• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Woman and man's highest calling- Cherokee proverb

AphroditeGoneAwry

failure to thrive
Joined
Feb 20, 2009
Messages
5,585
MBTI Type
INfj
Enneagram
451
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Maybe gender if just sensitive to an external influences...Not highly sensitive perhaps, but somewhere around the middle-of-the-continuum or right-side-of-the-continuum sensitive.

Maybe this saying is apt in the context of our recent past, because life forced us to adopt feminine and masculine traits that were more demarcated. To survive, men had to hunt, farm, provide food because women had to rear the young. The OP reflects the expression of these traits that manifested in our existence thus far, mainly for the most efficient, but also the most satisfying, survival.

Now technology surrounding eating and working and living makes it so strong traditional psychosexual traits aren't so necessary, and we are not only seeing more tolerance of sexual identity, but slowly, more gender bending (or maybe 'swaying' is more apt still) as well, into more open sexuality and androgyny.


I see this in my kids' generation regarding sexual and gender tolerance and expression, especially compared to our parents' generation. Quite a LOT of change actually, over a short period of time. But sexual fluidity (as in sex) seems to be more flexible than gender fluidity. Don't you think? I guess because male/femaleness is more primitive/innate in us than our sexuality. ?
 

Elfboy

Certified Sausage Smoker
Joined
Nov 26, 2008
Messages
9,625
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
399419_333151050110662_888998639_n.jpg

Thoughts?
I think this is lovely.
It could be said that things of this nature have a bit of a heterosexual bias, but it could just as easily be platonic; and man or woman could be whichever of the feminine or masculine polarities you identify with (doesn't have to be biological).

I think anyone who believes they can tell people what their highest calling is is fucking arrogant. that said, I do see a grain of truth to it (though in my case, it's protecting another guy :) )
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I think that is a grand statement. However, I would like to see a little flexibility concerning gender roles.

Right, like I say, anyone can chose whichever gender polarity they identify with. Actually, many Native American tribes greatly respected transgender (and probably hermaphrodite) people; they called people who switched gender roles berdache. Attitudes varied, but it was really cool where it was cool.

http://southernmuse.hubpages.com/hub/Native-American-Berdache-Tradition

Made more sense before firearms.

A bit more, yes. I think it's still relevant though.
 

Qlip

Post Human Post
Joined
Jul 30, 2010
Messages
8,464
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I find my own source, and I'd prefer to show someone else how to be safe in the world.. anything else seems patronizing outside of being a temporary measure. I reject those callings.
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
i believe the major difference between thinkers and feelers, underneath the Jungian definitions, is that thinkers are more likely to accept emotional dissonance then cognitive dissonance, thus creating a sense that thinkers are more "out of touch with their souls" because they experience a more difficult time accepting feelings that are not in tune with what they think, while feelers have a harder time accepting thoughts that are not in tune with what they feel. the flip side of these disadvantages are that thinkers can be perceived as more "one with their rational being" while feelers can be perceived as more "one with their emotional being" (while in truth both having merely opposite difficulties in being "one" with all aspects of their reality in the first place). because souls are more associated with one's emotional being, the later can be considered more spiritual.

therefore it stands to reason that "women are more in touch with their souls" is a generalization which stems directly from a the higher feeler to thinkers ratio in women and in men, and because in the past, lower populations meant minorities in general where less significant, meaning rather then being perceived as a minority you would have being perceived as an isolated case within a village or settlement that does not truly reflect on the range of your gender as a whole.

but today, as part of the recognizable and quite sizable NT minority within womankind, you are disqualified.

now grab that spear and let's get bore hunting with the rest of the thinkers so that the women will have fur to cover their pregnant bellies for the winter.

Lol. I agree with this, very good points! I do think women thinkers were still as prevalent; they just found outlets for their thinking which were in line with their gender roles more often, so it wasn't obvious, and they were taught to be more in touch with their feeling sides. It can be pretty complicated to make tools and such; probably women thinkers figured some of these things out, and other things like how to make protective garments, patch holes, fix housing units, etc. And women knew a lot about herbal medicine. And occasionally they did get out and hunt with the men (but probably not often). Or, very rarely, they started their own tribe of independent warrior women. :p

Ok, I've got my spear and bow, let's go! Huh!
 

Salomé

meh
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,527
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I find my own source, and I'd prefer to show someone else how to be safe in the world.. anything else seems patronizing outside of being a temporary measure. I reject those callings.

+1
 

Lady_X

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 27, 2008
Messages
18,235
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
784
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
yeah totally patronizing to both.

why can't it be he who shows you the way or she that protects you from the world...or you both finding your own way with each others encouragement.

i say blech...
 

Randomnity

insert random title here
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
9,485
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I don't see a heterosexual bias, just the unwarranted implication that women are weak.
+1
Fair enough. It is true that women are physically weaker than men though on average, and men do more of the physical harm; so it is reasonable to expect a good man to protect women from other men. Imo.

