You can´t get a man...
 
Notifications
Clear all

You can´t get a man with a gun

45 Posts
9 Users
44 Likes
1,533 Views
Mattias
Posts: 794
Topic starter
(@meyes)
Noble Member
Joined: 3 years ago

I can´t think of a better illustration of what Ernst teaches us about the necessity of being receptive for the female counterpart in a heterosexual relationship than this wonderful video:

https://youtu.be/hGB7yTZEZE4

From the classic musical Annie get your gun, of course. I dearly recommend it!

It´s so PAINFUL. And yet so fun! Hilarious, if you ask me.

I guess God had to give the women this weak spot - to depend on such a lousy creature as a man for her female happiness (if she´s heterosexual, that is). In modern society she can do everything a man can - except for the old things like carrying and giving birth to children, breastfeeding and other things that a man never will be able to do. She would have reasons to believe that she´s God´s equal, hadn´t this dependence been.

Mattias

44 Replies
Leela
Posts: 196
(@leela)
Reputable Member
Joined: 2 years ago
Posted by: @meyes

She would have reasons to believe that she´s God´s equal, hadn´t this dependence been

Do you mean the reverse, for your sentence makes no sense give the previous sentence, which is that women can do more than men can 🙂
Without women and the fact that they give life- men would think they are God.

Moreover- this musical is a good example of male ego. From what I know of this musical- the guy gets enamored of her and her talent (in spite of her masculine side), even though she is nothing like what he supposedly wants. It's just their pride that gets in the way.

Reply
1 Reply
Mattias
(@meyes)
Joined: 3 years ago

Noble Member
Posts: 794

@leela I´m sorry Leella, twice in a short time you have eliminated posts that I have answered to, making my posts to disappear as well. You would probably do it again so I´m not going to answer you.

Reply
Leela
Posts: 196
(@leela)
Reputable Member
Joined: 2 years ago

@meyes 

I'm not looking for an answer from you in specific at all. 

I see forums as an open discussion- it's not a debate, nor a QnA (unless addressed to the TEACHER here, which is not you).

Even if someone is addressing a point brought up by one person, anyone is free to read, write, ignore. I'm writing merely to add a voice. If anyone responds it's cool, if not that's cool too. 

What's interesting is there was no need for you to respond to me at all-- yet you choose to respond and say you're not going to respond. Seems kind of petty. 

Reply
3 Replies
Mattias
(@meyes)
Joined: 3 years ago

Noble Member
Posts: 794

@leela First thing in your answer was a question directed to me. I´m not in the habit of ignoring people who address me.

Reply
Leela
(@leela)
Joined: 2 years ago

Reputable Member
Posts: 196

@meyes 

It's a "quote" of your post, because I'm referring to it, it provides context. Also, that particular question is rhetorical, seeing as I answered it as well. 

Plus you wrote anyway, saying you won't write. 

Alright, that's enough.

Reply
Mattias
(@meyes)
Joined: 3 years ago

Noble Member
Posts: 794

@leela Next time you are going to be ignored, don´t worry Leela.

Reply
Manisha
Posts: 532
(@manisha)
Prominent Member
Joined: 3 years ago

In the mythological story of Lord Rama, even though Ravana kidnapped Sita, he could not touch a hair of hers. So, I guess even a man can’t get a woman with a gun, which means by force. Which means he has to be receptive to the cue from her too.

In the case of the movie example given above, ‘Annie get your gun’, which is based on the life story of Annie Oakley, Annie had a hard childhood and had to learn to hunt and shoot at the age of 7 to support her siblings and her widowed mother. She had no time or extra money to doll herself up and live a leisurely life like other girls might have.

Even if someone does not know Annie’s biography, all this is played out both in the musical and the movie. The song ‘Doing what comes naturally’ is a great one and shows how life gets simpler when we do what we are meant to do.

The song mentioned above ‘You can’t get a man with a gun’, is her lamenting about how her natural talent of being a sharpshooter helps her ‘get’ animals and birds to trade to feed herself and her family but that talent was useless when it came to ‘getting’ a man, because shooting a man with a gun would render him useless.

And yet Annie Oakley went on to perform for royalty and her husband, who lost their first shooting match to her, trusted her enough to allow her to shoot out a cigar from his lips. Not only that, her spirit so moved the great warrior Sitting Bull that he adopted her as his daughter.

She went on to teach thousands of women on how to use a gun, not only as a mental and physical exercise, but also as a means of self-defense. All the money she made was spent on her family and charities.

Not only did her husband respect her for the talents that came naturally to her and were an integral part of her, but he was so deeply connected to her that he died a few days after she did. 

When we look at her horoscope, what drives her to be who she is, becomes clear. 

