2007.03.25 The Female Orgasm

[Monica]

I am viewing this from a physical perspective yes. Not as evolving in consciousness as you think. Consciousness does not evolve as it is unchanging. However, our physical bodies evolve in their ability to reflect this unchanging eternal consciousnes.

Most of our psychological functions are physical in nature. Certainly the gender related ones... If we were to put your consciousness, your soul into my body you'd begin to act pretty much like me. You'd be me... In fact nothing is transferred, our consciousness is the same thing already you can't transfer a non local field.

You remember I always say there is but one soul, one consciousness? The difference between humans is distortion of the consciousness of intelligent infinity. Our body is like a filter that allows us to have a particular consciousness.

Ultimately, yes, all is one. But there are distortions. We are entities, whose spiritual evolution is described by the densities we resonate with. This doesn't change whether we are currently in physical incarnation or not. ie. a 5D entity is still a 5D entity whether incarnated or not. This is a key premise of the Ra teachings, in my understanding.

Are you saying that you see no difference in entities when they're not in physical incarnation? Is this an area in which you disagree with Ra, or am I misunderstanding you?

If the former, then that would explain why we aren't in agreement on this point. Which is ok, of course.

I think you'll agree we are not being ourselves in current society? Current society is not healthy for our gender image?

Current society is not healthy in so many ways. How can we ever be "ourselves" when we're veiled?

I suppose. Something else that also happens all the time is that people speak from their unconscious biasses while consciously not being aware of them. I accept now that I am mistaking and this is not what is going on here. But I admit that it is difficult to do so.

Something else that happens all the time is that people perceive the viewpoints of others based on their own biases. When we read or hear the words of another, those words are filtered through our own distortions. We may think we know exactly how the other person thinks, what their subconscious issues are, even what their life lessons are, and we could be totally wrong.

We could be partially right, we could be totally right, or we could be totally wrong. And to us, it will always seem totally right, even when we're totally wrong.

You could help me perhaps? Laugh about your friend uncle ali that his mind is slow to accept certain realities.. Just spell them out properly for him next time

OK! Will do. Just remember (when I'm being blunt) that you gave me permission!

So either the psychology we speak about existed for hundreds of thousands of years. Or it existed for millions of years. Either way, the last 7 millenia were not representative.

They were part of the intention to control mankind.

Well this is getting into a whole 'nother topic here. There is much I could say in response to this, but it would take this thread further off-topic.

I said no such thing. I don't understand where you got the idea.

From my own distorted perception of your words, of course!

This is a beautiful illustration of what we just talked about. Your words seemed to imply something to me. Turns out I was wrong in my perception of your words.

But, here's the difference: Rather than assume I was correct in my perception, I simply asked you.

You replied that I was wrong, and I accept it. "Oh, that's not what Ali meant. Cool. Next."

I simply stated that

Isn't it amazing how "simple statements" can carry loads of implication? when passed through our own filters.

At any rate I am glad we agree that both genders were victimized.

Agreed!

I would agree with you... Every change has it's up and downsides...

We agree again! yippppeee! Let's quit while we're ahead. About that female orgasm...

---

I think that I understand how you mean. I disagree and regard it to be an honor of both.

Then do you disagree with what Ra and Q'uo said about there being a difference?

As you said it yourself, I don't think that these roles are relevant for my personal progression.

What I'm wondering is: Do you disagree with what Ra/Q'uo said, or do you feel that you agree with them but just interpret their words differently than I do? Or, do you think Ra's/Q'uo's explanations just don't apply to everyone?

It's perfectly fine to not resonate with something Ra or Q'uo said, of course. I'm just trying to understand whether it's the whole idea of there being any inherent differences between male and female that you disagree with, ie. Ra's/Q'uo's clear indication that there are...OR is it that you feel Ra/Q'uo were referring to those who are veiled and that once we become aware those roles no longer apply?

(I hope this question makes sense.)

It seems to me that there is some indignation being expressed at the very idea that there could be an inherent difference between the sexual nature of male and female. I'm a little surprised at this, being that, in my understanding, Ra and Q'uo have both clearly stated as such.

So, I am attempting to reconcile Ra's and Q'uo's words.

Ra indicated a clear difference between the sexual roles of male and female. Q'uo seemed to focus on the female in this session, because that's what the question was about.

Could it be that they wasn't referring to men and women literally, but to the ever-changing energies in both men and women? Is that how this is reconciled? Surely Ra and Q'uo aren't limited by societal gender roles, right?

What about all the thousands of years' worth of Tantric and Taoist texts which say essentially the same thing Ra and Q'uo said?

Could it be that, as the veil thins, all that ancient wisdom no longer applies? I'm not being facetious here but entirely serious. Many people are confused about their sexuality, to the point of even having their sex changed. I wonder how all this fits in with Ra's and Q'uo's words.

I don't know the answer to these questions, but am just musing...

But let's look at what Q'uo said:

This is green-ray affection and it is at this point that the female orgasm becomes useful. There are more miles to go indeed in exploring sacred sexuality, but this is where it begins.

Why did Q'uo say the female orgasm becomes useful?

Why didn't Q'uo say that both orgasms become equally useful at this point?

Wait, it gets better:

If you are a woman, you treasure yourself. You do not worry about having an orgasm, as if it were the same thing as a man’s orgasm for, my friends, it is not. Certainly it can be made rough and primitive. It can have the energy simply of sexual congress in the red ray. However, it is far more likely for the feminine temperament to appreciate what’s going on when that orgasm happens to her. For a woman tends to have more of a connection with the unseen world. So, she is actually more aware of the kind of energy that is pouring through her when she is expressing an orgasm physically.

Consequently, a woman in that position is a priestess, just as a man is a priest, in sexual intercourse when they are working together sacredly. But to the man goes that kind of energy that is called by this instrument “yang,” to the woman goes the energy that is considered by this instrument “yin,” so that, in the sexual energy exchange that is sacred in nature, from the man comes that powerful energy of physical wellness and vitality—that which you think of when you think of the word “masculine.”

What the feminine offers is the inspiration from spirit. That is the other portion of that male expression of strength, power and virility. The woman is expressing acceptance, unconditional love, and the energy of the Creator Itself. For you see, the woman, unlike man, is possessed of a direct route or connection to the womb of, shall we say, Mother Nature or the red-ray energy of planet Earth.

The woman has that sea of infinity and eternity flowing through her. She is much closer to her priestliness because she must tend to the circumstances of her menses monthly and she feels the pull of the moon, the tides, and her passions in a way that, generally speaking, men are not encouraged to do in your culture.

I just went back and scanned this whole thread. I don't see any discussion of this Q'uote. But there it is.

Who let the elephant in?