Notifications
Clear all

Onlyfans girls

57 Posts
11 Users
16 Likes
804 Views
Quasar259
Posts: 164
(@quasar259)
Estimable Member
Joined: 2 years ago

Obviously the Lajjitadi Avasthas are in control here and it's a mass of poisonous wind that will do nothing but divide and cause further pain.  
The whole point is that you both have resorted to reactive points of view trying to conquer, prove or defend something, which proves my point about Mars.  Have you both read what Ernst has written about "attachment to opinions on what should or should not be"?  This is enough to allow space to agree to disagree and leave it at that.    
On this note we should be reminded that we are astrologers and on an astrology fourm.  Astrology affords us the space to step away from our personalized fixed point of view and see things from a wider angle.  Astrology, as a science is concerned with global, spherical, taking into account the whole, expanded beyond geo-centric mentality is inherently holistic, pervasive, imbued with understanding of multifaceted points of view and since we are all under the vise and whims of karma - compassion for each other.

The whole point is to drop your personal B.S. and have cogent, insightful, aware and experienced discussions about astrology.  This is the enrichment of yourselves and the group, so let's stop wasting our own and others time and contribute something meaningful, a meaning that is a light, a light that has been kindled by the seers and rishis of the past through complete devotion and dedication.  A light that is still burning, one only has to look inside or go to Varanasi.

Reply
5 Replies
(@staffan)
Joined: 11 months ago

Estimable Member
Posts: 126

@quasar259 I didn´t get any notifaction of this comment of yours, and I take that as an omen. I guess I wasn´t meant to read it. I´ll ignore it.

Reply
Leela
(@leela)
Joined: 4 years ago

Reputable Member
Posts: 229

@quasar259 

Everyone is a work in progress. If this is a space for astrologers, we also have the capacity to recognize that people are different. Your prior comment was quite insulting and a personal attack, even though you tried to cloak it in humour.. I guess Avasthas are at play there too. May I also point out that nobody forced you to read these posts or waste your time or be an arbiter - that was your choice.

I don't think you truly followed or read the conversation though. I was never defending my point- merely my right to say it without being "told off" for it. I offer that same right to everyone. I don't take something personally, unless I am literally dragged into it personally. Most of what I was doing here with Staffan, repeatedly, was conveying strong boundaries, as he has tried to cross them multiple times in all my interactions with him. And so what if that's Mars?

Ernst is a psychological astrologer, so I don't think it is abnormal that people drawn to this forum may end up working out their avasthas in real time, and not be 'dry' and 'high and mighty' all the time. Imo, nothing wrong with some passion. As an onlooker, there is not much point in you judging it. It wasn't your experience or conversation to begin with. And you don't know me, nor the habits I grapple with. For all you know, you were witnessing a moment that was actually growth for me. 

Reply
(@staffan)
Joined: 11 months ago

Estimable Member
Posts: 126

@leela The minute you stop calling me out, or speaking in a disrespectful way about men or any other group, I´m not going to address you Leela. I never did.

Reply
Leela
(@leela)
Joined: 4 years ago

Reputable Member
Posts: 229
(@staffan)
Joined: 11 months ago

Estimable Member
Posts: 126

@leela 😘

Reply
Ernst Wilhelm
Posts: 2952
Admin
(@ernst)
Member
Joined: 11 years ago

I just read the first couple post in this long post, I did not read the rest as I just don't have time, but what i wanted to say is that there is a tremendous amount of gender/marital problems these days because traditional roles are no longer valid. See, the 7th is what we can't give to ourselves, so we need to trade for it. It's our LIMITATION, its 7th, 7 is number of limitation and finding a way around that limitation - in respect to 7th house, that is done through partnership. 

In Kali Yuga, men provide, protect. Women could not work in most cultures. The only meaningful thing permitted in many cultures was having children.  So women were limited in what they could do, in how they could provide for themselves. So they trade for this and got a man in exchange.

Men did not cook, they did not take care of babies, they did not do a lot of things due to cultural limitations and they partnered with a woman to get those things. My dad was old german, he thought it was WRONG to play with children as a man, or to give love to a child, he saw it as a sign of weakness. thats kali  yuga! 

ANd yes, in kali yuga, in most cultures, woman had no choice in the matter, it was a male dominated world, because kali yuga is a male world cause it's a world that is driven by the the physical and men are physically stronger.