I guess a part of anything can be taken in isolation to ‘prove’ someone’s perspective, but only when the whole picture is taken into consideration does the right meaning come into focus.

Reply
3 Replies
Mattias
(@meyes)
Joined: 3 years ago

Noble Member
Posts: 794

@manisha "The right meaning." You haven't changed a bit, Manisha, since the time you declared so boldly in this forum that you know better than others for being a Clubs of Queens. To which I replied quoting Lao Zi, remember? "The know you more, the less you understand."

No Manisha, there is no such thing as "the right meaning" in art. There are different points of views. 

Mattias

Reply
Francesca
(@francesca)
Joined: 2 years ago

Honorable Member
Posts: 292

@meyes 

If there is no right meaning and all of us and our opinions are just different manifestations of Vishnu, doesn't that actually make it fun to engage in a discussion and hear different view points 🙂 ? And doesn't that also mean that there are no hard and fast rules and each manifestation of Vishnu is going to experience things differently? That's been my experience anyway ;).

Reply
Mattias
(@meyes)
Joined: 3 years ago

Noble Member
Posts: 794

@francesca I don't know what you mean or what you thought that I was saying. I just said that it's ridiculous to claim the truth in a matter that isn't even factual. When it comes to vishnu I'm sure that there are other vishnu manifestations that can answer that better than me, because I really don't know. 

 

Reply
Manisha
Posts: 532
(@manisha)
Prominent Member
Joined: 3 years ago

@meyes 

Posted by: @meyes

"The right meaning." You haven't changed a bit, Manisha, since the time you declared so boldly in this forum that you know better than others for being a Clubs of Queens. To which I replied quoting Lao Zi, remember? "The know you more, the less you understand."

No Manisha, there is no such thing as "the right meaning" in art. There are different points of views. 

A few thoughts and observations -

  • The central theme of your original post was about how a particular song from a particular movie was supposed to be
    Posted by: @meyes

    a better illustration of what Ernst teaches us about the necessity of being receptive for the female counterpart in a heterosexual relationship

    I know the particular movie and about the person that the movie is based on, and I could not see the connection. I put my thoughts forward from my perspective. Moreover, the post was not addressed specifically to you. There was no need for name-calling or using a low-level tactic of trying to discredit me.

 

  • I am also quite aware that there is no such thing as ‘the right meaning’ in art. I have worked in the film and advertising industry and still have many contacts there and also in the art industry. I have the best seat to see what goes on, both behind the scenes and infront on the screen. But the completed song itself is not abstract art, instead it tells a story. There are specific words to the song, and even though words could have many meanings, lyrics from that particular song like -
      • “... And you can’t shoot a male in the tail like a quail, Oh, you can’t get a man with a gun”
    • Or 
      • “... And you can’t get a hug from a mug with a slug, Oh, you can’t get a man with a gun”
    • Or 
      • ... But you can’t shoot a lover and use him for a cover, Oh, you can’t get a man with a gun”
    • Or 
      • “... But he can’t build you houses with buckshot in his trousers, For a man may be hot, but he’s not when he’s shot, Oh, you can’t get a man with a gun“
    •  
  • - I cannot see how those could be misinterpreted. If you could explain your perspective, that would be great. 

 

  • My energy might be that of a Queen of Clubs, but with Rahu in the first and the planets with my Rahu and Ketu, I am quite aware of how little I know and hence how little I have understood. I could say that I am growing into my role of a Queen of Clubs. There is no need for you to quote me Lao Tse. I am well aware of him and his writings and they have been a source of inspiration for me ever since I was a child, and with a 9 of Spades Ecliptic Path, have given me a lot to contemplate upon.
    •  
    • I have hounded Ernst and other members on this forum with tons of questions. I have also had many fruitful discussions on this very forum and love to hear the perspectives of others, so that I can learn and grow from them and expand my vision. With a 10 of Spades Sun card, I also love to share what I have found on my path so it becomes easier for others to navigate through theirs. I guess it is the nurturing aspect of all the Queens in the deck coming forth.
    •  
    • Does this equate to your allegation that I feel that I know better than others?

 

  • Trying to make me feel ashamed of who I am, won’t work on me. It is not the first time you have tried that or used back-handed compliments. That tactic has no affect or effect on me and is a waste of time. If it makes you feel better about it, I will completely agree with you that I am a complete idiot and a fool and a very dumb person. So, the more you can explain, the better I might understand. Sticking with the subject matter, instead of using evasive tactics to avoid the subject matter, would be much appreciated.

 

Reply
12 Replies
Mattias
(@meyes)
Joined: 3 years ago

Noble Member
Posts: 794

@manisha I am busy traveling. It will a few days before I can answer.

Reply
Mattias
(@meyes)
Joined: 3 years ago

Noble Member
Posts: 794

As for trying to shaming you I admit that I published a laughing smiley in yesterday's post, that was sarcastic. It was stupid of me. I updated the post several times trying to get rid of it, but since I was traveling and had a bad connection, it failed. 

For the rest I'm afraid that what you say about shaming is a projection and that it's your own behavior that you are describing. But I will have to get back on that.

Reply
Francesca
(@francesca)
Joined: 2 years ago

Honorable Member
Posts: 292

@meyes 

I would really like to chime in and offer my perspective as someone who has been following this thread, but hasn't really been involved in the discussion.

You made a post about a principle you saw reflected in a song and described how to interpret it, i. e. you offered your opinion. There are plenty of posts like that on this forum where members share their observations, presumably so other may benefit from it, too. As with anything in life, sometimes people agree, sometimes they don't. Once you voice a (strong or controversial) opinion in a forum, you are inviting a discussion about it, whether that's what you intended to or not.

The opinion you shared is one most women I know (including myself) would not agree with. Both Leela and Manisha disagreed with it and shared their counterarguments. Both did so in a way that I find to be fairly matter of fact.

I don't have full context for your discussion with Leela, but from what I see you cut the conversation short and phrased it in a way that was both sarcastic and condescending ("don't worry, next time you'll be ignored" or something to that effect).

With Manisha you actually resorted to an ad hominem attack ("you haven't changed a bit"), insinuated she does not know anything ("The know you more, the less you understand") and did personally attack her for her Cards of Truth Card (I don't know the terminology, so I apologize if I used the term incorrectly).

Regardless of what your intent was when writing these things, I agree with Manisha that you are shaming her and don't feel she is projecting. I don't know what your relationship is, but ad hominem attacks are not only not ok in my book, they are actually unproductive as well.

What I was trying to say in my post yesterday is that in my experience I think discussions and conversations like these tend to be most fruitful when we act like we have no skin in the game (good Mercury). As soon as we make it about our Mars, our strong opinions, everyone has something to protect and things get out of hand. I personally have many friends with opinion that are diametrically opposed to mine and the way we have been able to maintain strong friendships is by keeping discussions about the topic at hand, never about the person.

From having read your posts on this forum for a while, my guess is you were just trying to be funny or share what was an interesting observation for you and were maybe hoping for people to agree? I actually find many of the things you write really interesting, and appreciate some of the lively exchange you engage in. As an observer it does seem to me like it might not be clear why you said the things or how you said them could have been hurtful. I'm not sure if this is an isolated incident or whether maybe this is something that happens to you on occasion.

I encourage you to read your response again with the things in mind I wrote (how there are ad hominem attacks, unnecessary sarcasm, condescension) and try to put yourself in the shoes of the person you wrote these things to. Perhaps if someone said those things to you, you wouldn't love it either?

Sometimes we say things in a haste that do hurt others, even if not intended. Sometimes we might have been frustrated and unintentionally become hurtful. Either way, I think it's always important to own our behavior and apologize for the damage caused. It happens to the best of us! All of us. This might be a very European example, but think about a time you might have accidentally literally stepped on someone's foot in the tram, looked around, noticed, and apologized. It's so easy to do when it's something physical that we did unintentionally, but much harder to do when we hurt someone else's feelings by being inconsiderate, condescending, or making them feel bad about themselves.

 

Reply
Mattias
(@meyes)
Joined: 3 years ago

Noble Member
Posts: 794

@francesca Manisha and I have a history before this discussion that you don´t know about. I´m not going to get into that, I don´t accuse anyone but I also expect not be judged.  All I have done is to remind Manisha about the concept that she has expressed earlier on this forum. "I know better" she has said (literarily), just as she talks about "the right meaning" in this post. How tiresome, why should I engage in discussion with a person with a person with that attitude?

As for Leela, in two discussions in a short time, she ended erasing her posts, that way ereasing also mine. For that reason I don´t invest in any more discussions with her. She criticize me for having answered her (sic!), that´s why I wrote the way I did: "Don´t worry, you will be ignored." Did you read the thread before you chose to have an opinion?

Whether you agree or not with the ideas in the post, it´s a good illustration of Ernst´s teaching. It´s about the necessity for the female counterpart in a herterosexual relationship of being receptive towards the man, that is: it´s hard if not impossible for a woman, in most cases, to attract a man from her masculine side. If you don´t agree with that concept you should discuss it with Ernst, not with me.

Mattias

Reply
Leela
(@leela)
Joined: 2 years ago

Reputable Member
Posts: 196

@meyes 

I checked my recent history, as I remember the posts I've written on (as I'm not that active on the forum). No, what you say about me is a lie. 

But yes, in general I've erased posts, which is my prerogative. However, you have done it too with me - I remember it. And- in the past you've also erased/edited your post in such a way my response made no sense or made yourself look like a nice person. 

So don't pretend to be some saint and criticize me for something you too have done. 

Reply
Leela
(@leela)
Joined: 2 years ago

Reputable Member
Posts: 196

@meyes 

Btw, everything you write in your first paragraph and other posts is actually more valid for you. Maybe you're projecting it onto Manisha-- but personally, it's in you I see the "know it all" attitude.You're not wanting to "discuss"- but "tell", and you get mad that nobody wants to listen to you. 

Manisha has given very patient replies to you. 

But you're right about one thing- it IS tiresome to engage with such a person, which to me is you. So- goodbye. 

 

Reply
Francesca
(@francesca)
Joined: 2 years ago

Honorable Member
Posts: 292

@meyes 

That is not what my post was about. Please stick to the point and do not create false strawmen.

My post was addressing your claim that Manisha is projecting and you were not shaming her. I do not agree and feel that the way you have spoken to her is out of line. It is out of line for me regardless of the type of relationship or whatever history you may have. It is also out of line for me regardless of whether I agree with your opinion in this post. Had Manisha spoken to you this way and subsequently invalidated your feelings, I would have stepped in just the same.

I have made no judgment of you or your character at large. I have simply expressed my views on your behavior on one particular occassion and how I feel it was hurtful in this particular instance. Rather than judging, I have actually taken the time in my previous post to emphasize that unintentionally hurting others with our words happens quite frequently and to everyone. I've also described that in my opinion it is important to take responsibility for one's actions and causing unintended harm. It's what I find works best in almost of kinds of relationships I am in. If that is not the case for you or you do not feel like you have anything to take responsibility for, you are entirely free to ignore my opinion and advice I shared in my previous post.

Regarding your opinion and interpretation of the song, I am actually quite indifferent. I disagree with you because your view is not one that I see reflected in my life and the lives of those around me. But I am also a firm believer that we are all different and there are no hard and fast rules. What works for one person, won't work for another. Whatever floats people's boats and however they choose to conduct their romantic relationships is really up to them and is all the same to me as long as they are not harming one another. This is why I haven't engaged in the discussion at hand as far as the actual subject matter is concerned. I simply do not care about how people choose to do their love relationships. What I do care about and where I personally do step in, is when I see someone being treated poorly and then getting blamed for it as it does not sit well with me.

I am not addressing Ernst on this, because I did not see Ernst talking to two forum members the way you have. My qualm isn't with Ernst or his teachings. He can choose to teach whatever he likes on his website to whomever finds it helpful.

Reply
Mattias
(@meyes)
Joined: 3 years ago

Noble Member
Posts: 794

@francesca You judge from what you see, but as I said I have a long history with both of these women that you don´t know anything about. And frankly: it´s none of your business.

Mattias

Reply
Leela
(@leela)
Joined: 2 years ago

Reputable Member
Posts: 196

@meyes 

We certainly have a history. 

And by the horrible way in which you've treated Francesca here- who spoke in a very measured and polite manner with you-- clearly demonstrates how the history would have gone.  

 

 

Reply
Francesca
(@francesca)
Joined: 2 years ago

Honorable Member
Posts: 292

@meyes 

I’ve always been told that logic is men’s strong suit and that, unlike women, they are not controlled by their emotions. Perhaps in a display of healthy masculine energy you could follow your own advice, set your feelings on the matter aside, inspire us, lead by example, and apply your own logic by not meddling in how others choose to live their lives.

Reply
Mattias
(@meyes)
Joined: 3 years ago

Noble Member
Posts: 794

@manisha The song expresses a woman´s frustration that she can´t use her active, masculine side to attract a man. The shooting thing is a metaphore for that, and the line about strolling with umbrellas is a metaphore for the feminine attitude that does work for attracting men.

As for me criticizing you it´s for you habit of telling other people in this discussion what´s supposingly right, just as you did in your post above. You have a history doing that, inclusing telling me how limited my intellectual capacity is, but I´m not going into that here.

Mattias

Reply
Leela
(@leela)
Joined: 2 years ago

Reputable Member
Posts: 196

@meyes 

The song may express that, but her life and the musical as a whole does not. You're missing the forest for the trees. 

If YOU don't like strong women, that's a perfectly acceptable choice for YOU to make., If you want to. It just isn't true for all. There's someone for everyone. 

 

Reply
Page 1 / 4
Share: