but to co create is jupiter and woman still want a man for that as much as ever.
But a man needs a woman to co-create biological life too, it's not one-sided. In fact, a man needs a lot more from a woman to have his genes "live" on. So why is that not a factor for men?
Or are you going with the idea that only women are interested in procreating, men are not? I.e. Men look for convenience in a marriage, and women look for having kids.
Because then this could be a change that is happening in real-time, women are no longer considering procreating to be their only option to have/lead a creative life (and this is true). After all, a biological, hormone led creation is just a very basic and bodily expression of the IDEA of creation. A creative life does not have to manifest itself in a material, bodily-creative life aka procreation.
In which case why does man have to be Jupiter? Wouldn't it just depend on the context/woman?
The planets have been up there for a much much longer time than humanity.
The biology of the humans is a work in slow progress. The hormonal and sexual systems took many many thousands of years to develop.
Personally I don´t think that a deep change is possible within a few generations. It would take a much much longer time, and the foundation of what is feminine and masculine is there from the beginning and will never change, of course.
A sign to keep an eye on: Even if we see many women choose independence - and I don´t criticize them - do we see them getting fulfillment? I see - but that´s subjective, of course - a lot of women who has chosen independence, abortion, childlessness etc and that now express frustration, anger and even hatred. Not saying that it´s the whole picture, of course.
Mattias
do we see them getting fulfillment?
Yes, I do see them fulfilled, especially when they have their own thing that they like to do.
But when we have more options in life, and we make choices.. our minds can wander and think of other potential possibilities and feel bad/frustrated momentarily. This is nothing unique to women. Men too have their frustrations of unfulfilled potentials and possibilities that they do also regret.
What is new is that women have had their options open up very suddenly, very fast. So other parts of us have to catch up.
It seems many men find it hard to grasp that women have a nuanced existence, which isn't so black and white or infantile. They are waiting and watching for her to express a moment of doubt so they can pounce and say "Gotcha!!" and then use her vulnerable moment against her.
Personally I don´t think that a deep change is possible within a few generations. It would take a much much longer time,
So? I'm saying the concept exists, the potential exists.
Plus, the MAIN REASON transformation takes time is because we believe so. It's a concept stuck in our minds, and it's a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Plus, it doesn't escape my observation that women transforming (which is WIP now), scares men on some level, so that has to be factored in.
Nice job not actually addressing the content of what I wrote though.
Being sarcastic is not the best way of convincing anyone, at least not be, that you are happy and fulfilled Leela.
Mattias
Like "Do we have an actual astrological foundation to speak about feminine and masculine, men and women?"
I don't know.
We can look at certain qualities and call them "Active", and look at other qualities and call them "Receptive". I personally much prefer the 3 Gunas to categorise things rather than this.
But the only real basis for calling them masculine and feminine is based on sexual organs. Just this one, biological facet of us. It's not even the entire picture in terms of reproduction itself, for there is much that is still unknown. For example, the womb is now discovered to be much more "active" in the process, and the sperm is much more "passive". And the sperm has no more "life" than does the egg, for the egg comes to life through ovulation.
Now if someone wants to make the assertion that sex and biology is the ONLY basis for anything, then okay.. fine. Call things masculine and feminine, I have no issue with that.
But if we think there is some spiritual basis for life, and there is a "spirit" or a consciousness that can be perceived beyond the body, then sex and sexual biology and sexual differences is only a facet of us, that became too big in human consciousness due to repetition and habit.
This is not to say men and women are identical or will turn out to be identical. Creation is a process of unfolding- things are still being revealed and uncovered. Maybe the full extent of what a "woman" can be, has not yet come into existence. If we keep pretending it has- then that's like killing a sapling or putting it into a pot and making it into a houseplant before it grows into a towering tree. To me, that is an unacceptable outcome.