That has all changed now as we are in the dvapara yuga which is about the inner side, the emotional realm. So these things that were happily traded in the kali yuga, don't really matter anymore. Women can protect themselves, provide for themselves, having meaningful lives in countless ways. Men can cook, be sensitive, play with children, etc. I made a lot of money baby sitting when I was 11-13, my dad never knew, haha, that would have caused a ruckus.  in fact, it started when my sister had to babysit for someone she had babysat for a long time, but she could not do it that day so recommended me. She never went back to them, cause they only wanted me after that. Thats dwapara  yuga. 

So now the question is, what the hell do we need an opposite gender partner for? That depends on the individual. Yes, some men are still stuck in the kali yuga and just need a women cause they, the man, does not have a vagina on his hand. if that's where they are at, there are plenty of woman who are also stuck in the kali yuga who are happy to trade their vaginas for what they need from a man. 

But what we are all seeking from a partner in this yuga is something emotional and spiritual. Where are we emotionally and spiritually limited, where can we do the least for ourselves emotionally and spiritually. For woman its more spiritually and men its more emotionally. We have to learn what that is that we need on this level and then find someone we can trade to get that. But so many people are so abused on an emotional level that they just don't know, so yes, they will go to porn sites, have bad relationships, fall for a trap of what looks like something desirable. And we will keep doing this until we get in touch with those feelings and find out what's the thing, we REALLY need from another person that limits our life experience on an emotional and spiritual level? 

and when we recognize what we need to trade for and find someone we can trade it with, we are gonna want to have sex with them over and over again. We won't need to replace them, or get bored with them, or have drama that is more powerful to ruin the relationship than that trade is capable of holding the relationship together. Until we get to this point, we are going to be screwing our lives up with relationships in one way or another and so there really is no room for judgment. 

Reply
3 Replies
(@staffan)
Joined: 11 months ago

Estimable Member
Posts: 126

@ernst I believe that when I see it. I grew up in a culture where women where much more mature in their masculine side than what I see, in general terms, in the United States for example. Sweden had a very small population and fought wars half of the time during 300 years, so women often had no other choice than to run the family business, in most cases a farm. And that tought them, through generations, to act more like men in the outer world. With that said: to my experience, they still have far too big allowances when it comes to shaming, blaming and victimize themselves as a strategy of power. The educational crisis might be less severe than in for example the United States, but it´s still severe. In the suburbs of Stockhom, a city with only a couple of millions of inhabitants, people are being shot every day by young gangsters, and society seems to have no solution for the problem. To me it has to do with the feminization of society, where borders are not upheld and the school system is collapsing. Also the very idea of recieving extreme numbers of immigrant in a very short time, without having a strategy of actually integrate them in society, was an idea that far more women than men supported. Any opposition was shamed as racist and very few dared to ask for a responsive plan to actually make it works. A politics more based on emotions than on rational thinking I´d say. Let´s not discuss whether that is more female than male, but it´s a fact that it was more driven by women then by men. With the consecuencies that we now see.

Also technical careers have been open for women for many decades, but few women choose that path. Huge efforts have been done during the years to encourage women to become engineers, with poor results. My 17-year-old now study in a high-school class with a technical profile, and among around 60 pupils there are only two girls. So the new inventions, the new enterprises in other fields than the traditional feminine, when are women going to create them? The reason that I mention this is because Scandinavia is among the regions where feminism has the longest history, and the strongest support from the state, so it serves as a good - or bad - example I think.

Future will show if you are right Ernst. We are not there still, that I think that we can say for sure.

For those who says this is not an astrological discussion: I feel that Ernst just opened up for it.

But maybe we shouldn´t keep going further this lane.

I´m not saying that I´m right, I´m just sharing my observations.

Anyone who deduces from this that I am a racist should know that I´m married to a Mexican woman who is 55 % native American and 45 % African. I have three chilean children.

Reply
rryanr
(@rryanr)
Joined: 3 months ago

Eminent Member
Posts: 26

@staffan Your defense of masculinity is not widely popular, as you probably well know. Indeed, the sorts of stats and observations you mention can only be discussed openly in corners of the web that the dominant culture opposes.

This very topic invites body and gender identification, the attachment to which causes much agitation... an amusing irony when happening among spiritual people.

The distinction between masculine and feminine is like an exercise in neti neti. Most crudely, one might think one gender bad and the other good (whereas bad and good transcend the genders); or call one gross and the other subtle (although both genders are embodied); or, perhaps more accurately, describe one as overt and the other covert in operation.

Whatever the case, if there is a real difference between masculine and feminine--and the sex organs, gametes, and respective gross phenomena seem indicative--then male and female cannot be the same and cannot act the same, per creation. Indeed, any thing whole has both feminine and masculine qualities (whatever those distinct qualities may be), although man and woman would have each in opposite predominance.

One trouble with the culture, as you allude to, is the pretense that there is no essential difference between the sexes. This attitude leads to sterility and conquest, which the wise may not lament, but the unwise may in fact encourage. A frank discussion of the different games men and women play would scandalize many a polite listener. (See, for example, A Psychologist's Thoughts on Love and Marriage, Parts 1 & 2.)

God is Truth. If the truth hurts, then what it wounds cannot be who you are in essence.

Tangentially related, allow me to close by quoting this insightful vignette of a common relationship dynamic, from a survivor of severe childhood abuse:

And thus we entered into a phase in which he perpetuated the abuse he had suffered as a child onto me. In a regular romantic relationship, there is a similar arc, of being in love at first and being respectful with each other, protective even, until one day things change, and the power struggle begins. Sometimes people are barely recognizable in this phase, taken over by a young part inside of them that wasn’t active before. In equal relationships, this is the time that makes or breaks a couple, or even a friendship.

With some couples, both are capable of doing their own work, manage to acknowledge their projections, and can navigate the complex emotional landscape of their own past trauma while always returning to a place of respect and clarity with the other.

Other couples fall into dysfunctional attachment in which they each take on a role of either the “abuser” and the other the part of the “victim” aka the “adult” and the “child.” The power struggle is the struggle for each partner to be in the role of the victim/child, in which one gets to feel innocent and free of blame. That role and its accompanying freedom from accountability is what keeps many a partner in less-than-barely satisfying, even abusive relationships. During a break up, both parties often feel the victim and get to perpetuate their victim status as long as they wish, without the other person there to remind them of what is real.

— Anneke Lucas, "The Swing", 2019/3/29

Reply
(@staffan)
Joined: 11 months ago

Estimable Member
Posts: 126

@rryanr Yep. I have been in an abusive relationship, I can relate to it.

Now I´m married to a woman that doesn´t criticize me even when she has a reason. Once I managed to damage the car twice within a week reversing, and I had to tell her: "You are allowed to criticize me now!" 😀  She had a very strong grandmother and a father who was a "commandante" in the border control, the highest boss in two states of Mexico, so you can imagine. She is a hardworking professional and by no means a push-over, but she also appreciates strong men. With that said: I hope this is a closed chapter for me, personally. I don´t even have to face the world much, which is hard for me since I´m an autist. I can stay in our kitchen helping her with her herbal extracts and things that she sells. Well, she says that "we" sell it, and sure, if she says so...

But I´m worried about the decline of our society due to an immature feminism. I already mentioned that in previous posts so I´m not going to repeat it. Just saying: Boys and young men are leaving the educational system in high numbers. Women are taking over the workplaces without wanting to be engineers or doing much of the hard work. Without mentioning the problems on the dating market. I believe that our society is collapsing, even without the ecological disasters and possibly wars around the corner.

With that said: I´m checking out of this discussion and forum, it´s not healthy for anyone of us to go on like this.

But I very much appreciate your respectful answer!

Reply
Posts: 126
(@staffan)
Estimable Member
Joined: 11 months ago

Before I check out once and fo all, let me just add one last reflection.

I think what happened in this discussion is an example on how society, and especially woman, measure men and women with different standards and craves accountability in different degrees. Men are systematically being mishandled by the judicial system, to begin with. Only today I read about a man accused of rape because the woman had been drunk and for that reason not in a state in which she could take responsability for a sexual intercourse. But the man had been drunk too, yet he is being held accountable. How does that sum up?

A woman can say things about a man that would never be accepted if a man would say it. And especially women have a strong tendency to excuse a woman for bad behaviour. If she claims that she did not FELT in a special way - threatened or disrespected for example - that is often accepted, even if there is clearly no ground for it. Even if she is crying for no reason. The man on the other hand will never be found to have a justification, in many cases, I´d say.  This is what many men expresses on public places where this is being discussed. Personally I had to go through several processes in family court in Chile, in which my ex wife on one hand claimed that she had bought the house I gave to her with her own money, and on the other hand that she had no possibility to support herself - and she was believed in both cases!

Today women are starting to have not only informal but also formal power in the society, yet this has not been adjusted.

My belief is that it has deep biological and evolutionary reasons that can no be easily adjusted. Traditionally women´s role was to stay at home taking care of the home and the children. They had to stay in one place getting along, so they couldn´t afford big conflicts. For that reason they are prone not to question each other, but rather accept other women´s moods and take it for granted, even if there where no factual reasons for it. They would rather ostricize a person that either was or was percieved as problematic, rather than making justice, all for the survival of the group. We are talking about a strategy for survival here, so it´s very deep rooted.

Men on the other hand were mostly active far away from home in open places, where they could afford having a conflict to a much higher degree. Also their task was to solve often new problems, which called for logic and reasoning, and where discussions and conflicts were an essential part of the solving of the problem at hand. If the conflict became to hot they could just walk away from each other for a while, they were not bound to just one small place. They could split up in more than one group, and then come back to resolve the problem later. That is a male survival strategy.

The problem we have today is that these strategies are still working in our ways of being, since they are biologically wired in us. And we live in a society that is to a large degree vertically and hierachically organized, where the male strategy is needed. Our academia or enterprises are not going to evolve if there no place for conflicts. Oftentimes a new way of doing things or seeing things upset many people. If the tendency then is to look away and even shut down the person that comes up with a new solution, we are not going to have any development.

Already in for example Harvard University we can see how most pupils get an A or AB as a grade on most courses. Those were grades that were hard to achieve a few decades ago. So there is really no meaning in struggling hard to get a higher degree, it all becomes a gray mass, or mess. There is little room for original thinkers in such a system, or for questioning the established dogmas, which makes science pointless. What wins the prize is to be socially well adapted in an environment i which women holds the power, i.e. not rocking the boat. Just like me rocking the boat in this forum led to a discomfort so big that I feel that I have to check out.

Just as our boys and young men check out from the educational system, at a rapidly increasing pace.

I don´t think that there ever existed a society where men and women could study and work side by side. On a farm for example, the female and male tasks were clearly separated in most cases. I think that we are going through a huge experiment that is doomed to fail.

I´m not saying that a society could not be a matriarchy, and I´m not saying that it shouldn´t be. But I do think that women can´t uphold or develop vertical, hierarchic structures. Simply because it´s not a reflection of the female psyche. I use to tease my Mexican friends - yes, I have friends, believe it or not - by saing that Mexicans have a specially hard time to learn English. They look at me in chock until I clarify: "Because you don´t want to!" Then they laugh and agree. Most women don´t have a deep interest in keeping the verticality of a university or a company intact. But the problem is that our present society is built in a vertical way to a large degree. A clear and horrific example of this is the destruction of the once best selling beer Bud Light and the woman in charge that in interviews speaks about how the wellbeing of her coworkers was the most important thin /not realizing that she was mainly projecting her own uncertainty on them/. She seemed to have very little focus on actually selling the beer and not surprisingly it went down the drain. You may find the interview with her on YouTube. What a value a cheap beer may have or not have is really not the question, but for the men and women working on the plants and supplain chain it clearly had one.

I believe our society is doomed to crumble. And then maybe, in the future, there will be space enough for a horizontally build society in which women happily stay at home taking care of the Grandfather Fire, as they always did, and HAPPILY did, I´d say, before the men stole it from them and put into their machines... And gave them a spiritually dead electric or gas stove in return, which made the home feeling empty and obliged women to go out in society in search for the Grandfather Fire... But for that to happen we must be much fewer. But I guess that´s what´s around the corner, and with the eclipse, the devil´s comet and a rusty Moon in April, who knows....?

I think it´s a failure for this forum not having a place for me. I have contributed a lot, in an engaged and at least sometimes clever way, I dare to say. I´m a sSg and my names, Mattias Staffan, mean "Gift of God" and "The crowned", so you shouldn´t blame too much if I lack in humility I believe... Last time we had a major conflict in the forum I was not allowed to say that men generally are not attracted to a woman´s masculine side and was ferecely attacked for that by a multitude of women, even though Ernst bascially says the same thing. I uploaded a video from Annie Get the Gun where she things "You don´t get a man with a gun" and thought it was both spot on, cute and harmful, but no, it lead to what could be best described as a riot. This time I felt a wave of reluctance after me speaking up about hate speach against men, and that feeling has been confirmed by women on the forum. Noone defended my justified argument that we shouldn´t attack each other, men and women, in general terms. Noone came to my defence when I was falsely accused for having called women crazy. This time it´s me dropping out, but boys and men are dropping out in thousands and millions from school, universities, work places and relationships. A mass exodus has begun. Soon enough you will have millions of young men with no purpose in life and hatred towards especially the women that they feel have taken their place, and towards a judicial system that they feel works against them. Who are going to face that threat? Millions of female cops? Or do women need men after all? What are you going to offer men to get their help to rid up the chaos that feminism has created?

I´m gonna be honest: I don´t think I´m the one that should be ashamed for what have taken place in this forum these last day.

