Feminism is about a 5 year old, thought.

[Cyan]

So, I've been observing modern feminism for a while now and the activity is very similar to a child of around 5 going through the "confrontational period" of their life. It seems that feminism is yet to make a huge blunder so the feeling of all power is still there in combination with a sense of knowing how things should be done and being opposed by "old white power", this to me seem very much like a child telling their parent that they know how things should be done. Not to take into effect that the child maybe right, it does seem like a "tantrum" going on. Perhaps the best historical similar is the french revolution, it started as a tantrum but destroyed itself when they brought out the quillotine. So I'm interested in waiting and seeing what this new type of civilization produces, will it be able to produce a equalitarian paradise or will it devolve into the use of the quillotine and the tantrum.

I'm taking it to be a 5 year old even though its closer to a 60 year old due to the fact that the oldest earth ideologies are thousands of years old, not 60, if they are old people then certainly feminism is a young person.

Not to take part in the whole right and wrong debate in relation to this, I'd prefer to note that it seem the activities stem from lack of huge failures yet. I wonder how the activity will change when they encounter their first huge failure, for example what if the pay wage gap gets disproven or it turns out that females do more home violence, such a disprove would be what I'm looking for, then we could see if they adjust like an adult civilization or keep going on a tantrum. I would love to see what civilization they produce but I'm suspicious of the results of such a collection of anger, it seems counterproductive.

So that being said, i wonder how many see feminism as a child ideology and how many see it as an adult ideology and how this number changes the interactions between the adherants, it would be an interesting study.

So thats all I wanted to say, feels to me like an ideology waiting for its first big hurdle and to evolve upwards from it, hope it does well.

[Louisabell]

I believe the problem with over-generalised conclusions of certain idealogies (and mainly the intentions of the people behind them) is that you are trying to describe a 3rd density phenomena with 2nd density conceptual understanding.

Feminism is an umbrella term encompassing a collection of ideologies that are expressed on a group level. Anyone who's heard of feminism has a part to play in this group dynamic, so pretty much everyone living in the west at least. One cannot even imagine how complex and massive such a group is. Could even a supercomputer make all the calculations neccessary to truly represent the degree of nuance involved when millions of adult humans are making decisions surrounding "gender roles" and their meaning - something quite central to the human experience?

Maybe now we can begin to understand how abysmally insufficient statements such as feminism is this..., feminism is that... is.

Moreover as we become ever more saturated in media, we have to acknowledge the role of confirmation bias in our lives. Your version of feminism is very different to my version of feminism, as with everyone else. Someone who had an abusive mother and who frequents MGTOW forums is going to have a different idea of the role of feminism as a social worker with an alcoholic father and who works in disadvantaged immigrant communities.

We are all part of an infinite Creator, with an infinite array of perspectives. This is beautiful. Let's acknowledge the significance of everyone's unique experience. Let's not assume they're crazy, irrational, stupid. Lets entertain the idea that maybe everyone has good reasons for thinking the way they do and lets begin to learn from eachother.

I find feminism or sexism extremely interesting because when it comes to other groups, it's possible to have very little interaction with people of a different race or sexual orientation or religion. But when it comes to gender, there is no escaping it. We live with eachother, work with eachother, fall in love with eachother. So therefore we all have strong opinions and biases forged over our very personal experiences. I propose there is no other idealogy to feminism with more self-proclaimed experts in the field, with more people who think they know what it's all about and how other people should conform to their enlightened views.

For example - the gender pay gap. There are multiple ways to see this. One way will propose that women chose not to participate in the workforce as much as men, they're not as ambitious, therefore they cannot expect to earn as much, therefore the pay gap is a myth. Another way to see it puts into question the assumption that men are more ambitious (surely hypergamy, considered a toxic female trait in the manosphere, is the empitomy of ambitious behavior), and that just because women make babies it neccessarily needs to impact their careers. Maternity leave was a huge advancement in this, and Australia has 12 months leave with a guarantee of your job when you go back. But then it was thought that "maternity" leave was sexist, so now it is "parental" leave and the father can take this time off as well. For me this is a great step forward for men's rights as well, why shouldn't they get the same opportunity to bond to their baby in those early times?

