Hello R. Steven Coyle-
I feel it is difficult to know what the author meant when he wrote the words. Truth, Courage, Honesty, Logic, Masculinity, Wisdom, Perfection. In a general sense, I have some understanding of them. But, I cannot know exactly what he had in mind when he choose them. Take the word perfection. My experience suggests that perfection is. Therefore, it is unnecessary to state it. But my interpretation may be incorrect. I feel I would have to dialog with the author to discover what he is pointing to. In context? Yes and no. I look at words as many ways as I can. Often, it is limited. But to just look at a word and know it's meaning? Not possible for me. I have assumed too much in the past. Plus, it is more fun to do discovery. That's just me, though.
Genius Forums - "Masculinity"?
-
R. Steven Coyle
- Posts: 332
- Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 6:33 pm
- Location: Atlanta, Ga
In what way?Take the word perfection. My experience suggests that perfection is.
Yes, in this case, the definition of the word requires knowledge of the author's own subjectivity, his own personal meaning. But, there are other instances where we can safely rely on our own objective sense of the word, for our own subjectivity.I feel I would have to dialog with the author to discover what he is pointing to.
This raises an important philosophic question: Where does knowledge come from?
On this forum, I have learned that the logic of A=A gives identity to our perception. A simple logical formula, with a profound relationship to our perceiving mind.
Masculinity
I had to think about this for a while. Your statement reminded me of the book The Myth of Male Power.Pye wrote:"Masculinity" is a wholesale pernicious myth of the same stature as "Woman," only clearly more pernicious. Nothing will move here until it's gotten over.
Masculinity doesn't (just) suggest what some one particular person wants it to suggest; it's a word that has a lot of baggage along with it. It is associated with a host of pre-existing gender roles.
For instance, I think masculinity would - for most people - suggest aggressiveness, competitiveness, and the ability to provide for a woman, all qualities that are irrelevant here. If it's taken to mean the qualities that are typical of men, then some things (e.g., the endless, mindless pursuit of pussy) might be taken as masculine, while here they are specifically rejected (and even considered feminine).
On this forum, I take masculinity to mean independance and clarity of thought, commitment to truth without compromise; having the courage to seek after and face up to the truth, even when it is difficult or painful; also a rejection of the feminine concern for appearance over substance, or valuing comfort and pleasure over truth.
But, outside of this context, that would not be called masculine. Even if it is found in more males than females (as is sometimes claimed), it isn't actually very common among males. 'Masculine' seems to me to imply traits that are held by men generally, like having a deeper voice or being taller.
The main reason, it seems, to have masculinity up there with truth and wisdom is because it is provocative. It causes endless discussion - but the discussion is pretty fruitful, since it revolves around specifically what is being pursued and what is being rejected, and why.
Diebert It seems to me quite clear that the general idea, at least for many on this board, is that the question is not active or passive behavior, but in how far anything is done consciously.
I think the active behaviour of many male children, compared to girls, leads to greater opportunities for masculine consciousness later on – or should I say human consciousness as opposed to animal consciousness – inquisitive experimental analytical thought as opposed to emotional thought.
Pye: "Masculinity" is a wholesale pernicious myth of the same stature as "Woman," only clearly more pernicious. Nothing will move here until it's gotten over.
I tend to agree, in part. It is not that masculinity is a myth, nor is Woman, but I agree the value attachments that people automatically have with the terms masculine, feminine, male, female simply contain too much baggage. I would agree that the QRS and others create a kind of myth by promoting only certain positive masculine traits while ignoring the negative aspects. I think if I was them I change my tack to human versus animal consciousness – that way we are only looking at the differences between animals and humans, and for the most part such differences all fall within the masculine realm. Humans should not act instinctively upon emotions, whereas animals do act instinctively via emotions.
I think the active behaviour of many male children, compared to girls, leads to greater opportunities for masculine consciousness later on – or should I say human consciousness as opposed to animal consciousness – inquisitive experimental analytical thought as opposed to emotional thought.
Pye: "Masculinity" is a wholesale pernicious myth of the same stature as "Woman," only clearly more pernicious. Nothing will move here until it's gotten over.
I tend to agree, in part. It is not that masculinity is a myth, nor is Woman, but I agree the value attachments that people automatically have with the terms masculine, feminine, male, female simply contain too much baggage. I would agree that the QRS and others create a kind of myth by promoting only certain positive masculine traits while ignoring the negative aspects. I think if I was them I change my tack to human versus animal consciousness – that way we are only looking at the differences between animals and humans, and for the most part such differences all fall within the masculine realm. Humans should not act instinctively upon emotions, whereas animals do act instinctively via emotions.
-
suergaz
Hello Steven....R. Steven Coyle wrote:Hi Sophia,
Why do you say this?You have self-awareness. But you still need approval for it.
May I ask what specifically about the duality of yin and yang are you referring to so I can answer accurately?What are your thoughts on the duality of yin and yang?
Sophia
-
R. Steven Coyle
- Posts: 332
- Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 6:33 pm
- Location: Atlanta, Ga
Your last post seemed to show a frustration over others not giving your own personality traits the respect you felt they deserved.Steven: You have self-awareness. But you still need approval for it.
Why do you say this?
The idea that we all possess an imbalance of yin (feminine energy) and yang (masculine energy). And in order to achieve harmony, we need to recognize what aspects of either are lacking.What are your thoughts on the duality of yin and yang?
May I ask what specifically about the duality of yin and yang are you referring to so I can answer accurately?
Hmmmm...R. Steven Coyle wrote:Your last post seemed to show a frustration over others not giving your own personality traits the respect you felt they deserved.
You seemed to have attempted to understand the motivations behind my posting.....
I assure you.....
my post reflected nothing personal until I acknowledged it as such......
no.....
my posting was simply about human observations and my subsequent wondering aloud whether they were given consideration.....
imbalance seems to be an odd word of choice..... are you judging each? placing value?The idea that we all possess an imbalance of yin (feminine energy) and yang (masculine energy). And in order to achieve harmony, we need to recognize what aspects of either are lacking.
it is my understanding that no one being has all, equal or an imbalance of yin or yang.... it is my understanding that there are simply variations and degrees in each of us....
and there are a myriad of reasons for one or more sides becoming greater or lesser.....
it is not clear to me why a judgment is placed on something so fluid.....
Sophia
-
R. Steven Coyle
- Posts: 332
- Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 6:33 pm
- Location: Atlanta, Ga
To define each you must first judge them accordingly.imbalance seems to be an odd word of choice..... are you judging each? placing value?
I agree that there are various degrees in us all, but in order to correct an imbalance in masculine/feminine energy, you must first define what their characteristics are.it is my understanding that no one being has all, equal or an imbalance of yin or yang.... it is my understanding that there are simply variations and degrees in each of us....
A judgement is placed in order to acheive wholeness, in order to integrate or remove aspects of ourselves that lead to conflict.it is not clear to me why a judgment is placed on something so fluid.....
-
sue hindmarsh
- Posts: 1083
- Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2005 9:02 am
- Location: Sous Le Soleil
Pye wrote:
Pye said that the concepts of both ‘Masculinity’ and ‘Woman’ were both pernicious, but ‘Masculinity’ more so. She warned that “nothing will move here until it's gotten overâ€. You rightly replied that discussing the relationship between these two concepts and the influence each has on the other is the only way to sort out what you value more: truth or ignorance. Not knowing where you stand with those two concepts is far more pernicious, because then it really is a case of ‘life or death’. (Life = Truth, Death = Ignorance.)
Sue
DHodges wrote:"Masculinity" is a wholesale pernicious myth of the same stature as "Woman," only clearly more pernicious. Nothing will move here until it's gotten over.
Dave, Your reply to Pye is square on the money. Most men fit the ‘common masculinity’ category: males that Woman finds useful. These weak minded males will: fight for her, provide for her, cry for her, create for her, think of her, dream of her, look at her, improve themselves for her, fuck her, worship her, and think for her. Then there are a small number of males that wish to explore life without being enslaved to Woman. They turn their minds to unravelling the truth of, for example: the feminine mind, love, science, etc. And then there are those few very rare males who use their masculine potential to its fullest. They have the strength of mind and spirit to strive for true freedom, and true happiness, through their knowledge of Ultimate Reality.I had to think about this for a while. Your statement reminded me of the book The Myth of Male Power.
Masculinity doesn't (just) suggest what some one particular person wants it to suggest; it's a word that has a lot of baggage along with it. It is associated with a host of pre-existing gender roles.
For instance, I think masculinity would - for most people - suggest aggressiveness, competitiveness, and the ability to provide for a woman, all qualities that are irrelevant here. If it's taken to mean the qualities that are typical of men, then some things (e.g., the endless, mindless pursuit of pussy) might be taken as masculine, while here they are specifically rejected (and even considered feminine).
On this forum, I take masculinity to mean independance and clarity of thought, commitment to truth without compromise; having the courage to seek after and face up to the truth, even when it is difficult or painful; also a rejection of the feminine concern for appearance over substance, or valuing comfort and pleasure over truth.
But, outside of this context, that would not be called masculine. Even if it is found in more males than females (as is sometimes claimed), it isn't actually very common among males. 'Masculine' seems to me to imply traits that are held by men generally, like having a deeper voice or being taller.
The main reason, it seems, to have masculinity up there with truth and wisdom is because it is provocative. It causes endless discussion - but the discussion is pretty fruitful, since it revolves around specifically what is being pursued and what is being rejected, and why.
Pye said that the concepts of both ‘Masculinity’ and ‘Woman’ were both pernicious, but ‘Masculinity’ more so. She warned that “nothing will move here until it's gotten overâ€. You rightly replied that discussing the relationship between these two concepts and the influence each has on the other is the only way to sort out what you value more: truth or ignorance. Not knowing where you stand with those two concepts is far more pernicious, because then it really is a case of ‘life or death’. (Life = Truth, Death = Ignorance.)
Sue
Judging them by what standard? ...R. Steven Coyle wrote: To define each you must first judge them accordingly.
What is the given that makes you say a particular quality is "imbalanced"?
I suppose I'm asking how do you define balance? What does that look like to you?
Are you suggesting equal amounts of yin/yang?
Is there some perfected state of being by which you judge? If so, may I ask for evidence or an example of its existence?
Sophia
-
R. Steven Coyle
- Posts: 332
- Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 6:33 pm
- Location: Atlanta, Ga
Sophia,
"Masculine":
Assertiveness
Aggression
Single-Mindedness
Logic
"Feminine":
Passivity
Receptivity
Intuition
If the mind is conflicted, this is usually a result of an imbalance in masculine/feminine qualities:What is the given that makes you say a particular quality is "imbalanced"?
"Masculine":
Assertiveness
Aggression
Single-Mindedness
Logic
"Feminine":
Passivity
Receptivity
Intuition
To me, balance is unfettered high consciousness.I suppose I'm asking how do you define balance? What does that look like to you?
The balanced state of Enlightenment is the ideal state of masculine/feminine union -- due to Nature's constant flux, it has to be.Is there some perfected state of being by which you judge? If so, may I ask for evidence or an example of its existence?
Why are you using a conflicted mind as the base of your explanation? Do you consider all minds this way? female? male?R. Steven Coyle wrote:
If the mind is conflicted,
How much does culture and time period figure into deciding these male/female qualities and traits?this is usually a result of an imbalance in masculine/feminine qualities:
"Masculine":
Assertiveness
Aggression
Single-Mindedness
Logic
"Feminine":
Passivity
Receptivity
Intuition
Unfettered? By what? High ? defined how? by consciousness .... do you mean awareness? or exposure to particular types of awareness? like cultural awareness?
To me, balance is unfettered high consciousness.
You explained your understanding of Enlightenment.... may I ask for an example.... I agree with your statement above..... it would help if I could "see" what you are talking about..... does an ideal state exist? especially given the latter part of your statement as Nature being in constant flux... of which I also agree, by the way.....The balanced state of Enlightenment is the ideal state of masculine/feminine union -- due to Nature's constant flux, it has to be.
Sophia
-
R. Steven Coyle
- Posts: 332
- Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 6:33 pm
- Location: Atlanta, Ga
Why are you using a conflicted mind as the base of your explanation? Do you consider all minds this way? female? male?
I used a "conflicted mind" as an example because we were discussing an imbalance in masculine/feminine qualities.
As 99% of minds aren't perfectly enlightened, I consider both females and males as conflicted.
The perfectly enlightened mind must also recognize its conflicts, for balance. Through strife, we become whole you could say: the mind constantly striving for wholeness, individuality.
Culture definitely places limits on potential, defining for usHow much does culture and time period figure into deciding these male/female qualities and traits?
what is proper behavior for gender.
By defining these characteristics, we can improve ourselves. The labels, "masculine"/"feminine" really do get in the way: usually causing the individual's ego to only become further unbalanced, as it constantly craves itself to appear "masculine."
By the ego, and its foolish pride.Unfettered? By what? High? defined how? by consciousness .... do you mean awareness? or exposure to particular types of awareness? like cultural awareness?
Awareness corresponds to consciousness: the more you are aware of something, the more conscious you are.
The ideal state of enlightenment is direct perception, and all that may entail.You explained your understanding of Enlightenment.... may I ask for an example.... I agree with your statement above..... it would help if I could "see" what you are talking about..... does an ideal state exist? especially given the latter part of your statement as Nature being in constant flux... of which I also agree, by the way.....
Let's say, I interact with this girl online. While I'm at home, events are occuring that reflect to my awareness, what the meaning of this interaction means for my constitution - My own Buddha-Nature interacting with itself. It's this dual awareness, that makes up a small part of enlightenment, as enlightenment has no bounderies, no limitations on experience.
Or I'm walking through the woods, and I notice that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west. I interpret this as guidance on how I should live the rest of my days - waking in the morning with resolve, no matter the weather, and resting in evening with repose, as a result.
Last edited by R. Steven Coyle on Sat Jun 10, 2006 2:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
I like this.....R. Steven Coyle wrote: The perfectly enlightened mind must also recognize its conflicts, for balance. Through strife, we become whole you could say: the mind constantly striving for wholeness, individuality.
only proper behavior? is behavior the only limit that culture places on our self assessment?Culture definitely places limits on potential, defining for us what is proper behavior for gender.
How does culture limit our definitions of male/female traits?
I was following you until you said "appear masculine" I was expecting you to stop at "appear"..... I was thinking along the lines of one's ego getting in the way of not being affirmed/acknowledged...... why masculine?By defining these characteristics, we can improve ourselves. The labels, "masculine"/"feminine" really do get in the way: usually causing the individual's ego to only become further unbalanced, as it constantly craves itself to appear "masculine."
I think masculine..... and it is difficult for me to separate male (physical) from how I suppose you are referencing it as.... a sort of directional leaning of consciousness....
Would you mind explaining further why awareness should replace consciousness? I suppose I've always equated the two....Consciousness/awareness. IMO, awareness should replace consciousness, a more direct impression.
The ideal state of enlightenment is direct perception, and all that may entail.
Let's say, I interact with this girl online. While I'm at home, events are occuring that reflect to my awareness, what the meaning of this interaction means for my own constitution. It is this dual awareness, that makes up a small part of enlightenment, as enlightenment has no bounderies, no limitations on experience.
The self that is aware of its awareness? Is this what you mean? If so, would the two be separate consciousnesses? (is that a word?)
Sophia
-
R. Steven Coyle
- Posts: 332
- Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 6:33 pm
- Location: Atlanta, Ga
By limiting our behavior, it automatically limits our definitions.How does culture limit our definitions of male/female traits?
Masculinity, in either sex, is the active principle: This being the situation, it can easily become entangled in the ego, which is constantly seeking to dominate its environment.I was following you until you said "appear masculine" I was expecting you to stop at "appear"..... I was thinking along the lines of one's ego getting in the way of not being affirmed/acknowledged...... why masculine?
:)The self that is aware of its awareness? Is this what you mean? If so, would the two be separate consciousnesses? (is that a word?)
Exactly.
One consciousness is aware of itself: The other is aware of itself being aware of itself.
Last edited by R. Steven Coyle on Sat Jun 10, 2006 3:19 am, edited 1 time in total.
yes.....R. Steven Coyle wrote:
By limiting our behavior, it automatically limits our definitions.
but isn't there an implied objective behind the cultural directive?
got it...Masculinity, in either sex, is the active principle:
What (or Who) do you think is the origin of awareness?Exactly.
Yes, one consciousness is aware of itself: The other is aware of itself being aware of itself.
and how this relates to an infinite state?
in other words..... do you think a conscious awareness has always existed...? and takes different forms? or does this state have an origin?
and why did you choose not to answer my question regarding equating awareness with consciousness? Is this because of the priniciple of one aware being aware? meaning could you just substitute one term for another in any context?
Sophia
-
R. Steven Coyle
- Posts: 332
- Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 6:33 pm
- Location: Atlanta, Ga
The nature of most women's minds, is one of unconsciousness - an ego that exists only through other things. Western culture only further promotes this primitive phenomenon, in the process dragging both men and women into a will to unconsciousness.By limiting our behavior, it automatically limits our definitions.
but isn't there an implied objective behind the cultural directive?
Ultimately, your own awareness is your environment - the illusion of separation being born out of a desire to dominate it. Once your true state of awareness is realized, you become eternal.What (or Who) do you think is the origin of awareness?
and how this relates to an infinite state?
in other words..... do you think a conscious awareness has always existed...? and takes different forms? or does this state have an origin?
From where are you getting this information?R. Steven Coyle wrote:The nature of most women's minds, is one of unconsciousness - an ego that exists only through other things.By limiting our behavior, it automatically limits our definitions.
but isn't there an implied objective behind the cultural directive?
"primitive phenomenon" hmmm..... so this is what you think of a woman's mind? primitive? and something vulnerable to Western culture? If it is unconscious.... then how can your will be geared towards such? Will and Unconscious are opposites are they not? If one's Will has to be dragged towards unconsciousness..... and you associate the unconscious with the natural state of a woman's mind, then I must assume that you view the natural state of a woman's mind negatively......Western culture only further promotes this primitive phenomenon, in the process dragging both men and women into a will to unconsciousness.
Sounds like a mix of Taoism and the concept of Nirvana.... ummm.... but... you are speaking as if awareness is a given.... you speak not of an origin.... am I to assume that you disagree with such a notion?Ultimately, your own awareness is your environment - the illusion of separation being born out of a desire to dominate it. Once your true state of awareness is realized, you become eternal.
Sophia
-
R. Steven Coyle
- Posts: 332
- Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 6:33 pm
- Location: Atlanta, Ga
From experience.The nature of most women's minds, is one of unconsciousness - an ego that exists only through other things.
From where are you getting this information?
In all persons, the higher the degree of awareness, the less unconsiousness.
I see the situation, so I'm not dragged along."primitive phenomenon" hmmm..... so this is what you think of a woman's mind? primitive? and something vulnerable to Western culture? If it is unconscious.... then how can your will be geared towards such? Will and Unconscious are opposites are they not? If one's Will has to be dragged towards unconsciousness..... and you associate the unconscious with the natural state of a woman's mind, then I must assume that you view the natural state of a woman's mind negatively......
I view unconsciousness negatively, yes - as it promotes ignorance, and spawns more unconscious behavior.
Notice that higher degrees of unconsciousness, is most often found in women - as women contain a greater imbalance in masculine/feminine characteristics - their ego unconsciously desiring for masculinity, but lacking the will to acheive it.
Well, could you clarify what you mean by "origin"?Sounds like a mix of Taoism and the concept of Nirvana.... ummm.... but... you are speaking as if awareness is a given.... you speak not of an origin.... am I to assume that you disagree with such a notion?
I like this......R. Steven Coyle wrote:
In all persons, the higher the degree of awareness, the less unconsiousness.
Because you have stated that you gather your information regarding the nature of man and woman from experience (and therefore your data will be biased)..... should I not assume that in this statement above that your opinion of a woman's mind is that she lacks the will to think outside of unconsciousness?I see the situation, so I'm not dragged along.
Okay.... why?I view unconsciousness negatively, yes - as it promotes ignorance, and spawns more unconscious behavior.
Where does the unconscious mind reside? Of course I'm speaking metaphorically.... but I'm thinking that our brain is a tool of our minds.... and therefore awareness is not a materially dependent construct...... leading me to believe then that an original state of awareness.... including, and more importantly, that the unconscious predates...... and therefore has birthed the Will...... or the active principle in nature....... hence why I wonder, if you were to agree, why you would see such a thing as negative......
Actually I've noticed that the more a woman tries to embody masculine thinking, holding it in esteem above her own....., the more she loses herself and her intellect...... the more masculine the man becomes outside of the sphere of women the less responsible he becomes of "emotional" matters that are actual natural laws.... and becomes a very poor leader in this respect....Notice that higher degrees of unconsciousness, is most often found in women - as women contain a greater imbalance in masculine/feminine characteristics - their ego unconsciously desiring for masculinity, but lacking the will to acheive it.
men and women need each other....... for the different qualities when respected and combined..... bring about waves of peace and security in times of chaos.....
See above, please.....Could you clarify what you mean by "origin"?
Sophia
-
R. Steven Coyle
- Posts: 332
- Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 6:33 pm
- Location: Atlanta, Ga
Depends on the woman, doesn't it?Because you have stated that you gather your information regarding the nature of man and woman from experience (and therefore your data will be biased)..... should I not assume that in this statement above that your opinion of a woman's mind is that she lacks the will to think outside of unconsciousness?
Unconsciousness promotes ignorance because unconsciousness is inaccurate perception - easily instigating the ego.Okay.... why?
Unconsciousness and the unconscious mind should be recognized as too different things. The unconscious mind is a vast Universe unto itself - housing wisdom and intelligence that the conscious mind doesn't normally display. Unconsciousness is a lack in awareness.Where does the unconscious mind reside? Of course I'm speaking metaphorically.... but I'm thinking that our brain is a tool of our minds.... and therefore awareness is not a materially dependent construct...... leading me to believe then that an original state of awareness.... including, and more importantly, that the unconscious predates...... and therefore has birthed the Will...... or the active principle in nature....... hence why I wonder, if you were to agree, why you would see such a thing as negative......
As you alude, unconsciousness is speaking directly from the unconscious mind: Whereas, consciousness is communicating with it.
I agree.Actually I've noticed that the more a woman tries to embody masculine thinking, holding it in esteem above her own....., the more she loses herself and her intellect...... the more masculine the man becomes outside of the sphere of women the less responsible he becomes of "emotional" matters that are actual natural laws.... and becomes a very poor leader in this respect....
Women have a place in the Universe. But only with intelligence, from both sexes.
Last edited by R. Steven Coyle on Sat Jun 10, 2006 7:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
Hmmm.... yes... I suppose it does....R. Steven Coyle wrote:
Depends on the woman, doesn't it?
however, do you agree that women are not monolithic.... and
their potential should be supported and nourished?
Well..... I just overlooked a key point..... I feel a "duh" moment coming over me.....
Unconsciousness promotes ignorance because unconsciousness is inaccurate perception - easily instigating the ego.
Unconsciousness and the unconscious mind are too different things.
of course you're right..... Unconsciousness and unconscious are two different things....
though I must say that I'm sitting here at work (getting nothing done... sigh...) engaged in this conversation..... because I like the way you word things.....
like this:
and this:The unconscious mind is a vast Universe unto itself - housing wisdom and intelligence that the conscious mind doesn't normally display. Unconsciousness, is a lack of awareness.
direct, to the point.... yet vividly clear, understandable, covering most bases...Interestingly though, as you alude, unconsciousness is speaking directly from the unconscious mind. Whereas, consciousness is communicating with it.
nice.....
sorry, in my circle I don't often hear good definitions......
but this:
Suggests a bit of a poet......I'm walking through the woods, and I notice that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west. I interpret this as guidance on how I should live the rest of my days - waking in the morning with resolve, no matter the weather, and resting in evening with repose, as a result
Smile....I agree.
Women have a place in the Universe - with intelligence, that is.
Don't we all have a place in the Universe...?
By nature of our existence?
Sophia