I´ll really do my best not to answer any objections against what I have written. Some lady criticized me for not relating to astrology in these comments, not realizing that it was a meta discussion about the forms for the debate. Well, now I´ll give you some: My Ecliptic card in the CoT-system is King of Hears, the father´s card. I´m very keen on defending patriarchal values, as long as the feminism is inbalanced. I have nothing against the idea of a matriarchy, but for that our society has to change, hopefully in a healthy way. My Uranus card is King of Diamonds: it makes me willing to burn on a fire for the values I believe in. But my Neptune card is Six of Hearts, which make me appreciate a peaceful home with a loving and caretaking wife at my side more than anything else in life. Which I have, luckily.

I wish you all wonderful astrological lives!

Reply
3 Replies
Leela
(@leela)
Joined: 4 years ago

Reputable Member
Posts: 229

@staffan 

From what I can see, rryanr has verbally spoken up for you, scathach seems to like your posts (I think). Nobody actually spoke up for me at all- not men, not women.

Yet you imply you were attacked by the "Female members" of this forum and edged out. Must applaud you on your imagination! Well done! I think you're extremely entertaining, as long as I don't have to engage with you. When is the movie releasing? Lmk and I'll order an extra-large popcorn.Actually, I'll go ahead and order the popcorn already, coz I'm sure your reply to me might be just as entertaining!

PS: everyone is of God, everyone is of divine origin. No bar.
That you think you have some unique claim to being a gift of god, which must forgive your arrogance, says a lot. Hope you find your peace someday. 🌺 

Reply
rryanr
(@rryanr)
Joined: 3 months ago

Eminent Member
Posts: 26

@staffan Thanks for the thoughtful post. I have similar societal understanding as you do and can affirm the same problems. I don't think in terms of biological evolution as such (i.e. the theory of pond scum origin of human life), but the different strategies between men and women are clearly visible to an honest observer. Fundamental biological matter does reflect the metaphysical truths, so it helps to reason from it.

Sperm (and its drive) are plentiful; eggs (and their pregnancy) are expensive. These two are the basic identifiers of the sexes. We gamble first what we're willing to lose. If you have to discard one or the other sex (as in war[1]), it's clear which one to choose. If there's a loud knock awakening a household, who should investigate and who should stay with the children? If one has to innovate and risk failure, or be eccentric and risk ostracism, who should try? The tendencies toward bravery and conformity, aggression and harmony, are here understood.

You've discerned a lot already, down to the different treatment that high-status males get, irrespective of behaviour (the illustrious founder of this forum versus your own experience). "Men and women are not equal, for the same reason that men and other men are not equal." The feminist complaint that women are kept out of the boardroom is quite telling, for it betrays the high-status men and lifestyles they covet, meanwhile the great masses of men, however dutiful, remain invisible. "Victim identification is the first prerequisite for committing harm to others, because it justifies the deed."

Insofar as women accept pardon, they do it against their self-determination: if something is not "her fault", then it must at least be "his fault", in the accounting of things[2]; the removal of accountability from one party is the granting of responsibility to the other[3]. Therefore men have the ability to respond (responsibility) and women are irresponsible... an ironic return to patriarchy. This is logically inevitable. In practice, it is the Marshal force, hidden or otherwise, which prevails, tears notwithstanding.

As you already know, the ultimate enforcers for this pretend equality are men. The net taxpayers to support vulnerable/pregnant/childrearing women are men. The international fractional-reserve central banking credit money system gives the illusion that some individuals are more wealthy and productive than they really are, at the expense of others[4]. Those "working off all the joint grease" (to borrow a phrase) to sustain the society are predominantly men, especially when comfortable tools for the job are unavailable, tools which are predominantly devised and maintained by men. Status and credentials don't fix the plumbing, sadly.

Forced equality, instead of honest complementarity, impairs both men and women[5]. If a man cannot accept his Marshal nature without being ashamed, how can he be a proper man? If a woman cannot admit her Venusian motives, how can she be fulfilled? People disparage and tear down the masculine (and feminine) nature at their own peril, even in their own lives.

We laugh lest we weep--tragedy and comedy being but two sides of the same--but what jokes can we even make today[6]? How tragic that the natural lust of young men and the frivolity of young women cannot be lightheartedly accepted. Indeed, sex is fraught: playful and innocent in one aspect; predatory and vengeful in another. If the traditional gender roles are no longer valid, how can we be ourselves, naturally, and in love?

Thanks for the exchange. I am consoled that you found yourself a rewarding partnership. Sometimes, in fits of blissful realization, I think myself for renounced life. However, I am woefully undisciplined and unqualified for that. Moreover, one cannot renounce what he does not have (mstow vs. mgtow, m i rite lol). Now, I learned from one of Ernst's lectures the significance of the Rahu-Ketu axis... And yes, my Rahu is in the 7th. 🤦‍♂️

[1] The dubious benefit of being a female captive of war is that you still get to live and you may beget (more) children of your own, albeit to a new master that destroyed your father or husband; whereas men and young boys who are unable to convert to the new army are killed, lest they avenge the honour of their forefathers. In this way, it 'helps' women in the gross sense to have no loyalty (to principles, values, or culture), but rather to adapt to dominance, to receive. Even mundane electronic commodities have connectors called male or female that require no explanation to be identified.

[2] This betrays the transactional nature of relationships. Indeed, Ernst intimated as much in this thread, more eloquently. As an aside, it is telling that the fashionable science of our time is "Quantum" science, which was born of the desire to quantify, to count, to divide. This atomist prejudice fails us because the aether cannot be discerned in this way. To their credit, the scientists see wave-particle duality; nonetheless, they are in continued cosmological crisis.

[3] This returns to the problem of embodiment, differentiation, and separation (i.e. to exist as 'a man' or 'a woman'). The platitude of, "the world needs more love," comes to mind. Love transcends karma, so it appears in the world as sacrifice.

[4] The human soul is the real resource. Ronald Bernard, a former bankster, knows the intricacies of this exploitation.  It is marvelous that wealthy people are able to selectively breed entire nations, propel migrations, and foment conflict through the use of money, all the while appearing as great benefactors to the masses.

[5] The sheer volume of self-published confessions and criticisms makes the case: https://www.youtube.com/@moderndatinghere/videos

[6] Late comedian Norm Macdonald shared his observations: https://youtu.be/6GFIV4T-Z_Q?t=785

Reply
rryanr
(@rryanr)
Joined: 3 months ago

Eminent Member
Posts: 26

@staffan Thanks for the thoughtful post. I have similar societal understanding as you do and can affirm the same problems. I don't think in terms of biological evolution as such (i.e. the theory of pond scum origin of human life), but the different strategies between men and women are clearly visible to an honest observer. Fundamental biological matter does reflect the metaphysical truths, so it helps to reason from it.

Sperm (and its drive) are plentiful; eggs (and their pregnancy) are expensive. These two are the basic identifiers of the sexes. We gamble first what we're willing to lose. If you have to discard one or the other sex (as in war[1]), it's clear which one to choose. If there's a loud knock awakening a household, who should investigate and who should stay with the children? If one has to innovate and risk failure, or be eccentric and risk ostracism, who should try? The tendencies toward bravery and conformity, aggression and harmony, are here understood.

You've discerned a lot already, down to the different treatment that high-status males get, irrespective of behaviour (the illustrious founder of this forum versus your own experience). "Men and women are not equal, for the same reason that men and other men are not equal." The feminist complaint that women are kept out of the boardroom is quite telling, for it betrays the high-status men and lifestyles they covet, meanwhile the great masses of men, however dutiful, remain invisible. "Victim identification is the first prerequisite for committing harm to others, because it justifies the deed."

Insofar as women accept pardon, they do it against their self-determination: if something is not "her fault", then it must at least be "his fault", in the accounting of things[2]; the removal of accountability from one party is the granting of responsibility to the other[3]. Therefore men have the ability to respond (responsibility) and women are irresponsible... an ironic return to patriarchy. This is logically inevitable. In practice, it is the Marshal force, hidden or otherwise, which prevails, tears notwithstanding.

As you already know, the ultimate enforcers for this pretend equality are men. The net taxpayers to support vulnerable/pregnant/childrearing women are men. The international fractional-reserve central banking credit money system gives the illusion that some individuals are more wealthy and productive than they really are, at the expense of others[4]. Those "working off all the joint grease" (to borrow a phrase) to sustain the society are predominantly men, especially when comfortable tools for the job are unavailable, tools which are predominantly devised and maintained by men. Status and credentials don't fix the plumbing, sadly.

Forced equality, instead of honest complementarity, impairs both men and women[5]. If a man cannot accept his Marshal nature without being ashamed, how can he be a proper man? If a woman cannot admit her Venusian motives, how can she be fulfilled? People disparage and tear down the masculine (and feminine) nature at their own peril, even in their own lives.

We laugh lest we weep--tragedy and comedy being but two sides of the same--but what jokes can we even make today[6]? How tragic that the natural lust of young men and the frivolity of young women cannot be lightheartedly accepted. Indeed, sex is fraught: playful and innocent in one aspect; predatory and vengeful in another. If the traditional gender roles are no longer valid, how can we be ourselves, naturally, and in love?

Thanks for the exchange. I am consoled that you found yourself a rewarding partnership. Sometimes, in fits of blissful realization, I think myself for renounced life. However, I am woefully undisciplined and unqualified for that. Moreover, one cannot renounce what he does not have (mstow vs. mgtow, m i rite lol). Now, I learned from one of Ernst's lectures the significance of the Rahu-Ketu axis... And yes, my Rahu is in the 7th. 🤦‍♂️

[1] The dubious benefit of being a female captive of war is that you still get to live and you may beget (more) children of your own, albeit to a new master that destroyed your father or husband; whereas men and young boys who are unable to convert to the new army are killed, lest they avenge the honour of their forefathers. In this way, it 'helps' women in the gross sense to have no loyalty (to principles, values, or culture), but rather to adapt to dominance, to receive. Even mundane electronic commodities have connectors called male or female that require no explanation to be identified.

[2] This betrays the transactional nature of relationships. Indeed, Ernst intimated as much in this thread, more eloquently. As an aside, it is telling that the fashionable science of our time is "Quantum" science, which was born of the desire to quantify, to count, to divide. This atomist prejudice fails us because the aether cannot be discerned in this way. To their credit, the scientists see wave-particle duality; nonetheless, they are in continued cosmological crisis.

[3] This returns to the problem of embodiment, differentiation, and separation (i.e. to exist as 'a man' or 'a woman'). The platitude of, "the world needs more love," comes to mind. Love transcends karma, so it appears in the world as sacrifice.

[4] The human soul is the real resource. Ronald Bernard, a former bankster, knows the intricacies of this exploitation.  It is marvelous that wealthy people are able to selectively breed entire nations, propel migrations, and foment conflict through the use of money, all the while appearing as great benefactors to the masses.

[5] The sheer volume of self-published confessions and criticisms makes the case: https://www.youtube.com/@moderndatinghere/videos

[6] Late comedian Norm Macdonald shared his observations: https://youtu.be/6GFIV4T-Z_Q?t=785

Reply
Leela
Posts: 229
(@leela)
Reputable Member
Joined: 4 years ago

@rryanr

Posted by: @rryanr

he dubious benefit of being a female captive of war is that you still get to live and you may beget (more) children of your own, albeit to a new master that destroyed your father or husband

They don't get to, they were forced to. The adaptability you speak of is one that came as a reaction to the male ego, the male games and the male world of treating women as sub-par. That doesn't mean it's their true nature. There were also cultures where women killed themselves (in mass) to prevent being made into sex-slaves or forced to bear children of their enemies.

That is what Ernst is saying too, but he is saying it better than I am. Moreover, he is saying it is a byproduct of 'Time', which is fair enough, makes sense. So Kali Yuga made men act a certain way due to their own limitations, and Kali Yuga made women also act a certain way due to their own limitations. But that doesn't mean any of it was their true nature- it was just the nature in that timeNobody knew any better. But we do now. 

Sathya Yuga is already in our Space, though our Time is still playing catch-up. There is still so much of the mess of Kali-yuga left. Things crumble and collapse only because we reject the invitation from Space and Universe asking us to transform. Most things collapsing are only making room for more divinity to enter.

Reply
7 Replies
rryanr
(@rryanr)
Joined: 3 months ago

Eminent Member
Posts: 26

@leela Indeed. "Women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat." - Hilary Clinton

Reply
Leela
(@leela)
Joined: 4 years ago

Reputable Member
Posts: 229

@rryanr 

Men are usually quick to take credit for all their inventions. Well, large-scale war is also a male invention, so it's not really shocking that more men die in it. What of it?

On the other hand, fractures in female skeletons indicate the possibility that women have died at the hands of men from ages ago, as a result of male rage in the form of domestic violence. Not to mention the countless death by childbirth, because it took humans ages to prioritize female experiences and find solutions for it. It's just not a glorified death as dying in war, the latter of which has a better 'marketing' under various names like nationalism, heroism etc. Women didn't have a good PR team I suppose.

But apparently being made a sex-slave and forced-breeder is also a "better" fate than dying in war, as per you, so we clearly see things very differently. Anyway - You do you.  I don't think it is my business or karma to change people's mind or turn it to the possibility of a better future and vision. I can just continue to live it.