So women are weak and men are violent? That doesn't sound like a "beautiful proverb" to me, just more of the same old stereotypes. :(
 

Coriolis

Si vis pacem, para bellum
Staff member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
27,230
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Lol. I agree with this, very good points! I do think women thinkers were still as prevalent; they just found outlets for their thinking which were in line with their gender roles more often, so it wasn't obvious, and they were taught to be more in touch with their feeling sides. It can be pretty complicated to make tools and such; probably women thinkers figured some of these things out, and other things like how to make protective garments, patch holes, fix housing units, etc. And women knew a lot about herbal medicine. And occasionally they did get out and hunt with the men (but probably not often). Or, very rarely, they started their own tribe of independent warrior women.
Some of the more recent anthropological accounts I have read attribute the development of agriculture to women. While men were off on hunting expeditions (or wars), women raised crops at home along with their children. Makes sense, and if correct shows that women were the first literal "breadwinners". The idea of men protecting women may have come to make survival sense in some contexts, but the "natural" protector is a mother with her young.
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I knew this would provoke discussions of gender roles and "you can't tell me what my highest calling is." And I'm just curious what people think.

Ok, here's how I see it. (Darn it, I started typing a bunch of really smart things and then lost it- let's see how much I remember.)

Proverbs such as this are carefully worded to make you think. A lot of the wisdom lies in the interpretation.

"Highest calling" depends on a couple of things. One, many native peoples (and pagans like myself) see Divinity as both immanent and transcendent. This means that Spirit is manifested in the world and as the world. As such, Spirit has both feminine and masculine polarities; and like the yin yang symbol each person has both polarities of energy. When people live this way as they are naturally led (and in the case of men not harming or neglecting women and those more vulnerable than them), it is conducive to great harmony and happiness; in this state the polarities are in harmony, Spirit is in harmony with itself- so this is very sacred- and in fact, nothing is more sacred. Thus, living in such a way as to produce harmony between masculine and feminine polarities is man and woman's highest calling. Two, many people feel pushed to constantly achieve; and the proverb teaches that all you really need to do is live in harmony.

"Lead a man to his soul so as to unite him with Source" again refers to the polarity of Spirit. When we connect with another person, we are seeing a reflection of our soul. Spirit is in harmony with itself. What [MENTION=15291]Mane[/MENTION] said is also relevant. Women on average seem to be more comfortable operating on instinct; men are socially conditioned to be disconnected with themselves in certain ways. This is reflected in the fact that women biologically have greater ability to access and use both hemispheres of their brains at once. So they tend to think more holistically and men tend to think in a more linear fashion. The feminine can help heal the damage done to the masculine from being disconnected with itself. And don't forget, since each person has both feminine and masculine, men can lead women to their souls and women can protect men. (And as [MENTION=5684]Elfboy[/MENTION] mentioned, men can protect each other.)

"Source" also needs to be understood. This is referring to Divinity, whatever you choose to call it. Native peoples saw Source as both immanent and transcendent, as the source of all, but also as manifesting in and as the world. It is the Earth and Sky, nature as the sacred creator of life, and all the life energy which flows through it; it is collective consciousness, Spirit in all its forms, and every being which possesses life. So uniting with Source is as simple as a spirit being in harmony with itself and with other spirits while being in harmony with the natural world. (By this definition, [MENTION=10714]Qlip[/MENTION], your argument would be irrelevant.)

When man protects woman, or the masculine protects the feminine (regardless of biological sex), the more vulnerable person feels safe, and is in greater harmony. That person's life energy is higher when they are safe, and this is sacred because Spirit is protected. What [MENTION=16071]sprinkles[/MENTION] said is also something I wanted to mention; protecting something is not condescending, but denoting value. We all protect what we feel has value. And since Spirit manifests as the life essence in living beings, protecting any human or animal within the context of balance is being in proper relation to the sacred (however you conceive of Divinity). Protection is also necessary for all kinds of vulnerable people: those who are sick, elderly, injured, going through emotionally traumatic times, young children, and your tribe. No one would argue that protecting people in these instances is patronizing. And of course, it doesn't mean allowing another person to be lazy, or interfering with their ability to freely live their lives; it means should a potential source of harm appear, you are ready to step into the situation and help remove it. It should be pointed out that in tribal cultures before technology, life was a lot more dangerous for everyone. Women tended to have more babies, and in this state they and their children were more physically vulnerable. It's true that women are perfectly capable of taking care of themselves most of the time, but with most of the men off hunting and fishing and doing whatever else they did, women mostly cared for the children; so they could use some help in taking care of themselves. In modern times it's easy to forget how complex and interconnected life was, because technology has allowed us to seemingly be more independent. Things have changed a lot, but I think the underlying principles are still true. Men still do more of the physical harm, and women are still on average more physically vulnerable. And even though many women choose not to have children, it still happens. While we are capable of doing anything we put our minds to, we could still use some help, and we like to feel safe. And though men are perfectly capable of living however they want, and being in harmony with themselves, many of them find themselves fighting a lot of external battles and disconnecting with themselves; and they could use some healing and nurturing.

A wise piece of advice for how to live does not command. It gently shows the natural flow of things and the benefits of choosing to go with the natural flow. We can apply this to our lives in whatever way suits our individual circumstances.
 

FDG

pathwise dependent
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
5,903
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
7w8
Long interpretation, while the proverb was likely cognated by a drunken shaman after a night of promiscuous sex and mind-altering drugs.

While men were off on hunting expeditions (or wars), women raised crops at home along with their children. Makes sense, and if correct shows that women were the first literal "breadwinners".

Why does it make sense. We have extremely little evidence from pre-agricultural worlds, there's no reason to believe that men were spending all their time "huting and going to war with each other" as much as I could assume that women were "wasting their time being too attentive to their offspring" while men were trialing with seeds iin order to develop agriculture, or vice versa.

We're all humans, it's likely that most inventions result from an interplay of female and male minds, mostly because well, humanity is roughly 50-50 male-female and intelligence is distributed in a roughly 50-50 fashion among the genders. It's just a matter of probability.

but the "natural" protector is a mother with her young.

Lol, I gather you have little experience with hyperprotetive fathers wrt. their daughters. What you say may be true when it comes to single-motherhood, but in well-functioning couples, both parents are really protective.
 

rav3n

.
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
11,655
MAKE ME BISCUITS DAMN IT. AS LONG AS THERE ARE BISCUITS ALL IS WELL
Get it right. It's bannock within the context of this thread.

Can't disagree more with the premise of this thread. It's got a serious INFP vibe to it that I can't relate to.
 

Salomé

meh
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,527
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
It's got a serious INFP vibe to it that I can't relate to.

Umm..yeah.

Also, [MENTION=13402]Saturned[/MENTION], any WOT examples contained in this thread do not contribute to the INTP tally, K?
 

Qlip

Post Human Post
Joined
Jul 30, 2010
Messages
8,464
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
"Source" also needs to be understood. This is referring to Divinity, whatever you choose to call it. Native peoples saw Source as both immanent and transcendent, as the source of all, but also as manifesting in and as the world. It is the Earth and Sky, nature as the sacred creator of life, and all the life energy which flows through it; it is collective consciousness, Spirit in all its forms, and every being which possesses life. So uniting with Source is as simple as a spirit being in harmony with itself and with other spirits while being in harmony with the natural world. (By this definition, [MENTION=10714]Qlip[/MENTION], your argument would be irrelevant.)

I don't quite understand what you're getting at here, especially since I don't have an argument. I just don't have use for such a calling. I'll accept any guide to help me find harmony, but ultimately it's something that I have to take on myself. I will help others likewise, but ultimately that's something they need to take on themselves.
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I don't quite understand what you're getting at here, especially since I don't have an argument. I just don't have use for such a calling. I'll accept any guide to help me find harmony, but ultimately it's something that I have to take on myself. I will help others likewise, but ultimately that's something they need to take on themselves.

Very true. I was simply referencing your saying "find my own source" is all; as Source is everywhere and everything according to this definition, that part of what you said would be irrelevant. I see what you are saying though, and I agree with everyone who is advocating finding their own path- that's why I said that it could be adapted in whatever way a person sees fit to their individual circumstances.
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Can't disagree more with the premise of this thread. It's got a serious INFP vibe to it that I can't relate to.

Umm..yeah.

Also, [MENTION=13402]Saturned[/MENTION], any WOT examples contained in this thread do not contribute to the INTP tally, K?

What's WOT? And I think relating things like this to type is highly suspect and unreliable, and is flawed by each person's individual expression of their type and understanding of it. I'm sure there were people of every type in the Cherokee culture who agreed with sayings such as this one.

Surely you can see the logical inconsistency of applying entire cultural ways of thinking to one personality type within a system of types which is present in every culture?
 

Salomé

meh
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,527
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
What's what?

Relating anything to type is highly suspect and unreliable. As is Typology in general. You gotta start somewhere though....
How do you know type isn't a cultural construct? Like gender?
How can you be sure of anything type-related?
Short answer, you can't. It's airy-fairy mumbo-jumbo. Much like the OP. (no offence)
 

Qlip

Post Human Post
Joined
Jul 30, 2010
Messages
8,464
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Very true. I was simply referencing your saying "find my own source" is all; as Source is everywhere and everything according to this definition, that part of what you said would be irrelevant. I see what you are saying though, and I agree with everyone who is advocating finding their own path- that's why I said that it could be adapted in whatever way a person sees fit to their individual circumstances.

I guess what I see that you've done here is to employ a duality, masculine and feminine. Their attributes are somewhat arbritrary, but most dualities are. I can see how it was beautiful in a certain time and space. But I'm more of a fan of uniting and shifting dualities than enforcing them.

If it has an esoteric meaning to you, I understand. But, esoteric meanings are not shared easily by definition. I just know that whatever I bring to somebody in any kind of relationship will be fluid and based on empowerment.
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I guess what I see that you've done here is to employ a duality, masculine and feminine. Their attributes are somewhat arbritrary, but most dualities are. I can see how it was beautiful in a certain time and space. But I'm more of a fan of uniting and shifting dualities than enforcing them.

If it has an esoteric meaning to you, I understand. But, esoteric meanings are not shared easily by definition. I just know that whatever I bring to somebody in any kind of relationship will be fluid and based on empowerment.

Sounds good. Yes, it is rather mystical.
 
Top