Male Female relationships
cuddling
I watched a TV interview of some lesbians, and the lady was describing her relationship with her girlfriend, how thay can spend hours in bed just chatting and cuddling each other, and reminded us of how often men, after de-sperming, just walk off, light up a cigarette and that's it ... Don't wanna say that all are brutes, but in the majority of cases, our needs and way of feeling, are so different!
Well, if I am to discover that I could be better off with women, or that I should give it a heartfelt try, what would be wrong with that after all?? It may sound very nasty , but in the seventies, there was a feminist slogan that went " a woman without a man, is like a fish without a bicycle!".
I think that one succesfull yukti to get men's love and respect (not of a very elevated kind, though!), is pretending that you cannot manage to do anything without them. Independent women pay very high prices for being self-sufficient, and it takes a lot of sensitivity for men to realize when and how to step in and "be there" to support. Of course, if you walk around in high heels all day and seem needy weak, and helpless, you get a lot more attention and cooperation. At least on a gross level. Most men are a bit "thick", or self centered, so I guess they need clear messages ... so, more squeaking and swaying of hips, could be useful!
Well, if I am to discover that I could be better off with women, or that I should give it a heartfelt try, what would be wrong with that after all?? It may sound very nasty , but in the seventies, there was a feminist slogan that went " a woman without a man, is like a fish without a bicycle!".
I think that one succesfull yukti to get men's love and respect (not of a very elevated kind, though!), is pretending that you cannot manage to do anything without them. Independent women pay very high prices for being self-sufficient, and it takes a lot of sensitivity for men to realize when and how to step in and "be there" to support. Of course, if you walk around in high heels all day and seem needy weak, and helpless, you get a lot more attention and cooperation. At least on a gross level. Most men are a bit "thick", or self centered, so I guess they need clear messages ... so, more squeaking and swaying of hips, could be useful!
-
fluffy bunny
- ex-BKWSU
- Posts: 5365
- Joined: 07 Apr 2006
- Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
- Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: ex-BK. Interested in historical revisionism, failed predictions and abuse within the BK movement.
So do most women share the same beliefs. The problem is, they do the wrong Bhakti to get the rewards they want.freedom wrote:anyway, I believe in a nice, comfortable and honest relationship, men x woman ... :wink:.
You see, they think that by doing "Hair, Make up and Shoe Bhakti" that a perfect, man will magically materialise for them. But it is not true.
To have a man magically materialise, you really need to do "Liking Football and Knowing Different Car models Bhakti" ... oh, and a bit of "Short Skirt and Hair Flip Yoga".
Its a strange thing but both sexes of heterosexuals do almost the entirely wrong type of Bhakti to find one another ...
OK, guys, let's consider that I was a BK for a long time. So after that 'enlightening' experience that changed my life forever (eternally), I am still looking for a nice, honest , fun, sexy, happy, healthy relationship ... but in no way with values such as man with money, macho, protective. Yes, I agree man has this role but not necessarily ... I don't wear high heels and mini skirts (I used to) and I can still attract a few good men !! :lol:
Go for an ex-BK?freedom wrote:OK, guys, let's consider that I was a BK for a long time, so after that 'enlightening' experience that changed my life forever (eternally), I am still looking for a nice, honest , fun, sexy, happy, healthy relationship...but in no way with values such as : man with money, macho, protective, yes, I agree man has this role but not necessarily ... I don't wear high heels and mini skirts (I used to) and I can still attract a few good men !! :lol:
Most of the BK males I have met would make good partners if they weren't BK's of course. A bit like a gay man would I suppose.
-
arjun
- PBK
- Posts: 12201
- Joined: 01 May 2006
- Affinity to the BKWSU: PBK
- Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: To exchange views with past and present members of BKWSU and its splinter groups.
- Location: India
Om Shanti. Actually, as per Murlis there is no sex of souls as such, but there could be two reasons for describing souls as male. One is that Baba says in the Murlis that even in the relationship between a brother and a sister there could be scope of physical attraction. So, He might have thought that describing all souls as males may remove that possibility. Secondly, until a few years ago (i.e. even after many decades of independance of India) females were not entitled to a share in the property of their fathers. They could get only a share from their husbands/Father-in-law. Only sons were entitled to the Father's or grandfather's properties. So, by describing all souls as males ShivBaba wants to say that everyone is entitled to the imperishable inheritance of peace and happiness.Sister Bansy wrote:I do find it hard in the Murlis (sorry yes I know this is the All and Everything forum ) when we are told "all souls are male". But then I never asked what then is "male" ?
But, it is also mentioned in several Murlis/Avyakt Vanis that in relation to the Supreme Soul all the human souls are females. May be because God is always considered as 'He'. There have been lots of discussions even in the media whether God is a male or female (i.e. He or She)?
