Masculine and Feminine Energy

[/DG/]

I am not particularly feminine, but I am not at all masculine. What is left? I am blorp.

 

[Crabs]

I still can't find the workshop I was telling you about but there is a test I think you will get a kick out off. It's clearly for purposes of entertainment and not scientifically viable

Male Or Female Brain? Brain Gender Test

What sort of blasphemy is this test? It said my brain is female.

I'm going to be all moody and eat chocolate now.

 

[kyuuei]

I found it interesting that Ronda Rousey (arguably a woman who has embraced masculinity to a degree that few women have) after losing her undefeated streak, was in a demonstrably feminine state, tearfully recalling thoughts of suicide as she relied on her strong man for support.

of course you did. Confirmation bias.

I think there are things that we culturally associate with men and women... but the more you break it down, the more you realize it's socially-pushed-on nuances vs straight biological instincts.

Both men and women are prone to fighting... the causes of why may seem to be very different, but the want to fight is the same in both sexes. Do women fight more often? No. More often than not, that's socially and culturally driven... women are taught from before birth to be quiet and meek and rely on others for that. No one is going to deny that in nature some of the most fiercest animals fighting are female animals protecting their young... but yet, in humanity, it's shocking a woman would desire a lifestyle of fighting when she hasn't been growing up constrained.. and quickly pounce and jump on any opportunity for her to be emotional and human as a sort of soothing balm for the fact that she's breaking code.

If you've never heard of a man pouring his heart out about suicidal ideations and relying on others, particularly their family or spouse, for support, then you really just haven't been listening.

There ARE things very feminine and masculine on a functional level... the problem is, people still associate these social differences as being hard-and-fast and often negative, which is why I really get irked at the very mention of them. If they were just there to be noticed in an objective and "Oh, so that's that huh?" way, maybe not such a big deal. But insidious things like the quoted are why I hate this sort of talk. It doesn't SEEM like a big deal, or seem cruel or limiting on the woman.. but there it is.. The reality? More men find it "interesting" that she acted like what they want her to act like vs what she really is--a bad ass and awesome warrior that's also just plain human.

I mean... what do we really hope to gain from trying to pinpoint traits and actions as masculine and feminine? What is the true goal in that? There really isn't much to be gained. I think people need to all find a balance in their lives.. the most annoying, dull, and useless people I've ever met in my life are those that focus SO hard on being masculine or being feminine that that's their whole personality. A lot of stupid dumb shit is done in the name of wanting to be noticed as masculine or feminine.

Hopefully, if you're really lucky: You've got a balance of traits that allows you to seamlessly interacting with both halves of the population and relate and connect to them. Those men who claim they "cannot understand women" and women who think "all men are x" just ride off self-fulfilling prophecies, confirmation bias, and other fallacies for their own short comings in being unable to connect with their own emotions, or connect with emotional survival techniques, or simple laziness with things that require manual physical labor, etc.

 

[Rambling]

Hi [MENTION=23796]Crabs[/MENTION]

All men and women are scaled along "so called" feminine and masculine traits. As a woman, I would say my ratio falls around 68:32.

Most humans relate better to people that have counter-balanced traits. For example, in writing we are taught that endearing characters who the public can relate to are approximately 63:37 on the scale. Gender traits are exaggerated to produce 'villainous' characters. ie. A female approaching 100 percent female traits will come off as a nympho, aggressive, mentally unbalanced, weak.. A male character at 100 percent will appear brutishly aggressive, coarse and arrogant.

Biology is huge. Society is also a contributor: a man who enjoys art, is fluidly physically expressive and sensitive will never be lauded for his 'manliness.

Yet, surrendering ourselves to our TOTAL person is an incredible measure of strength.

Yep, this.

 

[Tilt]

My physical appearance is pretty feminine but I heard my energy is noticeably masculine.

 

[Rambling]

of course you did. Confirmation bias.

I think there are things that we culturally associate with men and women... but the more you break it down, the more you realize it's socially-pushed-on nuances vs straight biological instincts.

Both men and women are prone to fighting... the causes of why may seem to be very different, but the want to fight is the same in both sexes. Do women fight more often? No. More often than not, that's socially and culturally driven... women are taught from before birth to be quiet and meek and rely on others for that. No one is going to deny that in nature some of the most fiercest animals fighting are female animals protecting their young... but yet, in humanity, it's shocking a woman would desire a lifestyle of fighting when she hasn't been growing up constrained.. and quickly pounce and jump on any opportunity for her to be emotional and human as a sort of soothing balm for the fact that she's breaking code.

If you've never heard of a man pouring his heart out about suicidal ideations and relying on others, particularly their family or spouse, for support, then you really just haven't been listening.

There ARE things very feminine and masculine on a functional level... the problem is, people still associate these social differences as being hard-and-fast and often negative, which is why I really get irked at the very mention of them. If they were just there to be noticed in an objective and "Oh, so that's that huh?" way, maybe not such a big deal. But insidious things like the quoted are why I hate this sort of talk. It doesn't SEEM like a big deal, or seem cruel or limiting on the woman.. but there it is.. The reality? More men find it "interesting" that she acted like what they want her to act like vs what she really is--a bad ass and awesome warrior that's also just plain human.

I mean... what do we really hope to gain from trying to pinpoint traits and actions as masculine and feminine? What is the true goal in that? There really isn't much to be gained. I think people need to all find a balance in their lives.. the most annoying, dull, and useless people I've ever met in my life are those that focus SO hard on being masculine or being feminine that that's their whole personality. A lot of stupid dumb shit is done in the name of wanting to be noticed as masculine or feminine.

Hopefully, if you're really lucky: You've got a balance of traits that allows you to seamlessly interacting with both halves of the population and relate and connect to them. Those men who claim they "cannot understand women" and women who think "all men are x" just ride off self-fulfilling prophecies, confirmation bias, and other fallacies for their own short comings in being unable to connect with their own emotions, or connect with emotional survival techniques, or simple laziness with things that require manual physical labor, etc.

I think emotional immaturity leads to the stereotypes...and a lot of people are emotionally immature.

A woman shedding tears may be being strong and true to her inner self and intellectually able to express her reasoning and values or she could be emotionally immature and needy. Depends.

Same for a guy, he could be angry and dominant without being aware of the needs of those around him, or he could be authentic and passionate about a cause, able to show his controlled emotions appropriately in support of his reasoning.

I tend to look for complex thinking, ability to handle paradox, good rational explanations and authentic differentiated values and emotions shown appropriately. Anyone is capable of learning to be honest and become mature.

 

[Cloudpatrol]

That's interesting. I'd be curious to know what traits those countries view as masculine vs feminine.

You'd BE curious [MENTION=23796]Crabs[/MENTION] or you ARE curious :new wink: Just want to make sure before I go to any effort

What sort of blasphemy is this test? It said my brain is female.

I'm going to be all moody and eat chocolate now.

With your balance between feeling/thinking I can see why this topic is of interest to you. Being able to stand firmly planted on the ground AND soar is a beautiful thing regardless of what statistical/societal expectations and analysis exist. That being said, I find it hard to imagine that your masculinity would ever be called into question.

Appreciated your counter-reasoning in this thread [MENTION=6336]AphroditeGoneAwry[/MENTION]. I wanted to reply to another thread and compliment your gold nail polish but can't find it again. Sorry for the losses you described in that post and props for the gorgeous manicure.

 

[Thalassa]

That's interesting. I'd be curious to know what traits those countries view as masculine vs feminine.




I agree with you about western feminists embracing masculinity to a large degree. It seems that some eastern countries are perhaps more feminine than they are balanced, however - both men and women. I've heard that is why some guys have a penchant for Asians, because they're so docile and dainty in contrast to western women whom collectively became more masculine over time. I personally don't find the average western woman to be too masculine though.

Feminine energy isn't necessarily docile. Femininity is actually associated with chaos when it's out of balance (think a natural disaster knocking down a large building) ...I think you're specifically talking about the fetish for Orientalism, mostly because of mail order brides and Asian prostitutes or masseuses...Asian women can actually be really strong, even controlling, in their own domain. But yes overall Asian countries tend to be more feminine in energy, however I also wouldn't say that the men are feminine. I don't think Native American men are feminine either.

I honestly think you're speaking about masculine and feminine energy you're making it too much about your own perception about sexuality, rather than about masculine and feminine energy.

There's nothing feminine about being depressed or suicidal. Lots of men commit suicide, and there are men who see their gf or spouse as an emotional anchor, it depends on the individual. You don't know what goes on behind closed doors.

 

[strychnine]

It's interesting you mention that ratio. I'd be curious to see some sort of international survey indicating how various cultures rank traits on a masculine-feminine dichotomy. In the west, I think it has become too politically incorrect to acknowledge such differences at all.

You can actually go on hormone blockers and test it out for yourself. There's a lot of information available online about this. Transgender people do it. That's why the info is there, it's intended for them. But you can try it too. Then you can see for yourself.

Anyway, having lived most of my life in the East and then in Europe, I have noticed it's much more acceptable for men to be feminine outside of North America and especially outside of the US. EX. Men can hold hands, hug, even kiss each other on the forehead (you see soccer players doing on this on live TV), and so on - without any stigma. In the US, I wouldn't dare do this, for fear of being viewed as gay.

Essentially, what is to a European normal emotional expression becomes romantic homosexual emotional expression in the US.

This is also why we have a stigma here in the US about a father hugging his own son. HIS OWN SON. He gets called a pedophile. Vilified.
In Europe, they call it PARENTING.

As it stands, I don't see western women as too masculine either. But then I don't have a problem dating even those I do consider masculine.

Hyper-masculinity/femininity can't be healthy in any individual and probably doesn't lead to very successful relationships.

Bullshit. Statistically, the more masculine or feminine a person is, the higher the average amount of children they produce. Things like estrogen/testosterone levels as well as waist-to-hip ratio.

Best Female Figure Not an Hourglass

Curves Ahead: The Science of Female Waist-to-Hip Ratio and Attractiveness bless - | - Science of Relationships

Health: What a man can't resist: the perfect waist-hip ratio: Forget about breasts, says Jerome Burne. It's the last two figures of 36-24-36 that truly turn on the male naked ape | Health News | Lifestyle | The Independent

(...) I honestly think you're speaking about masculine and feminine energy you're making it too much about your own perception about sexuality, rather than about masculine and feminine energy.

Yeah, that's the impression I have from this thread so far - this doesn't seem like it's about Spiritual Energy at all, but about the OP's gender politics or social mores. Spiritual Energy transcends all of that, as it transcends culture and time.

Also, most religions that talk about masculine and feminine energies talk about striving for a balance between them. Not what is being talked about in this thread.

There's nothing feminine about being depressed or suicidal. Lots of men commit suicide, and there are men who see their gf or spouse as an emotional anchor, it depends on the individual. You don't know what goes on behind closed doors.

Yes, technically the suicide rates are higher for men. The proportion of attempts is about equal, but men are more likely to complete the suicide due to being more likely to use violent methods. Women are more likely to use methods like sleeping pills, etc., which do not complete the job.

Suicide Statistics - AFSP

I mean, it's not like it's particularly good to attempt suicide and not actually die... It basically sucks. It would be best if no one felt they had to take such measures at all.

I think emotional immaturity leads to the stereotypes...and a lot of people are emotionally immature.

A woman shedding tears may be being strong and true to her inner self and intellectually able to express her reasoning and values or she could be emotionally immature and needy. Depends.

Same for a guy, he could be angry and dominant without being aware of the needs of those around him, or he could be authentic and passionate about a cause, able to show his controlled emotions appropriately in support of his reasoning.

I tend to look for complex thinking, ability to handle paradox, good rational explanations and authentic differentiated values and emotions shown appropriately. Anyone is capable of learning to be honest and become mature.

Hello, I love you, I am your dual. Good post dual buddy friend. Btw, I accepted your friend request because dual. But this post is even better.

Ya, I knew a guy BTW who worked for an organization like this: Perverted-Justice.com - The largest and best anti-predator organization online
And you can bet your ass he was passionate about it!

But anyway, yeah. Also, if someone is shedding tears or yelling or something but it's only occasional, I don't think that reflects at all on their emotional stability, etc. Everyone blows up sometimes. It's fine. As long as it's not a chronic or violent issue. But usually it's not.

As an example. My parents, a man and a woman, blow up at each other about once every few months where they'll just fight over some stupid shit. Then they cool down and they have no problem. They have been married for 35 years! Your last paragraph is why.

I am not particularly feminine, but I am not at all masculine. What is left? I am blorp.

Lol, A+. BLORPS UNITE!!!!

I think there are things that we culturally associate with men and women... but the more you break it down, the more you realize it's socially-pushed-on nuances vs straight biological instincts.

Nature vs. nurture... who knows, right? Having lived in several different countries taught me that most of what I thought was "just human nature" is actually...not natural at all and something forced on us.

Both men and women are prone to fighting... the causes of why may seem to be very different, but the want to fight is the same in both sexes. Do women fight more often? No. More often than not, that's socially and culturally driven... women are taught from before birth to be quiet and meek and rely on others for that. No one is going to deny that in nature some of the most fiercest animals fighting are female animals protecting their young... but yet, in humanity, it's shocking a woman would desire a lifestyle of fighting when she hasn't been growing up constrained.. and quickly pounce and jump on any opportunity for her to be emotional and human as a sort of soothing balm for the fact that she's breaking code.

This is highly cultural. I've lived most of my life outside the US, and I live in the US now. A marked difference is in the rather, er, pro-violence culture of the US. I don't know how else to put it. There are some cultures where it's not really acceptable for anyone to fight.

If you've never heard of a man pouring his heart out about suicidal ideations and relying on others, particularly their family or spouse, for support, then you really just haven't been listening.

Yup. Unfortunately, a few months in college will teach you that right quick. Or hell, ask a college counselor.

That was several years ago for me now, but there was a time I was HOPING there was a gender skew in suicide attempts.

 

[Thalassa]

[MENTION=10383]strychnine[/MENTION]

That first article about the perfect figure not being an hourglass being linked to cultural priorities is fascinating. There was a woman in the comments also who listed out the differences as well...women who have the larger wth ratio tend to be older mothers and go into menopause later, so don't HAVE to reproduce at as young of an age as women with the lower wth. That's insane because it does directly correlate to cultural norms.

It also explains this aspect of Appalachian Studies in college where the country men in the mountains preferred bigger women because they were stronger and more capable of handling the stress of a life in the wilderness, while the men from the city preferred very small, even fragile looking women ..it seems like the same as this article, in cultures where women are more likely to be dependent they are expected to be thinner. But then again there are very slender women who have a more "ruler" shape so still don't have the lower wth ratio.

Also in regards to your comment about fighting being acceptable for no one in some cultures. ..I wonder if this is why some Western men see Asian men as "feminine"....you might know better than myself, but I believe that's nothing to do with femininity and linked more to the self control and social politeness expected in some Asian cultures ....what some people might call emotional maturity.

 

[strychnine]

Yeah [MENTION=23796]Crabs[/MENTION], in other parts of the globe attitudes do differ. ie. I've been in countries where it is considered impressive when men weep with strong emotion. It's perceived as strength and they don't have to hurriedly wipe tears away at funerals or births etc...

I did not see this post but this is correct. I've been in countries with such attitudes as well. Where crying in public is viewed as a strength.

In Indian classical music (I'm talking a specific genre of classical music here, so not popular music and certainly not the country as a whole), men were historically considered better singers because they were considered to have a greater depth of emotion than women. Times slowly changed, and more male vocal teachers became willing to take on female students. Then those students became performers and later teachers. So now there is a more even blend of male and female classical vocalists.

But historically, men were considered to have a greater depth of emotion than women. Women were considered lacking in emotional depth. Some people do still believe this, but it has evened out.

The bolding is only to emphasize the contrast with American attitudes, where men are generally viewed as lacking in emotionality while women are viewed as overemotional.

In terms of Western music, I have to admit I enjoy listening to Josh Groban (as an example that comes quickly to mind) in large part because of his ability to express emotion as he sings. He does not sing in a cold and sterile manner, at all. He expresses every word and every note.

(OMG My brain is trying to type Josh Groban now. LOL. I'm obsessed with typology. Sometimes I appreciate emotional expression so much, I wonder if I'm not an Fe type...)

 

[Mole]

I did not see this post but this is correct. I've been in countries with such attitudes as well. Where crying in public is viewed as a strength.

The word goes round Repins,
the murmur goes round Lorenzinis,
at Tattersalls, men look up from sheets of numbers,
the Stock Exchange scribblers forget the chalk in their hands
and men with bread in their pockets leave the Greek Club:
There's a fellow crying in Martin Place. They can't stop him.

The traffic in George Street is banked up for half a mile
and drained of motion. The crowds are edgy with talk
and more crowds come hurrying. Many run in the back streets
which minutes ago were busy main streets, pointing:
There's a fellow weeping down there. No one can stop him.

The man we surround, the man no one approaches
simply weeps, and does not cover it, weeps
not like a child, not like the wind, like a man
and does not declaim it, nor beat his breast, nor even
sob very loudly - yet the dignity of his weeping

holds us back from his space, the hollow he makes about him
in the midday light, in his pentagram of sorrow,
and uniforms back in the crowd who tried to seize him
stare out at him, and feel, with amazement, their minds
longing for tears as children for a rainbow.

Some will say, in the years to come, a halo
or force stood around him. There is no such thing.
Some will say they were shocked and would have stopped him
but they will not have been there. The fiercest manhood,
the toughest reserve, the slickest wit amongst us

trembles with silence, and burns with unexpected
judgements of peace. Some in the concourse scream
who thought themselves happy. Only the smallest children
and such as look out of Paradise come near him
and sit at his feet, with dogs and dusty pigeons.

Ridiculous, says a man near me, and stops
his mouth with his hands, as if it uttered vomit -
and I see a woman, shining, stretch her hand
and shake as she receives the gift of weeping;
as many as follow her also receive it

and many weep for sheer acceptance, and more
refuse to weep for fear of all acceptance,
but the weeping man, like the earth, requires nothing,
the man who weeps ignores us, and cries out
of his writhen face and ordinary body

not words, but grief, not messages, but sorrow,
hard as the earth, sheer, present as the sea -
and when he stops, he simply walks between us
mopping his face with the dignity of one
man who has wept, and now has finished weeping.

Evading believers, he hurries off down Pitt Street.

 

[Thalassa]

I wonder why English and American culture equated lack of emotions with masculinity - the Indian view makes more sense to me, that men would presume they had greater depth of emotion, because of the tendency in more than one culture (including the West) for men to believe women are fickle, changeable creatures led by money or pretty things..aka the "nice guy" chip on his shoulder because the specific woman he wanted didn't want to have sex with him, so women, those emotional whores, damn them, can't love as strongly as myself! Of course it's a ridiculous assumption, but I have seen it in different cultures presented as women being more practical or mercenary....a lot of that is culturally created though, since women who married for love or lust, could be left alone with children or struggle by with a poor man, since women didn't work or earn money in some eras (though ironically, in more primitive cultures women are indespinsible, not just for sex or child rearing, but for gathering, weaving, and taking care of tasks essential to daily life in a village).

Perhaps English/American men culturally labeled emotions as feminine because of Western philosophy being so structurally rigid...but that honestly doesn't make sense, since Mediterranean European men are allowed to hug, kiss and express emotions other than rage. Of course because of the association with women being a chaos which needs to be controlled and made to submit, emotions may have been so associated with that "chaos" that the over-Masculinity of the West begun in an attempt to impose a very rigid rational restraint that doesn't allow for a more holistic masculine- feminine balance in the culture, or themselves as men.

 

[SearchingforPeace]

I wonder why English and American culture equated lack of emotions with masculinity - the Indian view makes more sense to me, that men would presume they had greater depth of emotion, because of the tendency in more than one culture (including the West) for men to believe women are fickle, changeable creatures led by money or pretty things..aka the "nice guy" chip on his shoulder because the specific woman he wanted didn't want to have sex with him, so women, those emotional whores, damn them, can't love as strongly as myself! Of course it's a ridiculous assumption, but I have seen it in different cultures presented as women being more practical or mercenary....a lot of that is culturally created though, since women who married for love or lust, could be left alone with children or struggle by with a poor man, since women didn't work or earn money in some eras (though ironically, in more primitive cultures women are indespinsible, not just for sex or child rearing, but for gathering, weaving, and taking care of tasks essential to daily life in a village).

Perhaps English/American men culturally labeled emotions as feminine because of Western philosophy being so structurally rigid...but that honestly doesn't make sense, since Mediterranean European men are allowed to hug, kiss and express emotions other than rage. Of course because of the association with women being a chaos which needs to be controlled and made to submit, emotions may have been so associated with that "chaos" that the over-Masculinity of the West begun in an attempt to impose a very rigid rational restraint that doesn't allow for a more holistic masculine- feminine balance in the culture, or themselves as men.

An unfortunate outcome of the industrial revolution, I suppose. There was a strong movement towards maximum efficiency, as if this was the best goal for organizing a society.

Emotion was viewed as weak and inefficient. Ex. a 19th century industrialist couldn't abuse women and children the way that was typical if they let emotions interfere. The brutal indifference to life and the environment interfered with efficiency.

Far better to build an empire then "evolve" and give away some money later to soothe the emotions, I guess.

On this point, I recently talked with an acquaintance. He has an MBA and works for a multinational drug company, but has a side business with his brother. He bragged about his brother colluding with competitors to fix bids on a job among other things. He is nominally a good religious person, but, for him, everything is fair in business and he didn't want to consider what they were doing as illegal and unethical, no matter his personal standards where he would never steal a piece of fruit or lie.

 

[Thalassa]

An unfortunate outcome of the industrial revolution, I suppose. There was a strong movement towards maximum efficiency, as if this was the best goal for organizing a society.

Emotion was viewed as weak and inefficient. Ex. a 19th century industrialist couldn't abuse women and children the way that was typical if they let emotions interfere. The brutal indifference to life and the environment interfered with efficiency.

Far better to build an empire then "evolve" and give away some money later to soothe the emotions, I guess.

On this point, I recently talked with an acquaintance. He has an MBA and works for a multinational drug company, but has a side business with his brother. He bragged about his brother colluding with competitors to fix bids on a job among other things. He is nominally a good religious person, but, for him, everything is fair in business and he didn't want to consider what they were doing as illegal and unethical, no matter his personal standards where he would never steal a piece of fruit or lie.

I think the underlying assumption there is that absolute control over nature is preferable to working with nature in a balance...the way people lived once they were swift enough to organize themselves into societies and produce agriculture. ...so women, like animals, were viewed as nature which had to be dominated and brought under strict control...that attitude of course is present in Medieval Islamic culture to an unsettling degree, in which women are actually compared to live stock in their religious text...but there is the underlying view, exaggerated into something destructive and unhealthy ...an excess of masculine energy is associated with excessive rigidity and death, not just because of war, but because the lack of flexibility or suppleness associated with life. ..both the masculine and feminine are therefore necessary for a balance between life and death, between mankind and nature, and consequently between men and women...the industrial revolution and later worship of science reached a peak of environmental destruction, which ironically is something utterly opposed to reason, rationality or common sense, to pollute the air one breathes, the water one drinks, etc....it appears to be a weird self glorification that is underscored by a deep subconscious self hatred, then that hatred is projected on to nature and women.

All in the name of efficiency yes. ..in fact the US is frequently referred to as a Te dominant culture...but why the imbalance? Hatred of religion? Hatred of God? I don't know if I'm rambling at this point.

 

[kyuuei]

Nature vs. nurture... who knows, right? Having lived in several different countries taught me that most of what I thought was "just human nature" is actually...not natural at all and something forced on us.

Yeah, I'll never venture to say that biological differences don't exist (depth perception in men vs women, etc.) but usually behaviors are far far more nurture vs nature..

Yup. Unfortunately, a few months in college will teach you that right quick. Or hell, ask a college counselor.

That was several years ago for me now, but there was a time I was HOPING there was a gender skew in suicide attempts.

Unfortunate really.. the military is particularly bad for fostering manly-mentalities of bottling up suicidal thoughts and unhealthy behaviors. Far as I know, the statistics still stand more women try more men succeed in suicide.

 

[SearchingforPeace]

I think the underlying assumption there is that absolute control over nature is preferable to working with nature in a balance...the way people lived once they were swift enough to organize themselves into societies and produce agriculture. ...so women, like animals, were viewed as nature which had to be dominated and brought under strict control...that attitude of course is present in Medieval Islamic culture to an unsettling degree, in which women are actually compared to live stock in their religious text...but there is the underlying view, exaggerated into something destructive and unhealthy ...an excess of masculine energy is associated with excessive rigidity and death, not just because of war, but because the lack of flexibility or suppleness associated with life. ..both the masculine and feminine are therefore necessary for a balance between life and death, between mankind and nature, and consequently between men and women...the industrial revolution and later worship of science reached a peak of environmental destruction, which ironically is something utterly opposed to reason, rationality or common sense, to pollute the air one breathes, the water one drinks, etc....it appears to be a weird self glorification that is underscored by a deep subconscious self hatred, then that hatred is projected on to nature and women.

All in the name of efficiency yes. ..in fact the US is frequently referred to as a Te dominant culture...but why the imbalance? Hatred of religion? Hatred of God? I don't know if I'm rambling at this point.

Could it be the result of the worship of progress and human genius? Yes.

Religious pluralism? Yes.

I am reminded of when I studied colonial Latin America. The Hapsburgs ruled Spain and its colonies until 1700, when the Bourbons of France took over (and there was a large scale war over this).

Under the Hapsburgs, the government thought of itself as paternalistic, looking out for the needs of the different groups. The king was the father-king and policies didn't focus on maximum efficiency. Instead feudalistic relationships and social relationships mattered. There was more than lip service to the idea of noble obligation.

With the Bourbons, they brought French modern and enlightened ideas about maximizing wealth and using the colonies for the maximum efficiency.

A large disconnect soon developed between the colonies and Spain, as the paternalistic relationship with the king disappeared. The Bourbons weakened the power of the church somewhat as well.

This disconnect led, in part, to the revolt of the Spanish colonies.

There is a lot more to entire history here, but that is the general idea.

The factory system dehumanized the workers and destroyed a lot of small craftsman.

I remember reading ounce that the average peasant in the middle ages only worked 10 hours per week or something like that. And generally no one worked long, gruelling hours (except slaves) prior to the industrial revolution. Life, with inefficiency, provided for the needs with only a small quantity of work.

People are more than the mere amount that they can earn working. Professionals like doctors and lawyers used to take time to care for their clients, as opposed to mere salary men.

I do believe we can do better. I don't know how we get there, but if technology makes needs go away, perhaps we can create a different currency than money. Perhaps people will be valued based upon the good they do.....

 

[Cellmold]

I still can't find the workshop I was telling you about but there is a test I think you will get a kick out off. It's clearly for purposes of entertainment and not scientifically viable

Male Or Female Brain? Brain Gender Test

A FEMALE DOMINATED BRAIN
Your brain is certainly leaning towards the female end of the spectrum: your brain tends to work best when getting involved in matters of detail, and you are always ready to listen to the ideas of others. Although you may be occasionally prepared to take the lead, team working is very much your ideal. You recognise what other people are feeling and can put yourself in their shoes.

Heh, just as you said, for entertainment. Not because of that result but because of the questions, thus:

Some of the questions were so lolz.

Agreed. For example the question on visiting another country and how you would approach the language was laughable. Pointing and grunting (to someone who has at least regularly travelled to western Europe) is the mark of the wilfully ignorant, not a male trait (which is my speculation on what they were going for).

I wonder why English and American culture equated lack of emotions with masculinity - the Indian view makes more sense to me, that men would presume they had greater depth of emotion, because of the tendency in more than one culture (including the West) for men to believe women are fickle, changeable creatures led by money or pretty things..aka the "nice guy" chip on his shoulder because the specific woman he wanted didn't want to have sex with him, so women, those emotional whores, damn them, can't love as strongly as myself! Of course it's a ridiculous assumption, but I have seen it in different cultures presented as women being more practical or mercenary....a lot of that is culturally created though, since women who married for love or lust, could be left alone with children or struggle by with a poor man, since women didn't work or earn money in some eras (though ironically, in more primitive cultures women are indespinsible, not just for sex or child rearing, but for gathering, weaving, and taking care of tasks essential to daily life in a village).

Perhaps English/American men culturally labeled emotions as feminine because of Western philosophy being so structurally rigid...but that honestly doesn't make sense, since Mediterranean European men are allowed to hug, kiss and express emotions other than rage. Of course because of the association with women being a chaos which needs to be controlled and made to submit, emotions may have been so associated with that "chaos" that the over-Masculinity of the West begun in an attempt to impose a very rigid rational restraint that doesn't allow for a more holistic masculine- feminine balance in the culture, or themselves as men.

The left brain says: "Yo".

"We just get reflected back into more of what we know about what we know about what we know about what we know about what we know what we know what we know what we know what we know....."

 

[the state i am in]

i mean, personality theory kind of shows this probability continuum already.

F-T is about as feminine-masculine as it gets, at a basic cognitive/communicative level.

sx vs so is generally more associated with matching a masculine/feminine distribution, with sx more testosterone-y, competitive, possessive, objectifying, and so being more broader contextual, other-first, balancing more factors, etc. at more of a physical, drive level.

3, 7, and 8 tend to be high dopamine, high motor, goal-ish types who tend to initiate and make things happen. they focus more on the outside than on the inside. at more of a self-orienting, affective placement, sense of self level.

there's certainly more to it as well. i think, generally, high focus is seen as more masculine, whether that is mentally or whether it is literally phallic, like an arrow pointing outward to the one thing that matters. that basic energy orientation, even as both sexes have a kind of masculine and feminine sexual response too, easier to see in females with a kind of more yin or more yang orgasm drawing and directing energy in different ways, just shapes the way we experience our own co-creative impulses.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Who was the sociologist/psychologist/pseudoscientist who suggested autism represented the male brain taken to the extreme?