Can I attract a man on the same vibration as I ?
Can I attract a man on the same vibration as I ?Yes exactly right... with one slight nuance.
So, mostly the relationship based on Shadow attraction will be a bad idea to entertain. I don’t recommend it. I recommend doing your solo healing work before, so that you attract another mostly healed person.
BUT Shadow attractions and relationships CAN be useful for integration work. But starting a relationship with someone on this level often leads to retraumatization, which is wise to avoid. But the positive side of this is that it brings you into your old traumas so that you can heal and integrate.
So, primarily Shadow informed relationships will usually be very stressful and painful. And will mostly be futile I’m the relationship sense.
But these bad relationships can also be used as a springboard into healing work, if you’re not already doing it.
And then, once healing happens, you will be on a better wavelength which enables you to attract men that mirror the new, healed you.
Can I attract a man on the same vibration as I ?
Can I attract a man on the same vibration as I ?Think about it more as a wavelength than as a magnet.
There is magnetism that attracts on certain levels based on polarity... aka opposites attract.
But in terms of wavelength resonance, it is like and like that fall into resonance with one another.
And a compatible relationship requires both polarity and resonance to work.
So, in the example I gave, there was one element of polarity and another element of resonance.
So, I gave the example of a person with low self-esteem who is unable to assert themselves being attractive to another person with low self-esteem who is aggressive and has an overactive assertive drive.
So, the two people have Shadow resonance on the vibration of low self-esteem. But they also have Shadow polarity because one is a doormat and the other is a tyrant.
But the magnetism and resonance in this example is all coming from experiencing similar traumas. It isn’t coming from true compatibility, true polarity, or true resonance.
To have true resonance and true polarity, the partners must be attracted to one another from the core vibration. And this requires healing and integrating the Shadow vibration into the core vibration.
So, there is Shadow polarity and Shadow resonance.
And there is Core Essence polarity and Core Essence resonance.
And in order to have two people attracted to one another on the level of core essence (instead of just two people being attracted to one another who just have matching traumas) the healing work must be done.
Can I attract a man on the same vibration as I ?
Can I attract a man on the same vibration as I ?Yes, everyone has the two vibrations... unless they have integrated all of their Shadow contents and gotten to the end of healing. But I have never met such a person who has no more healing to do.
But I have met people who are mostly healed and integrated... or who had a relatively healthy childhood. And the core vibration has significantly more attractive pull than the Shadow vibration in these cases.
I’ve also met plenty of people who have such a dense shadow and lots of healing to do. And they attract their partners mostly from the Shadow vibration.
If you are in the space of having a lot of healing to do, you will attract whoever most mirrors your Shadow to you... and whoever will be most likely to facilitate that healing by bringing to the surface all of your pain and traumas.
You will attract whoever is most like the lemon juice to your wounds to make you aware of your wounds. That way, you can address them.
Although this Shadow attraction is usually oriented to unconsciously and thus usually doesn’t facilitate healing. It usually ends up in a retraumatization.
But once the Shadow vibration is healed and brought back into alignment and resonance with the core vibration, you will attract others that are a better match to your essential core vibration.
So, if you want a partner who is compatible with you... instead of just being compatible with your traumas ... then the Shadow contents must be healed and integrated.
Can I attract a man on the same vibration as I ?
Can I attract a man on the same vibration as I ?Everyone only ever attracts from the vibration they hold. No exceptions.
It’s already happening and you don’t have to do anything to make it happen.
There are two vibrations a person holds: their core vibration and their shadow vibration. And both are magnetic forces that pull those of like energy towards you.
The core vibration is the vibration of your natural essence. The Shadow vibration is the vibration of all that is repressed and hurt within you.
So, my best advice for finding the most compatible partner is to integrate your Shadow and do the healing work.
This will mean that your Shadow vibration will lose strength and become weaker and less magnetic... while your core vibration will absorb the strength of the integrated Shadow vibration and become stronger and more magnetic.
Until the Shadow is integrated, you will only ever attract and be attracted to what is not integrated in yourself.
So, if a person is dealing with low self-esteem and has a repressed assertive drive, they will have a strong Shadow vibration which will attract someone with low-self esteem with an over-active assertive drive (aka aggression).
Divine identification versus Identity with God.
Divine identification versus Identity with God.Do not mistake philosophising about the nature of Self for true Consciousness work. What you want is God-realization where you realize you are Consciousness/God itself and You dreamed up the whole story of Existence thinking it was a human being living a human life. Beware of groundless ego-mind identification with the CONCEPT of being God (with no direct experience of truth) which can lead to 'attaining' a childish Spiritual ego. True awakening will make you KNOW for a fact you are God, whereas mental masturbation will just give birth to a new belief.
Is it ethical for a guy to break a girl's heart ?
Is it ethical for a guy to break a girl's heart ?Women are the selectors and men are the one's trying to be selected. That's what that means. This is the heterosexual human mating dance.
If a woman acts as if the man is the prize, then she's already messed up because she'll be in her masculine energy trying to impress the guy and win him over. And that just doesn't work. It communicates low standards.
One of the best things a woman can do is to be in here Yin energy and communicate her standards. Men who are genuinely interested in her will (and only men who are interested in her) rise the challenge. This sorts out the men who are not good choices.
As an analogue to the human mating dance, there is one egg and many sperm... and only the best sperm gets to join with the egg. Women are best to remember that they are not the sperm in that scenario. The main goal is not to chase and impress. The main goal is to be receptive and attract but to sort who isn't suited... or have them sort themselves.
Also, in a healthy relationship dynamic, the man is more committed to the woman even than the woman is committed to him. If you have it the other way around, there's going to be a lot of disharmony in that relationship because the guy doesn't actually see the woman as the prize.
When you have it the other way around, the woman feels anxious and chases the guy around and the guy feels annoyed. And that's because the guy really doesn't want to be selected by her.
Also, I didn't say there's "no shortage" of solid men. Most men are not very solid. But there are plenty of solid men. And with the woman being the selector, her job is sort the wheat from the chaff... sorting out men who don't see/treat her as the prize, who are not solid, etc.
With this sorting job, 95% of that job is done by communicating expectations and being connected to the intuition.
Is it ethical for a guy to break a girl's heart ?
Is it ethical for a guy to break a girl's heart ?I agree with your point that desiring a monogamous relationship is as self-focused as any other desire. It's an agenda just like any other agenda.
But I do think women are wisest to expect (and by expect, I mean feel entitled to) the dynamic they want. And then, be ready to duck out if that dynamic is not to be had with that particular guy... ideally prior to getting involved with him.
Women are wise to remember that they are the selector and the "prize" in the mating dance, and that any man who isn't ready/willing to step up into the role she is looking for him to fill isn't a good candidate for that selection process.
So, ideally don't have sex with that person, unless you're looking for casual sex and you know for sure that you're never going to want him in any serious way. And ideally, don't even spend time with him once you know that he's not aligned to your agenda as you don't want feelings to develop with someone who isn't aligned to your agenda.
There are plenty of men out there who will be in alignment. Unless you're really just interested in some sexual escapades, it's best to move on and look for a more solid man.
Colleges are leftist indoctrination centers?
Colleges are leftist indoctrination centers?All identity is relative, subjective, and self-constructed.
Whatever you think you are, you're imagining that. Whether you think you're a human, a 30 year old male, or whatever.
The reason you feel some of these identities are more real and less constructed is because society happens to reinforce your imaginary identity.
So, for example, if you were born into a society/culture which believed that all humans are aliens, you would identify as an alien and you would feel that this is your true biological identity.
Your actual identity is Nothing. Which allows you to pretend to be whoever you want. But the added wrinkle is... since you are addicted to the approval and authority of your culture, you only tend to take seriously those identities which your culture says are valid and real. So when some college kid tells you that she's a unicorn, you think that's stupid. Because your culture tells you that people cannot be unicorns.
Who is right? No one. It's all relative.
Could learning game turn you into a people pleaser with low self-esteem?
Could learning game turn you into a people pleaser with low self-esteem?I had thought about it like this before.
I’m trying to imagine the criteria Western society would use to describe a “successful relationship”. Here are some things I think many people in society might think is to be a successful relationship.
— How long together. A lot of people value commitment and longevity. If a couple was together 50 years, I think a lot of people would consider that successful.
— Absence of internal problems. Things like cheating, excessive arguing, domestic violence, couples therapy, separations would be seen as unsuccessful.
—- Overcoming external problems together. Things like working through financial difficulties , death of a child, miscarriage, overcoming cancer would be generally seen as success.
— Creating something big together. Things like creating a business together, starting a nonprofit, creating a family.
— Doing a lot of things together. Traveling on trips together, going to the symphony, concerts, community events, taking dancing lessons together etc.
— Keeping the passion alive. Couples that have been together for years and still have chemistry - they still make each other laugh, are playful, regular sex, have passion and look like they want to be together and are enjoying their time together.
— Mutual growth and support. How much did the couple grow and evolve together? Did they make each other better? Did they challenge each other to grow and support each other during that growth. An example of this might be during an achievement award. The person being honored may tell everyone how this was only possible with the help of their partner. That they wouldn’t be the person they are today without their partner.
— They genuinely care about each other’s welfare.
Leo Gura PUA
Leo Gura PUAI don't think you really gleaned the main aspect of what I was saying.
I'm saying that the thing that makes a man attractive is not contingent upon "game". In fact, in my 17 years of experience of being approached, learning game is usually a disruptor to the natural personality and has a fake flavor to it. Women who are attuned to their intuition can sense it in men. Mind you it's better than being totally anti-social and sexual repression, so do whatever works. But don't think that just because it works for you, that it's what women actually like.
It really is a disruptor to a man's natural energy, as they get so attached to the techniques and knowledge that they forget to be a person... which is what women are actually attracted to.
And I can sense a lot of insecurity underneath both "game" and even personal development in general . So, I find game and approach to be off-putting. If I sense it's too easy to get a man (and most men are incredibly easy to get), then I know it's not special for him and that he approaches everyone and that I'm interchangeable to him. And thus, it is a sign of instability and often worse.
Also, because I view sex as a form of communication, I want a man who actually specifically wants to communicate something specific to me... not just someone who has nothing to say to me but just wants to speak. And just hearing someone speak with nothing to say is a turn off.
So, I automatically (like most women who are in touch with their emotional and sexual needs) screen it out, and focus toward men I'm familiar with that I am around frequently. And that's the most ideal scenario from a woman's perspective. Approach and game is very lukewarm in terms of pleasure and emotional enjoyment. It takes at least a few weeks (usually months) of platonic interaction to develop an attraction intense enough to make me want to pair bond with someone. And that's the only way to get the heat up that high. It's a slow brew and needs time to ferment.
Now, if you broadly define game as general social skills that apply for everyone, then I would say that's not really game. But these are necessary to make friends easily and form relationships more easily. So, yes, a man will have to develop basic social skills to attract more women. But learning to be confident and cool and all those other things will attract simply the most average woman who is also unaware of her intuition. A woman who screens for objective qualities instead of connecting to her emotional center.
And as a numbers game, if women are interchangeable to you, that's fine. But I doubt you'll find very many who you can really be understood by and be intimate with. It would just be a stage to perform your sexuality on and have some brief enjoyable experiences. But it sounds like a lonely experience.
But game specifically refers to behaviors adopted by men to roll the dice at finding a mate. And 99.999% of the time I find these mating dances to be counter-productive and off-putting. And I know I'm not an odd bird in this.
And truly I believe game, in its best aspect, to be a placebo that just gives an otherwise insecure guy the courage to approach a woman in the first place... which would have yielded them results even without learning game.
It's like you give someone a cape and tell them they're a hero, and they believe it, so they're able to do heroic things. But the person actually had that in them all the time and didn't actually need the cape.
The problem only comes from when the guy never realizes the cape isn't real. And there are tons of "gurus" touting the efficacy of the cape. And "Don't believe women when they tell you the capes don't work. Women just don't realize the capes work." It really creates an airtight vacuum of misinformation about the female sexual experience.
And you have an entire generation of guys who are totally lost, insisting that your sexuality works other than how it does just because they've gotten results in getting laid... which would have happened anyway. On a personal level, it's frustrating. But on a collective level, it silences the voices of women actually communicating their needs and wants... just because some women will settle for game. So, it drives an intimacy barrier between men and women in their experience of sex and love, because the guy fundamentally doesn't understand but is certain in his own ignorance that he does because he heard it from some equally clueless "guru".
So, that potential to attract a lot of women would have been there before any "game" was learned at all. And the reason why is simple. It's because most women are attracted to men. There is no need to filter oneself through all of these ideas and techniques. Just have your life in order, get some basic social skills, don't suppress your masculinity, make connections with people, open your heart, and be yourself.
From my perspective, I'm almost never attracted to the guys that would be deemed universally attractive. And it almost never happens when a guy has romantic intent of any kind on his sleeves.
I'm mostly attracted to guys who just have a very particular way about them that resonates with me. And as long as they're being themselves, I'm going to feel that. But game, as I've noticed, is usually the opposite. It cuts men off from their natural masculine essence and teaches masculinity on the external level. And the counter-productivity of it is very palpable and obvious from the outside looking in.
Issue with David Deida's book
Issue with David Deida's book@randomguy123 Keep in mind that chaos isn't necessarily a bad thing though. The only reason you exist (in the relative sense) is because your father and mother met chaotically (i.e. unplanned, unexpectedly, randomly) and the two had kids together. At no point did your father say "I will plan to meet randomguy123's mum at exactly 2.43pm on 28/05/1990 whom I will fall in love with and have kids with", he just met your mother chaotically one day and the connection that led to you was born. Chaos is one of the most fundamental principles required for the universe to function.
The problem is just that the ego-mind tends to skew towards craving order (predictability, routine, stasis, etc.) and so the idea of chaos gets demonised and shunned by a lot of people, without them realising just how much of their own existence (as well as the rest of existence) is reliant upon it.
Leo Gura PUA
Leo Gura PUA@Dumuzzi "It is most demonstrably not a better situation. Society as a whole is collapsing before our eyes, not least through crashing birth rates and the current situation does not benefit anyone, except, ironically, pick-up artists. You really have to live in and experience different cultures, with very different social and sexual mores to understand why this is. I have lived in many different cultures throughout my life, such as Poland, Hungary, Ireland, the UK, Singapore, India and Thailand as well as travelled extensively, which gives me a unique insight into what works and what doesn't and what the differences actually do to people and society in practice. It would take several books to explain."
Currently, there is a lot of dissolution of old social norms and mores. And though this can create issues, it's actually a sign of positive change. You have to break some eggs to make an omelette. And right now, the right eggs are being broken for us to create a fabulous omelette that more people prefer. Raw eggs are not good for most people.
It is the nature of the relationship between order and chaos. Order emerges from chaos which is the primordial soup. And then, once that order no longer works, it dissolves yet again into chaos... the same chaos from which more expansive order will emerge. So, we're always in flux between order and chaos. This is why the dissolution of old social norms and structures is wonderful news, even if its uncomfortable for those that the old order has worked for in the past. So, it will be more difficult for those who liked the old order.
So, reactionary views that seek to resurrect old and dead structures... are trying to put the goldfish back into a bowl that it's already outgrown.
I liken the way that order and chaos works together as being like the life-cycle of a butterfly.
First they start out with a simpler order as a caterpillar. Then, once the caterpillar has reached its point of maximum expansion and enters the cocoon, that's where the chaos begins.
Inside the cocoon, the caterpillar is dissolved into primordial soup. And then, from that primordial soup, new order constellates and a butterfly begins to grow from the soup. And it eventually emerges from the cocoon an entirely different being.
The same thing is happening now on the societal level. And so many people, especially those that the old order (caterpillar phase), worked for are urging everyone to go back to being a caterpillar. But it won't work... because it is against nature to resist the evolving social order of humanity.
It is time for us to be a butterfly. So, old sexual mores have to go out the window. And we can create new mores that are more conscious and make more sense.
Allow entropy to do its work, so that new things can grow.
The importance of letting go in a relationship
The importance of letting go in a relationshipDue to some deep healing and grief process I have been experiencing, I felt inspired to share something very important about relationships. The importance of letting go.
Letting go in a relationship is an act of love and surrender, that counter-intuitively can be done only with the intention of commitment.
Letting go in a relationship promotes commitment for the reason that the only thing you can ever let go of, are your expectations of your partner. If we are committed without letting go we are insisting on our partner to be the way we want them to be, which is a role that they cannot fulfill as the only thing they can authentically do is to be themselves. Similarly, if the notion of letting go is divorced from personal commitment, it will be only an act of avoidance and denial dressed up as an insight - as if we were saying 'I am letting go.', while masking the true intention and sending a message to a partner saying 'You are too much for me.'
Letting go, when done properly, can either lead to intimacy and interpersonal connection that is beyond any manufactured roles we play in relationships, as well as to an ending of the relationship, if that is the barrier that is blocking the emotional freedom of both partners. There cannot be true intimate commitment without the willingness to follow through with the possible ending of a relationship. That is for the reason that when you are committed, the relationship isn't actually what is the goal of your commitment. The goal of your commitment is the well-being of both partners, be it in a relationship or outside of the relationship. Every time you let go, there is an ending of the old roles, and the entering of the new. You can never know whether the new will include a relationship between the two or not, and in fact it will always feel like you are saying goodbye for good. That is why letting go is a beautiful act of faith and courage.
The words that describe the beauty of letting go can be said in a mantra I love you, and that is why I am letting you go. I love you is the declaration of the commitment to the wellbeing of your partner, and the letting go is the refusal to force them into a mold of an old role that was manufactured by your own ideas of what you want your partner to be.
And we all do this.
We all want our partner to be a certain way. We manufacture a character when we are growing up, based on all the unfulfilled emotional needs we experience growing up, we imagine (consciously or subconsciously), what we want our partner to be. In this way, we are more looking for a new parent, rather than an equal partner. We imagine what they are going to do, how they are going to make us feel, what they will never do to us, and how deeply understood we will feel by them. While there is ultimately not much wrong with such a fantasy, we are bound to experience partners that will disappoint this imagined ideal of a relationship just so we can experience the beauty of letting go and feel the true depth of a conscious inter-dependent relationship, that starts within us. Yes, letting go may lead to an ending, but the relationship within your heart will only grow stronger, with more love, more compassion and more fulfillment than any fantasy-partner could have ever convinced you of having.
Breakup because I'm not similar enough
Breakup because I'm not similar enough@electroBeam Hi ElectroBeam, I thought about posting in this topic to help you out but it didn't feel quite right until now. I feel like I can offer you something special, so I encourage you to take in whatever I am about to write next.
In every relationship, since we have been mostly conditioned in paradigms of either I win and you lose, or you lose and I win, there tends to be a struggle for control/dominance. This can play out in various ways, as you have described your relationship with your work and its changing role within the relationship, or her desire to stay intimate without sexuality and overall relationship commitment. It is as if both partners were taking turns in whoever has the control.
The hallucination of this comes to an end when you realize that any control over any person can only be imaginary. This inevitably comes with facing the emotional wounding within us that erupts when we are finally mature enough to realize and admit that we have no control, and it is out of sheer free will of our partner that they are agreeing to our terms of the relationship.
And here you are, in the stage of a relationship where control has become a toxic component and it seems as if you are playing a hot potato game with it taking turns in whoever gets their way. There can be no end to this as long as you are playing this game.
In your case, it seems to be the case that your area where the struggle to let go of control is being hindered by the fear of losing the relationship. In this way, you are giving your power away to her saying 'you are the source of my fulfillment and emotional freedom, and I cannot imagine being completely autonomous within this domain'. Her response (while most likely is subconscious one) is a refusal to play this role for you for it would hinder your ability to be completely autonomous and sovereign in your emotional freedom. In simple terms, you have given your power away to your partner, and she is on a subconscious level trying to say - I don't want this, I don't own it.
The other part of this unfortunate dynamic is the stage that your partner seems to be in, and that is the unwillingness to let go of you completely as of now merely mirroring to you your compliance of denial of personal needs and desire in favour of the promise of keeping your partner around. However you can only find your way into resolution and clarity by letting go. LEtting go doesn't necessarily mean the ending of the relationship, it merely means greater dedication to the emotional needs of you and your partner, in any scenario that would involve splitting up or staying together.
I recently channeled some writing in this thread called 'the importance of letting go in relationships'... or something like that I encourage you to give it a read, as that can be wonderfully applied to your situation.
Wishing you best of luck and a brisk resolution of your troubles.
Edit: To make this practical, you simply need a permission to fully say no to whatever doesn't feel good and stifling in the relationship.
No thank you. I love you very much, but this isn't something I am willing to go through. If that is something you insist on, then we might have to part ways. I am very sorry but I cannot deny the way that I feel. I can only respect the emotions and needs within me.
Closing in Game
Closing in Game@Adam M I'm not saying it's evil. But there is an entirely new and higher dating paradigm that doesn't involve all that twisted and toxic scheming you would tend to think is necessary if you only operate from the stage Orange RSD paradigm.
Leading, pushing, bouncing, shit testing, resistance, excuses, cockblocking, logistics. "Game". This is all typical stage Orange RSD vocabulary, and it all basically comes down to the paradigm of seeing women as objects you have to "win" through scheming, pushing and manipulating.
Stage Green dating would be going out to meet and connect with people, creating a connection/flirting with the people you find attractive and that are attracted to you, and from that, you can just date, build a connection and have sex effortlessly and smoothly.
Notice how pushing, bouncing, logistics and all that shit is only necessary when you have to convince the girl of sleeping with you and "win" her. When you see dating and connecting with people as a "game" to win.
And by the way, by playing that "game" you will only ever be able to attract stage Orange women. Green women are repelled by all this and will reject you instantly. You can't be a monkey with them, you have to be intelligent and real to build true connections with intelligent and real people. Which is really what you ultimately want.
Of course all this doesn't mean that living 10 minutes from a social place isn't better than having to take a 40 min bus, or that all of the stuff RSD teaches isn't valid. For example, you can still cold approach, and that's very valuable. But it's the paradigm that changes everything and dictates how you do it. And I can guarantee you that if you have a true connection with a girl, you don't have to worry about any logistics or such nonsense. When a girl wants to have sex with you too, she will do anything to make that happen and there will be no resistance.
Anyway, all this is a much deeper thing that I can explain in a post. You can start by reading Models by Mark Manson, but this whole thing goes very deep.
spiral dynamics girlfriend- yellow dating blue
spiral dynamics girlfriend- yellow dating blueThat's not going to work.
The whole point of a relationship is to grow together. As soon as that stops working you're doomed.
For a stable long-term relationship you must find a partner who is willing to grow with you. Otherwise why even be in relationship?
Do not underestimate the seriousness of a value disconnect in a relationship. You are going to be able to ignore that and just keep things going. The value disconnect will infect everything eventually.
does absolute ethics exist?
does absolute ethics exist?Since God is Absolute Truth, even a hint of lying, dishonesty, falsehood, or inathenticity automatically severes your connection to God. That is okay. It is not "bad" to be seperated from God, but it painful since you become lost in your own falsehood. That is the definition of devilry.
Lying is only "bad" relative to if you want to be happy. If you are okay with being unhappy, then lie a lot. If you want to be happy, lie as little as possible. If you want to realize God, lie as little as possible.
There is only one reason you lie: fear. If you were immortal, untouchable, and fearless you would never lie. In other words if you were God, you'd never lie. Really think about that. That's deep.
Absolute ethics is Truth/Love. It is Goodness without an opposite. It is God.
Ken Wilber Inteview On Jordan Peterson
Ken Wilber Inteview On Jordan PetersonI do not share the idea that masculinity and femininity are just social constructs.
I do not share the idea that major imbalances in equality can be solved through legislation or by force. It has to be done through an increase in awareness relative to how the human system works and why it's changing now.
I do not share the idea that women and men choose careers and life paths based only on conditioning. There are life paths that are more suited to more feminine individuals and those that are more suited to more masculine individuals. I do, however, think that we should instill in people that they can do anything. And I think feminine careers should be valued and paid as much as more masculine carers.
I do not share the idea that Capitalism needs to be abolished in order to get rid of corruption.
I do not share the idea that changing the social systems will beget the changes that we need in the degree that we need them to. This can only be solved on deeper and energetic levels. That said, social systems do need to change as well.
I do not share the idea that all the far right wing stuff coming up right now is a result of evil people that want to do bad things. I see it more as a community of pain and a collective shadow that is coming up to be faced. So, even if it's very threatening, I know that it's part of the process.
I do not share the idea that censoring people will solve these issues. It will just be like cutting off the head of a hydra and more will grown. Integration is the way to solve these issues, not resistance.
I do not believe that people come in as a tabula rasa and that people's environments create their personalities entirely. There is a natural way that every human system works. So, a person can't be conditioned out of their nature, even thought conditioning will have an impact on how much that nature can be expressed.
I do not share the idea that any of the left-wing ideologies are the end all be all of rightness. I see them as valuable lenses to be looked through. But piss-poor lenses to glue upon your eyes. This is a real problem with Green.
I think Green tends to try to sterilize what is organic to fit their ideas, and I don't like that. There is something that's not natural about it.
I do not share the idea that a person's level of goodness is wrapped up in their 'woke-ness'. But I do think 'woke-ness' is important because it gives us a lot more angles to look from.
These are all the ones that came to my mind off the top of my head.
Ken Wilber Inteview On Jordan Peterson
Ken Wilber Inteview On Jordan PetersonWonderful post
Why do I run away from inquiring and sitting down?
Why do I run away from inquiring and sitting down?@Pouya
“Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate, our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness that frightens us. We ask ourselves – Who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented and fabulous? Actually, who are you not to be? Your playing small does not serve the world. There is nothing enlightened about shrinking, so that other people won’t feel insecure around you. We are born to manifest the glory that is within us. It is not within some of us, it is in everyone. And when we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same. As we are liberated from our own fear, our presence automatically liberates others.” ~ Marianne Williamson.
I am enlightened. Sincere seekers: ask me anything
I am enlightened. Sincere seekers: ask me anythingWell, there’s a few different ways. One is by really feeling that fear and expressing it — articulating it — in writing or drawing or other art, as specifically and originally as possible, till you have feel like have really captured what it’s like.
In the process, you might discover other things related to this fear, perhaps things from the past, traumas you haven’t dealt with, desires you haven’t admitted, negative emotions you haven’t let yourself experience.
Psychoanakytic therapy is very helpful for this.
It is fully hearing the nuanced message your emotions have for you that allows them to relax
The other alternative is not to enter stillness and contemplate the fear — fear cannot really exist where there is true stillness — but simply to enter and stay in stillness, period, and more specifically to do that by inquiring into who it is feels that fear. Who’s the “I” that feels the fear?
It’s always about investigating the I.
I don’t know, sorry.
I HATE Stage Green
I HATE Stage GreenStage Orange is the beginning of the gender role rejection that women engage in. But it is more of a rejection of femininity and an adoption of masculinity, at that stage. And it is based in unconscious internalized misogyny. Imagine a woman who detests the color pink, shoots guns, rejects feelings, can compete with the guys, and is a cool girl who's one of the girls who loves beer and pizza.
At Green, however, there begins to be a questioning of gender roles and their efficacy in general in response to the awareness of the LGBT community and a growing awareness of internalized misogyny as a phenomenon. So, at Green, it is less of a cleaving to masculinity as with Orange, but a rejection fo the existence of masculine and feminine in general... and an unconscious falling back into the masculine principle unknowingly.
And yes. Both are necessary transitions that allow women to transcend the confines of the traditional gender roles. This is key to allowing the emergence of the Divine Feminine within human society. They are part of the liberation process, but that will have to be shed in later stages.
Exactly. And there is an early part of the Green transition that is genuinely a place of not knowing how to express in a masculine way. There is a resistance to the traditional masculine way of doing things as there is a dawning awareness that masculine preference has caused a lot of issues and that a lot of it is very toxic. So, a lot of guy's over-correct and find it difficult to own and express their masculinity because they don't want to be part of the problem. They are not aware that their traditional ideas of masculinity and manhood are just ideas, and that the actual energy of the masculine is something that can be expressed in other ways that are not destructive. So, the transition to Green is genuinely a bit scary. And men who value their masculinity above all else will likely never make the transition.
"As more females transition through Green and into Yellow, they will be less attracted to traditionally masculine "alpha males". They will be more attracted to Green and Yellow level masculinity. I think we are seeing this now. Traditionally masculine men are seeing techies, hipsters, snowflakes, yoga, politically correct males getting in on their alpha male action. These wussy Green men are becoming more successful with women, which causes confusion, anxiety and frustration in blue/orange men (hence an attraction to speakers like Jordan Peterson). Yes?"
If I look at the type of men that I'm interested in, I would say that what you say is true. But I wouldn't describe these men as un-masculine or in denial of masculinity as men are at early Green. I do genuinely have a lack of attraction to early Green men who are in resistance to their masculinity. But I also don't find them as tiring as Orange men who are obsessed with a limited version of masculinity who feel like they're pretending every step of the way. The former I lack attraction to, but the latter I find directly unattractive and have an aversion to.
So, it the men I tend to find attractive, their masculinity is definitely a major facet of what I find attractive in them. But I would describe their masculinity as subtle and unpretended. It just emanates from them through a congruence with their essential nature without the distortion of societal notions... but with the ability to engage in both gender roles or neither without wavering from his natural energetic signature... which is mostly masculine with some feminine, both integrated. So, his masculinity emanates from an integrity with himself as a naturally masculine oriented person, as opposed to an obligation to perform particular versions of masculinity and wearing a mask.
And there is still a hint of the "dominance" and strength that is attractive in the alpha male archetype. The alpha male becomes a latent aspect of the highly developed man who is highly developed but still has an energetic congruence with his animalistic nature. But the dominance is not domineering and just exists as a background potential... like a weapon in the holster of a really responsible person or a lion with a superior lion-tamer. Strength and the ability to protect if necessary are still attractive qualities in a man.
The core instincts still exist that polarity attracts. So, most women will be attracted to men who are centered in their masculine energy. But it won't be a brutish or immature masculinity. It will be subtle.
To allude to some men who embody this, I always imagine someone like Rupert Spira or Adyashanti when I think about subtle and unpretended masculinity. It simply is what is there, but they aren't trying to perform it. And it may seem strange to mention these men as attractive, but I find them to both be very much so.
But most of my strongest examples are men that I know from real-life who are just highly developed people who have a high degree of awareness and integrity with themselves.
I HATE Stage Green
I HATE Stage GreenWhen I was more in an Orange POV, as a child and teenager, my idea of empowerment came from the idea of the rejection of all things feminine and girly and the ability to relate to and be "one of the guys." It was a given to me that femininity was weak, and that masculinity was superior. And I was quite misogynistic as a late elementary school kid. I appreciated the thought that I was some kind of special girl that was the loophole... the only cool girl that was as good as a boy. So, on one hand I was always trying to prove myself. But I also wanted a feminine facade, so that I could be respected in that way as well. So, that I could be male on the inside and female on the outside.
When I started to transition into Green thinking as a teenager, I still had the majority Orange. But my misogynistic views lessened and I found other masculine girls (or simply girls who were not traditionally feminine) as close personal friends. So, my prejudice was toward femininity instead of girls. I respected girls who had a well-developed masculine side and felt at home with the gender non-conforming... especially as a bisexual woman. But I still had this idea that I was special because of my man-on-the-inside but woman-on-the-outside dynamic. And I did get quite a bit of respect compared to other girls my age... so it added to my ego identification with my superiority over feminine women. And at the time, I could have totally started the Red Pill movement, as so many of their beliefs I had at the time. So, even in that transition to early Green, there was still a ton of resistance to the feminine.
And as I embraced Green more and more, I became comfortable in deconstructing the notions of gender and masculinity and femininity altogether. My favorite phrase at the time was "It's a social construct" as I believed everything to be a social construct. I thought that personalities essentially sprang forth from circumstance and that no amount of nature was inherently there. I had a very "tabula rasa" idea of how people were, except in convenient circumstances when explaining homosexuality's validity to homophobes.
And I consciously rejected most gender norms, and say others that participated in gender norms as dull and "boxed in"... a slave to a social construct. And even though this resistance, I later recognized as a barrier, it helped me grow. I was able to skate circles around others who were so attached to their gender identity. I allowed myself any expression and was very experimental with my appearance, creative endeavors, and life in general. Some of my most useful personal development happened at that time.
But underneath those Green and Orange ideas, there was still lurking a natural feminine energy that was my most dominant energy. And also lurking below was the misogyny and hatred of the feminine that I had learned over the years. So, there was always an internal conflict for me, that even continues into present day.
It was only when I had my experiences of ego transcendence that I experienced the Divine Feminine and all the femininity that I had been repressing since childhood. I had related femininity to weakness because of subtle conditionings over the course of my life from the media, friends, family, school, church, etc. I didn't even notice it as it was happening, as I consciously always believed in the equality of the genders even in my most misogynistic periods. So, I had learned to reject my most dominant energy, that cut me off so much from major aspects of myself and reality.
Ever since then, I've been taking a more Green/Yellow approach to looking at issues of gender, feminine/masculine, Yin/Yang, etc. And seeing how this issue intones on many different levels into reality.
As for your Orange coming off as feminine (assuming you're a woman), this is very common for women to get really obsessed with looks at this stage. They want to be seen as feminine because, at Orange, the woman's primary societal value is as a sexual commodity and her secondary value as a worker and competitor in capitalist society. Women at this stage will try to embody both, as I did, if they are interested in social status. Plus, the desire to be seen as feminine does cross over the sexual instinct as well.
Perhaps your transition to Green illuminated this unhealthy dynamic and you became protective of yourself, because you realized that you and society was seeing you as sexual currency primarily. So, a masculine facade can help avoid that kind of attention as well as your tendency to see yourself in a limiting and dehumanizing way. Also, looking masculine is a way to seem more competent and less threatening simultaneously, even if it has a marginalizing effect to a certain degree. Men are less likely to project unpleasant things onto you, as they are unlikely to notice you that much. It's a trade off of greater discomforts for lesser discomforts.
But none of it is yet embracing true feminine power as you're just trying to mitigate various blocks to the feminine being able to be integrated into your conscious awareness and by extension the collective consciousness. That takes a lot of letting go and the cultivation of receptivity, emotional intelligence, and intuition.
I hope this helps. I definitely assumed that you're a woman, so my answer was based on that assumption. If it's not the case, my response may differ.
The rarity of Spiral Dynamics
The rarity of Spiral DynamicsI would just call it the academia paradigm. If you've been in academia or been around professional academics -- they love to think the same way, talk the same way, write the same way, dress the same way. It's group think. It's very much a specific kind of sub-culture with a shared set of values.
Sort of like how Silicon Valley has a certain kind of sub-culture, set of values, and set of assumptions about life. All of which constitutes a paradigm, POV, or interpretive framework.
Every paradigm or POV is blind to its own biases, values, and assumptions until you step out of it and observe it from the outside. Every paradigm takes itself to be the sum total of reality, which it never is because the map is never the territory, and the territory is infinite.
This is a very deep epistemic problem, not merely a problem of universities or Silicon Valley or Hollywood.
The rarity of Spiral Dynamics
The rarity of Spiral DynamicsYes and no. Part of the challenges of being in a group-think bureaucracy is that you must then follow their rules to survive in that ecosystem or risk getting excommunicated. As a result, academics often consign themselves to be slaves of the system. They are not in a position of power to challenge rules and norms, so they just end up accepting it as "reality". Of course not always. There are plenty of exceptions here and there.
But many of the most advanced humans end up leaving academia because they need a more stage Turquoise ecosystem.
It can be painful to be the biggest fish in a tiny pond. Whales need to seek the ocean and academia is like SeaWorld