Regards,
OGS,
Arjun
Was Brahma Baba a sexual anorexic? I think if he was analyzed by an objective sex therapist the therapist would think so. Sexual anorexics are people who hate sex. They tend to be people who are sometimes dominated by sexual desires and then go through phases of extreme hate for anything and everything sexual.
Let me propose a radical idea, which had some elaboration already here, let’s put down religion and philosophy altogether for a second and just look at empirical facts about male female relationships. I am talking about the Discovery Channel and National Geographic.
Examining many different animal species and their male female relationships tend to show 2 primary priorities for having sexual relationships. The more important is mating. The secondary relationship seems to be for a co-operation for the survival of each other and the offspring. If both of these relationships become invalid, like after a cheetah male and female mate and the female cheetah is capable of caring for the offspring, the 2 go their separate way.
Now this is just a rudimentary observation, but it would imply animals want to pair up for mating and to increase security and better their chances at survival. What separates humans from other animals? The cerebral cortex. My understanding is that animals have and are dominated by a lymphatic (emotional) brain where as we humans have this but also have a cerebral cortex that can be programmed, reprogrammed and make logical decisions.
We can see a culture as like the programming of a particular tribe of people. With the Tibetan nomads, their programming was to offer their women to wandering travelers for mating as a means to widen the genetic gene pool and avoid the mutations of incest. Where as a more western programming is that 1 man and woman be paired for life to avoid conflict of property and status.
Most people are so dominated by cultural programming that they are totally confused or worse, like BKs are taught, ashamed and hate the natural and lymphatic part of our being. People are supposed to mate. They are supposed to find partners or a tribe which will help them survive and make babies. Sex and relationships are usually defined right or wrong not by definition of virtue but by definition of cultural programming.
The dark side of this is sexual and relationship dependency, and addiction. Humans are all totally dependent from birth until a time where we become more and more independent until finally we can just about survive on our own like a cheetah in the wild. Most cultural programming however says NO! You can’t do it! You NEED us! You NEED the tribe! You NEED a partner! You NEED an I-Pod phone! And so we never get past dependency. Past dependency leads to independence and then to a beautiful state called interdependence.
I think most people can be happy in life if they abide to their cultural programs and just find a mate have babies and survive with moderate security. But. With people who are bent on understanding and making right their cultural programs, like us ex-BKs, life is not so simple. I think for us we have to come to terms with a more evolutionary perspective on male and female relationships.
An example from tatric Yoga is how a male and female join energies and become husband and wife in the presence of their God selves. They use tantric sex to create astral bodies in which they can travel and be immortal. Now this goes into the realm of spiritual and faith as I see it, and it could just be another elaborate form of social programming used to create a healthy social environment.
Where is human evolution going? Perhaps an expansion of consciousness so that we can perceive higher states of reality for ourselves. Then perhaps male and female relationships, from this perspective, are meant to be a relationship (or relationships) to help consciously nurture one another’s spiritual and psychic development. This criteria met, baby making and security would further be determined by genetic and environmental factors.
And who says men don’t like cuddling. I love all weekend cuddle sessions. Of course stereotypically men are like on off switches and woman are more like dimmer knobs when it comes to sexual stimulation. A man is either on or off and a woman is excited in degrees which need to be increased from off to be truly on. An experienced man appreciates the thrill of elevating and prolonging intimacy.
Let me propose a radical idea, which had some elaboration already here, let’s put down religion and philosophy altogether for a second and just look at empirical facts about male female relationships. I am talking about the Discovery Channel and National Geographic.
Examining many different animal species and their male female relationships tend to show 2 primary priorities for having sexual relationships. The more important is mating. The secondary relationship seems to be for a co-operation for the survival of each other and the offspring. If both of these relationships become invalid, like after a cheetah male and female mate and the female cheetah is capable of caring for the offspring, the 2 go their separate way.
Now this is just a rudimentary observation, but it would imply animals want to pair up for mating and to increase security and better their chances at survival. What separates humans from other animals? The cerebral cortex. My understanding is that animals have and are dominated by a lymphatic (emotional) brain where as we humans have this but also have a cerebral cortex that can be programmed, reprogrammed and make logical decisions.
We can see a culture as like the programming of a particular tribe of people. With the Tibetan nomads, their programming was to offer their women to wandering travelers for mating as a means to widen the genetic gene pool and avoid the mutations of incest. Where as a more western programming is that 1 man and woman be paired for life to avoid conflict of property and status.
Most people are so dominated by cultural programming that they are totally confused or worse, like BKs are taught, ashamed and hate the natural and lymphatic part of our being. People are supposed to mate. They are supposed to find partners or a tribe which will help them survive and make babies. Sex and relationships are usually defined right or wrong not by definition of virtue but by definition of cultural programming.
The dark side of this is sexual and relationship dependency, and addiction. Humans are all totally dependent from birth until a time where we become more and more independent until finally we can just about survive on our own like a cheetah in the wild. Most cultural programming however says NO! You can’t do it! You NEED us! You NEED the tribe! You NEED a partner! You NEED an I-Pod phone! And so we never get past dependency. Past dependency leads to independence and then to a beautiful state called interdependence.
I think most people can be happy in life if they abide to their cultural programs and just find a mate have babies and survive with moderate security. But. With people who are bent on understanding and making right their cultural programs, like us ex-BKs, life is not so simple. I think for us we have to come to terms with a more evolutionary perspective on male and female relationships.
An example from tatric Yoga is how a male and female join energies and become husband and wife in the presence of their God selves. They use tantric sex to create astral bodies in which they can travel and be immortal. Now this goes into the realm of spiritual and faith as I see it, and it could just be another elaborate form of social programming used to create a healthy social environment.
Where is human evolution going? Perhaps an expansion of consciousness so that we can perceive higher states of reality for ourselves. Then perhaps male and female relationships, from this perspective, are meant to be a relationship (or relationships) to help consciously nurture one another’s spiritual and psychic development. This criteria met, baby making and security would further be determined by genetic and environmental factors.
And who says men don’t like cuddling. I love all weekend cuddle sessions. Of course stereotypically men are like on off switches and woman are more like dimmer knobs when it comes to sexual stimulation. A man is either on or off and a woman is excited in degrees which need to be increased from off to be truly on. An experienced man appreciates the thrill of elevating and prolonging intimacy.
-
fluffy bunny
- ex-BKWSU
- Posts: 5365
- Joined: 07 Apr 2006
- Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
- Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: ex-BK. Interested in historical revisionism, failed predictions and abuse within the BK movement.
I think he, the original BKs and their emission, should be analysed in such a light.bro neo wrote:Was Brahma Baba a sexual anorexic? I think if he was analyzed by an objective sex therapist the therapist would think so. Sexual anorexics are people who hate sex. They tend to be people who are sometimes dominated by sexual desires and then go through phases of extreme hate for anything and everything sexual.
The story was he never wanted to get married until he went to the movies and then he had the idea. Its sounds as though he was a little dim and out of touch with instincts. He had kids late. I wonder if he ever enjoyed sex?
I get the feeling that there was no real relationship with his wife, that she was more his "follower", he being her guru and guide. I dare say the marriage was arranged and good for business/status. If he came from a lowly background, where did he get his first leg up into the money game? Her dowry? It might be worth exploring her family.
This thing of arranged marriage ... how many Indians fall in love and what do they do with it?
How does being made to live with someone you have no feeling for and may not be compatible ... sex with them to procreate "objects", children, you may have no wish for ... generation after generation ... what affect does this have on a national psyche?
What we read is of another imbalance, where the men distinctly did have love affairs and mistresses. This is portrayed as a terrible crime. But is tol ove a crime? Were the men not just as much victims to the system ... which was mainly based about property and wealth and partly based around genetics ... as the women were? Was it just "lust" or was it romantic fulfillment they sought?
One thing for sure, you are going to have to scrape your way past a load of hardened BS to get to the truth of it. You are pulling at the strings that are holding together a national psyche. But it is happening. India is being Westernised and more than anything "western is defined by its Romantic and Post-Romantic attitudes toward love, sex and marriage.
mela and jamela
Baba plays with the words; "jamela" (chaos), and "mela" (meeting). Sadly, often the first one takes place easily, but the second does not happen. :roll:
bro neo wrote:We fall in love with the image we have of a particular person. When someone comes into our peripheral vision that looks anything like the image we have burned in our brain of a rescuer, that’s it. This is our soul mate. It is the one we have been looking for our whole life. Our long lost and now found reason for living. Our knight is shinning armor, or perfect princess.
Sadly though, the more we get to know about this person the more the real person conflicts with our image of this person and we blame the person for not being perfect (as compared to our ideal)
Sorry, I haven’t had time to write about my concept of love yet alladin, but this is something I have found to be quite nice. It is from the promises of SLAA. It implies what will happen by working on self development.alladin wrote:Hi, Neo. So, in a way, u are suggesting that self deception and infatuation play a major, if not the only role in "falling in love"?
This would explain to a great extent why love often turns into struggles. I hope the remedy is not ascetism and detachment. What do you think? If you appeal to reason, that sounds a bit like the opposite of a natural feeling of love - or am I too romantic and idealistic? Is there a wholesome, healthy way of loving?
Is any unconditional love possible, that can take us beyond the stage of infatuation with an image and enable us to use this energy for loving the real soul, the way he or she is, with defects and qualities, hopefully respecting each other's freedom and empowering qualities and potentials that are latent in our "higher self"?
I don’t believe unconditional love exists in reality, it is by definition conditional. In regards to how to develop to a point where we can really love someone for who they are, I believe this is absolutely possible. It is done by freeing one's perceptions and beliefs of illusions and projections.7. Love will be a committed, thoughtful decision rather than a feeling by which we are overwhelmed.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests