender and boy and girl. Prince is a certain way, must be a certain way, and Princess must be a certain way, is a certain way, never to mind how one might want to express their own inner Prince or Princess. And sometimes in extreme examples of how this can go completely ary and destroyed and maimed, is in examples of JonBennet Ramsey.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I like what you suggest with this. I also stress that being extremely girly as a Girl can be an expression of freedom.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Action can simply be responsive, which is how Yin/"Feminine" Energy is described.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think shying away from extremes altogether is perhaps the best way to be, but in some cases seeing behavior as VERY BAD (sociopaths, pedophiles, incestual family members) or VERY GOOD (sharing the berries you picked on your way to your friend's house)</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I love what you say here. I know I originally asked the question sort of musing/Socratic Method of inquiry. Yes freedom within contained spheres of being or influence seems much more enjoyable and taking pride in who you are, whoever you are. The concern comes when you believe that your pride should come at the expense of another person feeling prideful, or against them in some way.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>In some ways, in many ways yes, <strong>but not entirely.</strong> It has however, gotten a WHOLE LOT BETTER! Moreover, Women can just as much experience a feeling of emptiness from this role. Meaninglessness can find anyone anywhere. I just tend to think of things sometimes in terms of apocolypse, when the absence of God seems most present. In those circumstances what becomes most important, is a sense of home, one's house, one's sense of comfort, of which is directly connected to the role Women have typically been assigned and said to function within most effectively and most appropriately. Apocolopyse can happen at any time anywhere... <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /> I still believe however, that things have changed and if we were to have an Apocolopyse now, or soon, what would actually ideally be happening, is people would be eroded from their comfort zones of all kinds shapes and sizes and the responsibility to provide comfort and retrieve once again a sense of sure-footedness would rely simply on the actions of kindness.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think my aforementioned discussion speaks to a lot of this in another way. Some women, not all, have the biological option to give birth. Some women, not all, have the desire to mother and nurture. Some women, not all, find meaning in this. As for your point about some women find meaning through transcending their biology: I think we all do this no matter what we do with ourselves. "Our brains are separate and independent enough from our genes to rebel against them.. we do so in a small way everytime we use contraception. There is no reason why we should not rebel in a large way too." (<strong>Richard Dawkins</strong>, The Selfish Gene 1989, <a href="http://www.spaceandmotion.com/evolutionist-richard-dawkins.htm" target="_blank">http://www.spaceandmotion.com/evolutionist-richard-dawkins.htm</a>) </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think Pixi, taking control and managing how come across to others is important and understanding how others may "spin" our behaviors is something to also be aware of. I see it as a process of recognizing the power you have in your self-expression to influence others, and how our self-expression and how we come across to others, is something to be aware of and responsible towards.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>To answer things backwards. First of all I think it's entirely possible and desirable to be non-accepting. The idea is the instances with people are few and far between and the people you meet who qualify in one's book to not be acceptable are seldom. You do not have to like everybody, and everybody does not have to like you. The focus on the singular You is important, and is therefore independent from others' influence (family, religious, or cultural) to decide who to like and who to not like.</p><p></p><p>Curious what you mean about biological urges? Biological urge as the need to urinate? Defecate? We are all equals here. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /></p><p></p><p>Biological urge to reproduce? Not everyone desires this equally, and some not at all. Couldn't merely be divisible down sexed lines.</p><p></p><p>Biological urge for sensual pleasure? Does this come and go for people differently? Couldn't merely be divisible down sexed lines.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Modcleopatra, post: 224881, member: 7059"] Thanks so much for sharing! I agree very fascinating. I worry about a sexless society. I think if I could decide how things are, I'd say we simply need to become more sensitive with what we make sex mean. I think neutrality is trap, absolves us of responsibility, personal awareness, and communal/global connectiveness. I like that you say there is no sexuality here, it's just prana and flows of energy that has not become harnessed or connected to the person as an expression of sexual desire. I do think it's problematic how we as a Global Society try to begin this process of programming via or depictions of gender and boy and girl. Prince is a certain way, must be a certain way, and Princess must be a certain way, is a certain way, never to mind how one might want to express their own inner Prince or Princess. And sometimes in extreme examples of how this can go completely ary and destroyed and maimed, is in examples of JonBennet Ramsey. I like what you suggest with this. I also stress that being extremely girly as a Girl can be an expression of freedom. Action can simply be responsive, which is how Yin/"Feminine" Energy is described. I think shying away from extremes altogether is perhaps the best way to be, but in some cases seeing behavior as VERY BAD (sociopaths, pedophiles, incestual family members) or VERY GOOD (sharing the berries you picked on your way to your friend's house) I love what you say here. I know I originally asked the question sort of musing/Socratic Method of inquiry. Yes freedom within contained spheres of being or influence seems much more enjoyable and taking pride in who you are, whoever you are. The concern comes when you believe that your pride should come at the expense of another person feeling prideful, or against them in some way. In some ways, in many ways yes, [B]but not entirely.[/B] It has however, gotten a WHOLE LOT BETTER! Moreover, Women can just as much experience a feeling of emptiness from this role. Meaninglessness can find anyone anywhere. I just tend to think of things sometimes in terms of apocolypse, when the absence of God seems most present. In those circumstances what becomes most important, is a sense of home, one's house, one's sense of comfort, of which is directly connected to the role Women have typically been assigned and said to function within most effectively and most appropriately. Apocolopyse can happen at any time anywhere... ;) I still believe however, that things have changed and if we were to have an Apocolopyse now, or soon, what would actually ideally be happening, is people would be eroded from their comfort zones of all kinds shapes and sizes and the responsibility to provide comfort and retrieve once again a sense of sure-footedness would rely simply on the actions of kindness. I think my aforementioned discussion speaks to a lot of this in another way. Some women, not all, have the biological option to give birth. Some women, not all, have the desire to mother and nurture. Some women, not all, find meaning in this. As for your point about some women find meaning through transcending their biology: I think we all do this no matter what we do with ourselves. "Our brains are separate and independent enough from our genes to rebel against them.. we do so in a small way everytime we use contraception. There is no reason why we should not rebel in a large way too." ([B]Richard Dawkins[/B], The Selfish Gene 1989, [url]http://www.spaceandmotion.com/evolutionist-richard-dawkins.htm[/url]) I think Pixi, taking control and managing how come across to others is important and understanding how others may "spin" our behaviors is something to also be aware of. I see it as a process of recognizing the power you have in your self-expression to influence others, and how our self-expression and how we come across to others, is something to be aware of and responsible towards. To answer things backwards. First of all I think it's entirely possible and desirable to be non-accepting. The idea is the instances with people are few and far between and the people you meet who qualify in one's book to not be acceptable are seldom. You do not have to like everybody, and everybody does not have to like you. The focus on the singular You is important, and is therefore independent from others' influence (family, religious, or cultural) to decide who to like and who to not like. Curious what you mean about biological urges? Biological urge as the need to urinate? Defecate? We are all equals here. ;) Biological urge to reproduce? Not everyone desires this equally, and some not at all. Couldn't merely be divisible down sexed lines. Biological urge for sensual pleasure? Does this come and go for people differently? Couldn't merely be divisible down sexed lines. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Anything Else...
Chat
Hot topic arena
Sex, Gender, and Sexuality: Prescriptions and Possibilities
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top