Wednesday, October 16, 2013

Harmony of The Sexes, Intelligent Survival and Dreams

I think a deep issue, if not the deep down issue behind misogynistic and sexist behaviour is men trying to compensate for their sexual inadequacy/ sexual insecurities.

"And so in order that that shall not happen, for you and I are flukes in this cosmos, and we like our way of life--we like being human--if we want to keep it, say these people, we've got to fight nature, because it will turn us back into nonsense the moment we let it. So we've got to impose our will upon this world as if we were something completely alien to it, from outside. And so we get a culture based on the idea of the war between man and nature. And we talk about the conquest of space. The conquest of Everest. And the great symbols of our culture are the rocket and the bulldozer. The rocket--you know, compensation for the sexually inadequate male. So we're going to conquer space. You know we're in space already, way out. If anybody cared to be sensitive and let what's outside space come to you, you can, if your eyes are clear enough. Aided by telescopes, aided by radio astronomy, aided by all the kinds of sensitive instruments we can devise. We're as far out in space as we're ever going to get. But, y'know, sensitivity isn't the pitch. Especially in the WASP culture of the United States. We define manliness in terms of aggression, you see, because we're a little bit frightened as to whether or not we're really men. And so we put on this great show of being a tough guy. It's completely unnecessary. If you have what it takes, you don't need to put on that show. You don't need to beat nature into submission. Why be hostile to nature? Because after all, you ARE a symptom of nature. You, as a human being, you grow out of this physical universe in just exactly the same way that an apple grows off an apple tree."

The compensation is only compensation though for people who identify as men AND feel insecurity. The idea of sending a rocket into space can be a completely genderless, creative expression of humanity or even life itself, but as it stands its motivation has also been and can be a compensation (We put a MAN on the moon, not a human on the moon...)

I mean really, what motive would a man have to hate or invalidate women? I think the only hate towards women is from men or people who identify as men projecting their dislike of aspects of themselves as hate towards women, who they feel insecure with in some aspect, even if this is entirely unconscious to them (This is not unique to sexism though, projection of our insecurities as hate, malice, evil or dislike towards others or aspects of others or even objects or entities like the sun happens for many different cases). Some men find this defining of their 'manliness' through rape and pilage. However, I also spend a lot of time culturing and reading about bacteria and micro-organisms. Bacteria wage war and compete for survival with other species to a degree, looking down on the culture plates they don't appear to have any concept of sexism though. Looking down at Earth from space at night and seeing our surge of lights defining cities, towns and roads connecting to look like a fungal growth on the Earth, an alien might not think we have a concept of sexism either. So, identifying 'dominance' and 'aggression' with 'masculinity' is also sexism, that is saying dominance and aggression are at heart gender neutral. You could then see the concept of 'men' and 'women' as two competing organisms, competing hedonistically for power or survival, and men winning the race so far. This I see as a complete side-track from peaceful mutual interdependence, due to a completely unjustified sense or idea of security of survival. The foundation for many men is the belief that if they don't put their mark on this world and be a successful tough guy they won't survive and will be inadequate or unimportant, useless, wastes of existence - that this is the only way that exists and the only way to get through this world and pass on their genes/ continue their lineage. It is fine to want to continue humanity but we're going completely the wrong way about survival... survival as a unified interdependent organism doesn't seem to be the primary objective of most people. So really what is happening is disharmonious and unintelligent competition. You know, there is a 'battle of the sexes' but it can be good in the form of a purely flirtatious venture or all-in-good-fun expression, like an art competition... though in that case it would mean any bad interpersonal stuff that goes down is really people being a 'bad sport' with the game they're playing.

A truly free and open society wouldn't necessarily be bursting with orgies everywhere, but people wouldn't be insecure with them, insecure with most forms of consensual sexuality, insecure with their attitudes and feelings towards nature. I've been listening to a lot of Terrance McKenna too and he says another divisive issue can be 'families'. As in very open cultures which had lots of orgies, nobody knew who's children belonged to whom, but this was not an issue, these cultures saw all children as belonging to the total human group and everybody cared equally to all children; men and women fathering and mothering not only their own biological children but those not of their lineage. That is just an example, you can still have families and boundaries but if you're open with what they represent (a tighter interdependent niche still in interdependence with all the other niches), how you feel about them, and aware of others and your connection to nature this is not an issue. The obvious next step would be to disillusion yourself to the boundaries of the family and in and out groups and see yourself as part and parcel with the entire universe as a unified being that depends on the support of all its components to be harmonious and thrive creatively.

If women ruled the world everything would be so much better, but as a wave cannot last forever up or down we would go on a wave of masculine dominance, then a wave of feminine dominance, repeating. I read Atlantis was deeply feminine to begin with and very spiritual, but then got overpowered by masculinity and I think that's why they ended up destroying themselves (still doing research). So, the next wave of our time will be another massive return to femininity just going from that, should feminism have its way and the masculine dominant culture not destroy humanity (Though as I said, 'masculine dominance' is gender neutral at heart, it's really a made-up thing men identify with to feel secure, and they obey its dogma to maintain the status quo and thus their security... similarly some women might also reinforce and act as if its okay for the sake of the status quo too... strictly a self-confidence and probably educational issue). However I think a better option would be more androgynous with either no concept of male or female or with a balance between them (Some people like revenge and feelings of power though, so that could be a driving force to feminine dominance among some feminists). You can identify as male or female if you want to (your behaviour is going to be influenced to some degree by the hormones secreted from your genitals and the pheromones you secrete that affect the behaviour of others, creating lust for the opposite sex[in most cases, to be LGBT friendly, and continuing our species]) but being secure and open about your feelings, sexuality included, in general as a human being should become the norm. Or you could realize physical differences but not use them as parts of your personal identification (as a soul or experiential level)... which is already happening with people using gender neutral pronouns. Using normal gender pronouns is NOT an issue though; identifying, stigmatizing or making gender-biased judgments about people due to their own personal beliefs is though. 'They' I see is a form of spreading awareness. It is a word... like tree, but we should not anthorpomorphisize with stigma (most trees are evil, books are angry demons, your toes get upset if you step on a tack)... I can see a tree as a nice interdependent part of nature, similarly though more radical I can see pathogenic bacteria as nice, interdependent, harmonious parts of nature... the constant activity of our immune system against a manageable amount of pathogens keeps us healthy, just like reading a lot or doing math problems keeps you mentally active or running and straining your muscles keeps you fit... this only applies to survival games though, in the godhead all you do is 'be' without purpose) It is archetypal transference of male and female qualities to truly undefinable energy structures on a 'personality' or 'soul' level  that is the problem. I don't know how to solve all the problems but the cliche 'follow your heart' and synchronicities will resolve everything, along with education. I now think that the ego is not a problem, sexism couldn't happen without the ego, but sexism can also be abolished with the ego in tact. The ego is completely fine and can be completely harmonious, it is just a different perspective of reality that sees itself as not 'feeling' it is everything in existence and instead a separate entity (Me)... transcending the ego eliminates suffering, but you can also eliminate it while still being an ego. Treating evil with love... because loving and accepting your inner rascality and evils you are projecting onto others is being completely with yourself and completely accepting... for you couldn't know and appreciate good without evil... so a harmonious experience with rascality and destruction while accepting it as an aspect of yourself and loving it can be quite a peaceful attitude - just as accepting normal organisms that live on you help keep you alive (except sometimes can cause disease if in over-abundance... so everything is fine if balanced correctly). If you accept we can all be a bit of an ugly cunt sometimes but love that this gives rise to the good and beauty of existence.

Sorry if I was romanticizing a bit much at points... was just being a bit of a fuckwit

Also looking back at this blog... consciousness encapsulation theory I see now is the idea of different forms of experience an ego can take on (any encapsulated form of experience being an ego). My ideas about colonizing other planets and solar systems and being the ultimate survival organism is not necessary to live in a hedonistic pleasure playground, you can disregard human survival completely and just live hedonistically right now (everything dies and comes to an end after all)... though the idea of exploring other planets, solving our recycling, culture, war and disease problems does sound very appealing to me and I would like to see that happen... my egotistic dream... a sustainable (well, until Shiva does the dance of destruction and renews the entire universe to start from scratch... we have at least a couple gazillion million infinitilion years before our fractal complexity gets reset to zero though!) hedonistic pleasure playground of dreams and creativity and appreciation as a neohuman that everybody can agree on. Until we transform into machine circus elves made of language and light that can instantly manifest any idea. Until the return to the absolute godhead.