Some men would prefer not to be the primary care giver of a baby, changing diapers and the like, and so see such a move as emasculating (feminism trying to turn men into women), but then is he not just resisting the idea that he doesn't get to decide what a man is? Seems quite childish to me as obviously some men want this - they go on parental leave.

Personally I like diversity of thought and personality and believe that the onus should fall on the individual to make an appropriate choice of partner. Some of my feminist friends think that doesn't go far enough. I don't see how that's moral or even possible, but that is just a testament to how different all our interpretations of what feminism should encompass is.

Lastly, I want to discuss a very important idea, and that is assigning motives to other people. In order to hold a strong oppositional position with a group, one must assign motive to that group. Sometimes these assumptions are held up with a lot of evidence and based in fact (i.e. white nationalists want a country of only white people - it's in the name) while other times these assumed motives are based on flimsy evidence, caricatures or are only representative of extreme or subversive elements in the group. Anti-progressive/cultural-Marxist thought leaders have rightly critiqued this practice when directed at them, only to turn around and do the same thing to their progressive counterparts (apparently all women who label themselves feminist don't want equality, but want to put men down, no matter what they say about it).

I see this as a block in 3rd ray understanding causing a block in 5th ray ability to really communicate and listen carefully to people, take them at their word, not preconceived ideas about them.

So in a round about way, do I think SOME elements of feminism are like a 5 year old tantrum? Well of course, because feminism IS people and there are plently of humans walking around with the emotional maturity of infants. Men too who pretend to gag because a woman choses not to shave her underarms are 5 year olds throwing a tantrum. Just humans being humans. But to also ignore that there are plenty of intelligent people with valid reasons involved in feminism is to not see the reality of complex human systems.

I see no evolution possible trying to simplify things down to orange ray thinking. A group made up of millions is not one 5 year old child. How you chose to respond to that child cannot be appropriately applied to all individuals in the group. The group will not "grow up" as one, but parts will evolve, other parts will devolve. So the question becomes, can you stand the ambiguity and chaos and still find a way to love people?

[Cyan]

Interesting response. I'll think a bit and maybe write a response.

[Cyan]

Currently watching this and considering it funny, your opinion may vary.

[Louisabell]

Currently watching this and considering it funny, your opinion may vary.

Gender relations run the gambit of absolutely hilarious to downright tragic.

I see most of the ridiculousness comes from the complete inability to put one's self in the mind of the opposite "cis"-gender. Out of curiosity, I am constantly trying to see the world through the eyes of a male who find women attractive, since their bodies seem to be plastered everywhere. Yet apart from foundational feminine and masculine energies, I still can't seem to understand what all the fuss is about. I guess the article writer in the video has a unique perspective as someone who has experienced radically different amounts of sex hormones in their life.

[ScottK]

That video is hilarious

I know feminism was started by the elite for two main reasons. The first was to get a second paycheck, so the family could afford me and pay more to bankers and the government. And secondly, it was to break up the family - if you don't have a strong family, you need to rely more on the government. And it's a shame so many kids are raised in daycare, practically by necessity now. It's worked pretty well.

The dogma surrounding feminism has gotten pretty insane in recent years - to the point where the silent majority is looking at it in shock, IMO.

[David_1]

Sadly, things aren’t always the way they seem at first.
We have the gift of being able to look at information.
Think!
Then choose.
I suspect choices are often made from a “It’s about me” point of view.
Should I always follow what others think?
Only fish that are dead always swim with the stream!

[Diana]

Sadly, things aren’t always the way they seem at first.
We have the gift of being able to look at information.
Think!
Then choose.
I suspect choices are often made from a “It’s about me” point of view.
Should I always follow what others think?
Only fish that are dead always swim with the stream!

I ike this. Instead of getting caught up in the human drama, it is my practice to live and think as an empowered individual. Regarding for example, equal pay, I'm out of that box because I have worked for myself most of my adult life—which was a choice. If I were working for a company who was paying me less than a man with the same job, I would address that with the manager, and if that got me nowhere I would go to the CEO. Before that came up, I would know I was doing my very best, and not just working to get a paycheck.

But activism is something that appears to be necessary to drive humanity forward. In order for women to be able to vote, for instance, there had to be a rebellious push from activists. There are activists now trying to expand the consciousness of humanity to include compassion for animals and not just people. Hundreds of years ago we had a civil war in the US over slavery. Big leaps forward are usually messy it seems, when you are dealing with so many humans at different levels of consciousness.

A note about the French Revolution: It was mob mentality yes, but I wouldn't categorize it as a tantrum. According to history, the citizens revolted because they were starving, living in extreme poverty, in juxtaposition to the royalty and elite who were obliviously flaunting excess and privilege.

[David_1]

Beautiful thoughts, Diana.
There are many things on Earth I consider unjust.
It is a noble cause to promote compassion and justice.
One problem is that decisions are sometimes made from the point of view of “What can I get out of it?”

[Merrick]

I believe the problem with over-generalised conclusions of certain idealogies (and mainly the intentions of the people behind them) is that you are trying to describe a 3rd density phenomena with 2nd density conceptual understanding.

Feminism is an umbrella term encompassing a collection of ideologies that are expressed on a group level. Anyone who's heard of feminism has a part to play in this group dynamic, so pretty much everyone living in the west at least. One cannot even imagine how complex and massive such a group is. Could even a supercomputer make all the calculations neccessary to truly represent the degree of nuance involved when millions of adult humans are making decisions surrounding "gender roles" and their meaning - something quite central to the human experience?

Maybe now we can begin to understand how abysmally insufficient statements such as feminism is this..., feminism is that... is.

Moreover as we become ever more saturated in media, we have to acknowledge the role of confirmation bias in our lives. Your version of feminism is very different to my version of feminism, as with everyone else. Someone who had an abusive mother and who frequents MGTOW forums is going to have a different idea of the role of feminism as a social worker with an alcoholic father and who works in disadvantaged immigrant communities.

We are all part of an infinite Creator, with an infinite array of perspectives. This is beautiful. Let's acknowledge the significance of everyone's unique experience. Let's not assume they're crazy, irrational, stupid. Lets entertain the idea that maybe everyone has good reasons for thinking the way they do and lets begin to learn from eachother.

I find feminism or sexism extremely interesting because when it comes to other groups, it's possible to have very little interaction with people of a different race or sexual orientation or religion. But when it comes to gender, there is no escaping it. We live with eachother, work with eachother, fall in love with eachother. So therefore we all have strong opinions and biases forged over our very personal experiences. I propose there is no other idealogy to feminism with more self-proclaimed experts in the field, with more people who think they know what it's all about and how other people should conform to their enlightened views.

For example - the gender pay gap. There are multiple ways to see this. One way will propose that women chose not to participate in the workforce as much as men, they're not as ambitious, therefore they cannot expect to earn as much, therefore the pay gap is a myth. Another way to see it puts into question the assumption that men are more ambitious (surely hypergamy, considered a toxic female trait in the manosphere, is the empitomy of ambitious behavior), and that just because women make babies it neccessarily needs to impact their careers. Maternity leave was a huge advancement in this, and Australia has 12 months leave with a guarantee of your job when you go back. But then it was thought that "maternity" leave was sexist, so now it is "parental" leave and the father can take this time off as well. For me this is a great step forward for men's rights as well, why shouldn't they get the same opportunity to bond to their baby in those early times?

Some men would prefer not to be the primary care giver of a baby, changing diapers and the like, and so see such a move as emasculating (feminism trying to turn men into women), but then is he not just resisting the idea that he doesn't get to decide what a man is? Seems quite childish to me as obviously some men want this - they go on parental leave.

Personally I like diversity of thought and personality and believe that the onus should fall on the individual to make an appropriate choice of partner. Some of my feminist friends think that doesn't go far enough. I don't see how that's moral or even possible, but that is just a testament to how different all our interpretations of what feminism should encompass is.

Lastly, I want to discuss a very important idea, and that is assigning motives to other people. In order to hold a strong oppositional position with a group, one must assign motive to that group. Sometimes these assumptions are held up with a lot of evidence and based in fact (i.e. white nationalists want a country of only white people - it's in the name) while other times these assumed motives are based on flimsy evidence, caricatures or are only representative of extreme or subversive elements in the group. Anti-progressive/cultural-Marxist thought leaders have rightly critiqued this practice when directed at them, only to turn around and do the same thing to their progressive counterparts (apparently all women who label themselves feminist don't want equality, but want to put men down, no matter what they say about it).

I see this as a block in 3rd ray understanding causing a block in 5th ray ability to really communicate and listen carefully to people, take them at their word, not preconceived ideas about them.

So in a round about way, do I think SOME elements of feminism are like a 5 year old tantrum? Well of course, because feminism IS people and there are plently of humans walking around with the emotional maturity of infants. Men too who pretend to gag because a woman choses not to shave her underarms are 5 year olds throwing a tantrum. Just humans being humans. But to also ignore that there are plenty of intelligent people with valid reasons involved in feminism is to not see the reality of complex human systems.

I see no evolution possible trying to simplify things down to orange ray thinking. A group made up of millions is not one 5 year old child. How you chose to respond to that child cannot be appropriately applied to all individuals in the group. The group will not "grow up" as one, but parts will evolve, other parts will devolve. So the question becomes, can you stand the ambiguity and chaos and still find a way to love people?

Thank you for this thoughtful and considered response. I would have been far more glib and dismissive. Something for me to meditate on.

[Cyan]

I wonder what feminism will be like in the 2060's when it reaches school age. Give or take. It will be interesting to see.

[kristina]

I'd burn my bra tomorrow but my fiance would stop taking out the trash and building things for me.

[isis]

[Infinite]

Everyone who understood the concept of unity and its natural compassion, is automatically feminist and in favor of the majority of social movements. The humanity is unbalanced in many manners, the role of the women is one of them. We are in a matrix, that matrix is based in separation and illusion. One of the aspcets of this illusion is the chauvinistic matrix whose the primal manifestation is the patriarchal society.

[isis]

I'd burn my bra tomorrow but my fiance would stop taking out the trash and building things for me.

FREE THE NIPPLE

[ada]

Context?  

[isis]

Context?  

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-...SKCN1Q30Q7

[ada]

I will say something that might sound bad, though it's not my intention to blame or point fingers at any one as I think we all are as responsible. I think it's ok for women to not wear bras if so they wish, however, I think the issue's that most women hate it when they are looked at. So if there's no issue with looking, then there is no issue with dressing. So basically, I think (though I am most likely wrong) women wear bras to significate that they do not want these parts to be seen, and on the contrary they want be seen as bras appear to make breasts larger and "more beautiful"(?). I don't know, by now it's become so stigmatic that women have to abide like it some kind of law to wear a bra, it's so confusing. Wear whatever you want, be whoever you want.

[isis]

I just wish we could all be naked in public if we want.

[ada]

It's a silly thought actually, but that's how I sometimes imagine 4th density to begin, with everyone walking naked and for the first time not being afraid of what others might think.

[Cyan]

Good discussion, I was surprised how well the situation got to talking here, good funny discussion too, anyway.

I hope we can keep a open hearted discussion and no blame and just enjoy the situation here. =)

[Merrick]

Everyone who understood the concept of unity and its natural compassion, is automatically feminist and in favor of the majority of social movements. The humanity is unbalanced in many manners, the role of the women is one of them. We are in a matrix, that matrix is based in separation and illusion. One of the aspcets of this illusion is the chauvinistic matrix whose the primal manifestation is the patriarchal society.

I agree emphatically and completely.

[Cyan]

Everyone who understood the concept of unity and its natural compassion, is automatically feminist and in favor of the majority of social movements. The humanity is unbalanced in many manners, the role of the women is one of them. We are in a matrix, that matrix is based in separation and illusion. One of the aspcets of this illusion is the chauvinistic matrix whose the primal manifestation is the patriarchal society.

I agree emphatically and completely.

I strongly disagree and am of the opinion weve been at a matriarchical system at least since late farming era and that there is little point in even discussing patriarchy while hunting and scavanging for your food is considered low while purchasing food from the market is a high style food. The way i see it this is a matriarchy.

That being said, wont stop me from enjoying a goodheart discussing which this is clearly staying as, which is very good.

Either way happens to be true what matters is individual choices grounded in STO, or so I believe anyway.

[Infinite]

I strongly disagree and am of the opinion weve been at a matriarchical system at least since late farming era

It's my opinion (that could be wrong) that the past doesn't matter. I'm talking of the present. But, if you desire talk about past just remember of the the majority of religions which has patriarchal structures. And also, realise how much rights the women had to conquer while the men always had them.

and that there is little point in even discussing patriarchy while hunting and scavanging for your food is considered low while purchasing food from the market is a high style food. The way i see it this is a matriarchy.

I humbly suggest you study the terms patriarchy and matriarchy because your example makes no any sense.

Either way happens to be true what matters is individual choices grounded in STO, or so I believe anyway.

Yes, I agree. But, I believe there comes a time when all structures and blockages in our society of orange and yellow rays become obvious to the seeker. However, as Ra said, the green-ray entity rarely will engage yourself in one social activity because the distorions are many.  

[Minyatur]

I'd burn my bra tomorrow but my fiance would stop taking out the trash and building things for me.

FREE THE NIPPLE

The author of GOT has been a pioneer of the cause.

[BastionPath]

That combined with the projection of men being the 'cause of evil' leads to a fairly resonant distortion. E.g men being celebrated for selling out men.

However, this is actually fairly beneficial for men. As this paradigm allows the soul espousing true equality and acceptance a plate against which they can grow to whatever level of grandeur their soul desires.

[speedforce131]

Modern feminism is an aberration of natural law and order but even so, it serves as a catalyst to weed out correct and incorrect thinking which leads to a better more solid understanding.

[Merrick]

There are some bizarre and disturbing (to me) posts in this thread. Power of the patriarchy I suppose.

[Relax]

I'd burn my bra tomorrow but my fiance would stop taking out the trash and building things for me.

I enjoy building things for myself as well as others helping me. I like to know I'm self sufficient, especially so I never feel trapped/locked into any situations/relationships.

Trash - you can take it out in turns... that way you decide your undergarment situation with no pressure

if you're solo you make less trash to take out and autonomy can be a blessing as much as a good relationship can be.

but you're joking? yes?

if not - take off your bra (if you want) and learn a trade (if you need)

see what the reaction is

I'd never marry anyone who only does helpful things 'conditionally'

and yes - (to other replies here - this thread is an unpleasant one

I think it's intended to be 'provocative' which is exactly why I haven't responded to the OP.

No point.

Cyan wants drama to alleviate boredom (?)
but why? he's travelling in another country ! 0_0 exciting! :exclamation: :idea:

[AnthroHeart]

Cyan certainly is brave. One night he sensed a carnivorous creature like a coyote that was spotting us out, with an evil spirit, and walked out towards it while I was a little scared. We were sitting outside in the paradisical slight breeze and warm almost cool air, talking about it. My dog started howling indoors cause he could tell what was going on. I didn't sense the creature though.