Reply
rryanr
(@rryanr)
Joined: 3 months ago

Eminent Member
Posts: 26

@leela

Your post edit to mention the ancient self-sacrifice of women to avoid rape/conquest was noticed after my reply, which is a shame, because it did moderate your tone quite well. Such practice is alien to modern women and revolting to modern sensibilities, but betrays transcendental values.

A woman, like a man, is gross embodiment. What is good for worldly existence--survival--is not synoymous with virtue. (The story of Christ is instructive.) Men who are glorified "for their service" to countries ruled by thieves may in one case be free of karma (owing to their innocent discharge of duty, actually believing the lies) and in another case be guilty murderers (motivated by lust). God will decide; men and women will opine.

There's a lot of push across political and corporate spectrums to empower and glorify women (and blacks). Some might say this is actually an appeal to vanity, false self, and therefore ultimately perilous to them. Affirmative action causes suspicion of the true merit of the hire. Also, the reliance on non-market (non-voluntary) direction of funds to subsidize these sorts of practices betrays an underlying failure. Yet, opposing such things is the mark of a misogynist (and racist), we are told.

So glory you can have, but “whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.” And power you can have, however, "Where love rules, there is no will to power; and where power predominates, there love is lacking. The one is the shadow of the other."

Thus the moral failures you ascribe to men can now more openly be adopted by women. This may by the natural cycle of things, not avoidable. Indeed, someone deprived of self-esteem through early abuse does benefit from worldly affirmation, even if that is just a stepping stone to something divine.

Reply
Leela
(@leela)
Joined: 4 years ago

Reputable Member
Posts: 229

@rryanr 

Posted by: @rryanr

“whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.”

Well, I guess that is why men are abased now- it's a consequence of their constant self-glorification and self-exaltation. And maybe that is why women are being exalted and glorified.

Reply
rryanr
(@rryanr)
Joined: 3 months ago

Eminent Member
Posts: 26

@leela

Reply
Leela
(@leela)
Joined: 4 years ago

Reputable Member
Posts: 229

@rryanr 

You seem to undermine your own points and views, or perhaps you're not really clear about things yet.

Reply
rryanr
(@rryanr)
Joined: 3 months ago

Eminent Member
Posts: 26

@leela What say you and me get out of here?

Reply
Lorris
Posts: 91
(@lorris)
Estimable Member
Joined: 4 years ago

I used to be on a forum for psychology, oriented toward hypnosis, meditation what not, self development. One way or another at some point we can be argument prone, I have done that a lot in the past. Regarding the main subject though I tend to think any difficult Saturn may have a hard time moving on from past relationship. Look at the years in which Saturn is weak, like in 1998, 2002, 1968, 1978. When I meet anyone born in those years, they have a lot of trouble in their relationship, letting go is hard for them. At the same time I think they do enjoy those relationships, even if it's painful. I'm have been wondering if some don't have an addiction to pain primarily. Saturn is touch, how many people don't want to touch themselves, or force themselves out or boredom instead of pleasure. 

I have learn from one Master Hypnotist that studied Mindfulness that sometimes learning to meditate without pain can be a much faster path to "visualization" or stillness. And he used a lot of physical exercise to help your mind focus, those exercise are very easy to do. But one need either patience Saturn or Mars will to do it. 

How well you can do those physical and mental exercises without going to extreme laziness or extreme painful ascetic measure seems to be how you are doing to express yourself sexually also. 

How much you can detach yourself from the results? and not pay attention to the obvious, our charts. I have that Saturn strong but close to Rahu, How much self pain did I inflict myself? 

Rahu is getting close to Saturn and will be conjunct exactly in Pisces in 2025. One way I'm looking at it and simplifying a lot:

Both Pisces and Virgo are related to sex somehow. Virgo for obvious reason, Pisces for being the opposite of Pisces. If Virgo have been associated with a virgin, Pisces can be associated with a slut. Any of those sign trash by Saturn or rahu or both can lead to promiscuous behaviour.  

We may forget that Aries and Pisces seems different but from spiritual point of view they are only 30° apart. Aries has Rahu in it right now. Saturn is in Pisces. The clock is ticking and we can observe that our consciousness is upside down, we walk with our head, or only with our feet. Or our feet are getting purge as Saturn is creating trauma there?

 

Similar events happened in 1968, drug culture, cravings for a Moon landing. And in 1877 the year Edgar Cayce was born. It's not a wild bet to say we are going to be attracted and traumatized at the same time when this happen. 

Ernst video on the last eclipse that can be traced back to the Victorian Era, when the Queen succeeded the Throne and went to war against the Chinese, the opium wars. The first war on drug and terrorism? A lot can be said there also from what happened during those years. 

 

Reply
Page 3 / 4
Share: