Femininity & Truth (Parody of Leo's Blogpost)

[MuadDib]

On 7/27/2025 at 1:36 AM, Xonas Pitfall said:

Women, on the other hand, are socially conditioned to be kind, soft, pleasing, empathetic, and understanding. They already know what it’s like to be victimized. They know how nasty ego corruption can get, and they already hate it. Therefore, they are in a much better place to realize the truth and go beyond this "materialistic" ego-driven reality.

Look at all the current world leaders we’re accusing of child abuse, sex trafficking, music stars involved in scandals, criminals, and even spiritual gurus who use fake spiritual language to justify polyamory and sexual exploitation in cults. Consider the countless high-profile figures involved in scandals: politicians with multiple accusations of sexual misconduct or corruption, famous CEOs and business magnates exploiting workers or engaging in shady deals, grifting and insider trading, actors and musicians who abuse their power to manipulate vulnerable fans, etc. Are we really going to deny that the prevalence of these behaviors is linked to unchecked masculine power, entitlement, and ego? Who’s significantly and disproportionately involved in these actions? Men. Are we honestly suggesting that this gender is more grounded in integrity, truthfulness, and free from cheating and lying? Seriously?

The feminine is less dominated by lust, horniness, and aggression. It is impossible to seek the truth if you are overly impulsive, horny, and angry. Too much masculinity leads to hard science, materialistic thinking, power-seeking, capitalism, inequality, oppressive, and tyrannical systems. Who do you think elected Hitler, Trump, and previous tyrants and leaders? Who do you think was doing the most of the oppression throughout history? Who do you think was suppressing science and calling paranormal research and spirituality "too woo-woo" for science?

 

[Natasha Tori Maru]

@Isabella Interesting you bring up working with our monthly cleansing within the spiritual frame.

I do this also.

Resisting the process never did me any good.

Men have their cross to bear - their sexual appetite etc. Harnessing that can be powerful for them.

I am not sure they also comprehend women's monthly cycle. One week of pain, malaise, bloating, dysphoria. Two weeks of AWESOME. Then another week of emotional dysregulation, altered states, depression, body pain. Effectively 2 weeks of endurance for a woman, 2 weeks of pain and suffering out of every month. Of course - your mileage may vary  

Really, within the truth-seeking realm - working WITH these different states is great as all different times illuminate a different part of the ego to work with, at different phases of the cycle.

Edited Friday at 03:56 AM by Natasha Tori Maru

[Xonas Pitfall]

I should start making unhinged Actualized.org parody posts anytime Leo is being naughty. I'll pretend to be a 👧🏻 Girl Boss Babe˚˖𓍢🌷✧˚.🎀⋆, femininity-promoting, biased spiritual leader sharing "profound" insights. I must BONK! 🔨💥🏏

[Xonas Pitfall]

[Monke]

women totally underestimate the sheer difficultly of navigating reality as a man. There are some good points here but women often forget that the tier 1 ego needs that men fight for (sex, resources, status) are freely given to a large percentage of women with zero effort. It doesn't require years of grinding work for a beautiful woman to be valued highly. She won't understand the lived experience of being completely non-valued by your social ecosystem.

The criticisms of men here are not without some merit, but these are true only of men that get stuck in ego and survival "needs" based thinking without being able to transcend it. The current socioeconomic situation has made it much harder for men to transcend this in a way that is attractive to women. Traditional careers are becoming wastelands of quiet desperation and skewing the dating curve further towards the few men that are able to escape and transcend survival. 

This is why things like escaping wage slavery are so crucially important for men. The struggle to beat the game of survival and transcend it is the essence of how you attract a woman. This is why agreeable nice guys are repulsive to women. They have a bad survival strategy.

The man women want is the one who transcends but fully integrates tier 1, but they have no clue how difficult it is for him to do that 

Society rewards men for devilry 

Edited Friday at 06:16 PM by Monke

[Isabella]

@Natasha Tori Maru Totally agree!!

And I think that for men, it's painful to let go of sexual opportunities in the name of truth. I happen to be extremely satisfied with my imagination and powerful orgasms. Honestly, it's harder than ever to find a guy that knows how to please a woman, I mean I know we can teach them how to do it, but it takes time... building trust, connection and overall, it's just easier, whenever I have the urge, I use my mind, and I can come in such an incredible way, I mean, better than I've ever experienced with any guy, and I have to mention that my ex boyfriend really knew hot to use his fingers and tongue, I had amazing experiences with him, but lately, just like Leo experiments with 5 meo dmt , I've been experimenting with orgasms lately and they are just getting better and better! The sole idea of being with a man is purposeless.

And what you mention about using the cycle as spiritual work is so profoundly true!!!! I can describe it as living as an observer or a witness, of fluctuations within Consciousness, one week is pure fire, sexual, fierce, wild, and it's mostly about being horny 24/7 like an animal, maybe like men are 95 % of the time.  Another week is all about emotions, and it's like being on psychedelics, colors, emotions, things are way more vivid and intense. Other week it's all about insights, and I can describe it like egoless, because that week I don't give a fuck about anything, everything that made sense in the past, it's suddenly purposeless and I can shine with truth, just absolute truth, don't know how to describe it, it's like being tipsy and earie fairy, like I'm flying but not really haha. An then the only week where we can be "normal" that's when we feel more active and powerful, but our intuition is less present. AND while on psychdelics, depending on your cycle, you will also understand Truth from different aspects. So, I don't agree that it's easier for men to achieve Truth, I think it's the same for both genders, but since Leo is not a woman, he is a different creature literally speaking, it's like a monkey trying to understand what being an eagle is like, it's impossible!!! 

SO NO, Truth is not easier for men, it's just DIFFERENT. 

[Natasha Tori Maru]

23 minutes ago, Isabella said:

And what you mention about using the cycle as spiritual work is so profoundly true!!!! I can describe it as living as an observer or a witness, of fluctuations within Consciousness, one week is pure fire, sexual, fierce, wild, and it's mostly about being horny 24/7 like an animal, maybe like men are 95 % of the time.  Another week is all about emotions, and it's like being on psychedelics, colors, emotions, things are way more vivid and intense. Other week it's all about insights, and I can describe it like egoless, because that week I don't give a fuck about anything, everything that made sense in the past, it's suddenly purposeless and I can shine with truth, just absolute truth, don't know how to describe it, it's like being tipsy and earie fairy, like I'm flying but not really haha. An then the only week where we can be "normal" that's when we feel more active and powerful, but our intuition is less present. AND while on psychdelics, depending on your cycle, you will also understand Truth from different aspects. So, I don't agree that it's easier for men to achieve Truth, I think it's the same for both genders, but since Leo is not a woman, he is a different creature literally speaking, it's like a monkey trying to understand what being an eagle is like, it's impossible!!! 

SO NO, Truth is not easier for men, it's just DIFFERENT. 

You describe my experience and spiritual work very well! 

Working with the tides 🙃

[enchanted]

22 hours ago, Isabella said:

@Xonas Pitfall @enchantedY es YES YES AND YES!! and you forgot to mention, that during our cycle we experience different states of consciousness. During our period, we tend to retreat into ourselves, and if done correctly, we can have insights into the nature of reality. I didn't know it was possible, because no one taught me how to do this, but we can reach enlightenment or awakening as easy as men do. Let's not forget that we are also in tune with our bodies and emotions, so navigating through them is a piece of cake for us. I say this from my own experience. AND let's not forget orgasms!!!! MAN, If only Leo knew what women go through during an orgasm. Le me tell you a trip report from an orgasm I had when I was 14, I was masturbating in my bathroom, and suddenly I came, but everything went completely dark, there was no self anymore, and for a few seconds I was completely terrified because I disappeared completely and I swore I could feel my body melting into the texture of reality. Then of course, everything came back to normal, but this was my first encounter with divinity, in my bathroom, no drugs, just my fingers and clit. Amazing experience. During my research with orgasms, I can tell you there are several categories of orgasms, there are those that bring relief and they usually help women to sleep better. But then there are Divine Orgasms, because during those brief moments of ecstasy, you can have mystical encounters with the Ultimate Reality, and I have a feeling mystics from the past knew this could happen to women. 

Why this happens? who knows!! But please give me an example of a direct contact with God without drugs, and as direct and fast as an orgasm but for men. Go ahead, I'll wait.

 

Lol,a trip report from an orgasm 🤣

[Xonas Pitfall]

More Debunks!

https://www.actualized.org/insights/why-masculinity-values-truth-more

Quote

The masculine and the feminine do not have a symmetrical relationship to truth. Yet the general public assumes the relationship is symmetrical. But remember, nowhere in the universe is it writ that men and women should have equal access to truth. There may be important survival reasons why the masculine orientation has easier access to truth than the feminine. I propose that’s the case.

Okay... let's analyze!  

Quote

The most important psychological difference between the masculine and feminine is that the feminine prefers to prioritize feelings above truth — to make others feel loved. The masculine prefers the opposite. If you put a woman in a position to tell a child something truthful but hurtful, the woman will look for a way to soften the blow to save the child’s feelings, including distortion or lying. This difference in attitude is obviously not arbitrary nor trivial. This tradeoff is necessary for mothering, for raising children. But, notice, this is a bias borne of survival. Survival places the feminine at a natural disadvantage with truth. Of course, this is a tradeoff. The feminine gains in other areas, so it’s not all bad for them.

The idea that 'men value truth and women value feelings' is easily debunked by looking at women’s history (or frankly, any minority or repressed group). If men were truly high-value truth seekers, why did they feel the need to enslave, suppress, and exclude women from higher education, the workforce, and other knowledge-seeking and expanding opportunities? If valuing truth was so natural to them, why not just ask women what they wanted and fulfill their truth as well? You can’t claim to value truth if it’s only when it aligns with your perspective and serves your interests. There are many more arguments later that I’ll make that show men care about the truth only when it suits them emotionally. A true truth seeker would want others to seek truth too, to be enlightened as well. They would create systems that support this spiritual journey, not lock their students away next to washing machines or by the kitchen stove.

And if you use the argument that 'those are just the corrupt men,' that's silly. You can't nitpick like that. I could throw a curveball and say, 'Oh, well, the only truly 'real' women are highly spiritual, intelligent, and rational women who are both in tune with their logic and emotions, every other woman is corrupt! She's not a valid representation of the feminine!' But that’s not how it works. You have to own the *truth* of all expressions of your gender and look at it rationally and *truthfully*. If your gender is disproportionately responsible for things like war, power struggles, greed, manipulation, oppression, and sexual exploitation when in power, then one should seriously question how truthful masculinity is by nature.

Quote

Truth is more important to men because men require truth to be effective. Women need effectiveness less since their organic role is to raise children. Raising children requires trading off effectiveness for warmth. Women also require more social enmeshment for survival more than men. Which is why women have higher social skills. Women are more socially intelligent, and warmth and kindness is more effective for social survival. A woman is less able to survive solo than a man.

Truth is not the same as effectiveness; in fact, they are often opposites. Survival is not inherently about truth. Sure, they can be correlated, but the fact that men are physically stronger and can bend, control, dominate, and threaten reality more than women might actually make them more prone to being untruthful. “Oh, I see… I'm the most powerful, alright! I’ll use the truth to my advantage and create my own version of reality.” It’s easy to manipulate the truth to build a spiritual cult, convince women to worship you, sleep with you, and brainwash them all. It’s effective for the ego, right? That’s how “truth” can be twisted into something that serves personal gain rather than genuine reality. 

I’m sure I don’t need to remind you how many men throughout history have created cults, ideologies, and religions to manipulate and misuse the truth. You can be aware of the truth, but if you twist it to deceive others, how truly aligned with the truth are you? If men were genuine, pure truth-seekers or enlightened gurus, they would seek to enlighten everyone, regardless of race, gender, or age. But history clearly shows us that this is the complete opposite of what’s actually happened.

Quote

Which is why women are attracted to good providers.

Also, you do realize this goes full circle, right? If you say women value men because they are truthful, that means women value truthfulness and pragmatism.

But what do men value? Emotionally, they often seek softness, something smaller, younger, and less likely to threaten their ego. They want someone who won’t be too disagreeable, someone who won’t challenge them or tell them how it is, but will follow blindly, subserviently, and boost their ego, "Oh, my king!". Hmm?  How strange... It’s curious how this all comes full circle, almost like men are the ones who need a partner to be deluded, feeding into their own delusions. If femininity really is this delusional, unintelligent, and irrational behavior, why are they so attracted to it?

Quote

Men require effectiveness in order to be providers. Winning a war for your tribe requires that you prioritize brutal truth over warmth and feelings. There is no room for compassion and empathy in war. Nor in business, which is just war by other means. Business leaders require making brutal, cold, calculated, rational decisions. Business leadership is a masculine game. Not that women cannot play it, but any woman doing it starts to act in a masculine way. Businesswomen are basically men with vaginas. They sacrifice femininity for success and effectiveness. They learn to be cold and ruthless in order to compete. This is most noticeable at the highest business positions where billions and trillions of dollars are at stake. I’m talking about Fortune 500 companies, not small mom-and-pop shops where ruthlessness is not needed. It’s easy to remain feminine while running a mom-and-pop shop, not so much if you’re running Walmart, Exxon-Mobile, Lockheed Martin, Microsoft, the Pentagon, the CIA, or Syria.

This is why the masculine values truth more than the feminine. The feminine outsources effectiveness to the provider, the man. Women don’t need to care about truth as much as men because they have men handle the bloodiest truths for them. But if all women had to wage wars and lead billion dollar corporations, they would care about truth a lot more. Because truth is needed to be effective. Placing feelings over truth makes you ineffective at raw survival. However, it makes you highly effective at human relations and social survival.

Effectiveness ≠ Truth

If anything, I could flip this argument. The world often rewards men for how brutal, manipulative, and devilish they can be, essentially for their ability to dominate and bend reality. By nature, survival, and design, they are more likely to become liars, cheaters, and ego-driven, often falling down a corrupt path. I don’t want to repeat myself, but this issue goes both ways. If I saw statistically that men were more aligned with the truth of reality and fighting for it, while women were lost in delusions with their astrology and crystals, sure, that could be one thing. But that’s not the case. What we’re really seeing is human ego and greed playing out on both sides. Men often come to terms with the brutal truth of reality, yet instead of helping, they exploit the system for their gain, creating more manipulative industries, crypto scams, sex cults, harmful ideologies, and pyramid schemes, rather than contributing to something meaningful.

Let’s flip the argument again: consider that women are often most vulnerable to their very mating partners, who are their natural predators in many ways. This is a hard, cold reality to face. The question is: Who faces the harshest truths in nature, the predator or the prey? Who’s more painfully aware of reality? The one who has the power to tear apart, or the one who’s constantly aware they can be torn apart at any second?

On the topic of business:

Research shows that, on average, men take more risks than women, both physically and financially, which may help explain why female-led companies often have steadier, long-term growth. MSCI reported that companies led by women saw 10‑point better returns on equity over time. Male-led companies may pursue faster growth, but often at the cost of higher risk and volatility. In contrast, female-led companies often achieve more sustained and stable growth. During crises like the pandemic, firms led by women were perceived as less risky, had better credit quality, and weathered downturns more reliably than male-led firms. A large-scale study of nearly 99,400 global firms found that companies led by women consistently outperformed male-led ones on exploitation metrics, such as productivity, innovation, and capacity utilization, but showed lower growth in sales and aggressive expansion behaviors like asset acquisition.

Men are much more likely to punch, attack, or street fight, whereas women are more likely to express crying, issues, or vulnerability; both of these are impulsive, non-stoic expressions, not grounded, logical approaches.

Quote

In a war, getting to the truth is a matter of life and death and requires torturing people. Which is why men do the warring and the torturing, not the women. If a woman was placed in charge of a war, she would not be ruthless enough to win it. Or, if she became ruthless enough to win it, she would do it by sacrificing her femininity. War turns a woman into a man. Any brutal life-and-death survival situation will turn a woman into a man. Because it’s easier to survive that way.

Being ruthless and warlike has very little to do with actual enlightenment or truth. It's much more of a Stage Red argument. If you look at the average yogi or monk, they often embody qualities that might be considered more feminine: calm, peaceful, non-ruthless, patient, detached from material reality, and distant from war. But of course, you could flip these definitions and argue that they’re also very masculine in their stoicism, emotional detachment, independence, and resilience. In reality, they embody both qualities.

The core argument is this: yes, you might be forced to confront harsher truths, but that doesn’t mean you necessarily value or appreciate them more. And again, I’m not convinced that men are more compelled to value truth. Think about all the victimization, abuse, torture, and rape that women endure, and their overwhelming helplessness in the face of it. That can be just as awakening as any brutal reality check; it’s an intense, harsh truth of its own.

Truth certainly demands the harshness of reality, but it also often requires safety and privilege to even access it. Buddha, for instance, could only retreat to a cave because he already had every material need taken care of. He had the privilege of detachment from survival. So, in that sense, I could argue that men, being more occupied with survival, might have less mental and emotional space to engage with spirituality. Women, on the other hand, might have more time to be spiritually aware or reflective because they’re less consumed by the demands of physical survival.

Science, rationality, pragmatism, empiricism, logic, and systematization are what you get when you focus solely on those aspects of reality. That’s why ‘mystics’ and highly open-minded individuals, who weren’t afraid to explore the paranormal, undefined, and more 'chaotic', often ‘feminine’ parts of reality, were needed to make greater scientific breakthroughs.

It’s also funny how liberalism is viewed here as a more progressive and correct view, yet if I ask some hardcore, masculine, grungy redneck, they'd say liberalism is for 'pussy beta cucks' and that you're not a real man if you hold that perspective! This means conservatism is seen as largely more masculine, not liberal; yet somehow, the feminine is considered the higher perspective? In fact, if an objective alien were to observe both from a non-partisan perspective, they’d probably conclude that conservatism feels more masculine, while liberalism feels more feminine.

I could argue: "Oh! Men are often more likely to get stuck in the endless pursuit of self-preservation, resource gathering, and power hunger, remaining in stages like Red or Orange in terms of consciousness. On the other hand, women are more likely to be in Stage Green, which is more focused on community, empathy, and interconnectedness. This puts them in a much better position to access higher levels of consciousness, like Tier 2 (Yellow, Turquoise, etc.), where a more holistic and integrative worldview can emerge!"

Quote

Yes, war requires lots of lying and deception. That should be obvious you if you follow my work. But what’s less obvious is that war also demands truth. Without truth you cannot win a war and you cannot succeed in business, because your plans and actions must align with harsh external realities. You must know the objective truth about the battlefield, about your enemies, about the marketplace, about the terrain. If you delude yourself about your competition, your competition will bury you. If you delude yourself about your environment, the environment will swallow you alive like the African jungle, like the turbulent ocean. How many commanders, explorers, generals were swallowed by the Earth, never to be heard from again? A truthful map is life, a fictitious map is death.

But what’s less obvious is that love also demands truth. Without truth, you cannot truly love or care for another person, especially children. Your emotions, intentions, and actions must align with the reality of the person you care about, their needs, their struggles, and their growth.

If you delude yourself about your partner, you risk losing them. If you ignore the truth about your children's needs, their development, their struggles, you’ll fail them. The world of relationships, like the battlefield or business, demands an honest view of the reality you’re in. If you deceive yourself about your partner's feelings or your children's needs, you’ll lose your connection to them. Love that is built on fiction, on denial or self-deception, is ultimately fragile and unsustainable. True love is rooted in an honest understanding of each other, where both parties are seen clearly, without distortion.

Why is it often the men who are absent from their children's lives? Why do so many men end up with second families, struggle with fidelity, rely heavily on porn, or constantly demean and compare their partners? Why is the domestic violence rate so much higher? Why is it that so many men show so little interest in their partners' lives and needs? It’s almost a sad, ironic meme at this point: dads forgetting holidays, birthdays, or missing parent-teacher conferences. It's like society has normalized this neglect, turning it into a joke. Why is this behavior so common? 

You can’t selectively value truth. If you only care about the truth on the battlefield but ignore it when it comes to loving your family, then you don’t actually care about the truth; you care about fueling your ego. You want to be the hero, the protector, the savior, the cool, edgy, tough soldier. If you can’t be truthful with the people you love, then you're just living in a delusion of your own making.

Quote

The more someone else handles your survival for you, provides for you, protects you — the less you need to worry about truth. Adults insulate children from truth. Women use men to insulate themselves from truth (generally speaking). And 1st world welfare states insulate people at large from truth. You will never care more about truth than when you live 100% solo. When your survival is 100% your responsibility, when there is no supermarket, no gas station, no restaurant, no restroom, no hospital around the corner — you will get real serious about truth. This explains why citizens of 1st world democracies are some of the most delusional people, spoiled by abundance of social infrastructure. When all you do is live off your daddy’s wealth, play video games, scroll through TikTok, and smoke weed with friends, you don’t need to care about truth. But if you are trying to build a conscious business from scratch that advances mankind with zero safety-net, truth is your master.

I agree to some extent, but if men were truly these high-level truth-seekers, why are so many of them avoiding socializing, depressed, constantly playing video games, and spending their time debating their favorite ideologies on online forums? If masculinity is so deeply connected to truth, shouldn’t we see a clear discrepancy between how this "Gen Z modern" lifestyle is affecting men vs. women?

Also, if women were so desperate for someone to take care of them, why do we see female ideologies pushing for pro-choice, higher education, delayed marriage, the 4B movement, women in business, and advocating for more and more independence? If femininity is so reliant on being taken care of, desperately wanting to stay in "La La Land", wouldn’t these movements reflect that?

It’s also curious that many men complain about women not being subservient enough, while women are clearly pushing for greater autonomy. Does this really follow the path of a "truth seeker"? And when we look at voting patterns, who do you think elected Trump? The gender disparity in voting is massive, and it tells a very different story about what genders currently value. Men often complain that women are too vulgar, not sweet, soft, as easily influenced, or feminine enough. They point out how women are out-earning them and have more ambition. Meanwhile, women tend to prefer when their guy is more direct and straightforward. So, who here really seems to value truth more? And who is trying to protect their ego from being hurt? It’s clear that the ones pushing for softness and maintaining their ego might be more concerned with image than truth.

Quote

So, anyways, this is the ultimate reason why there have traditionally been more male gurus and enlightened masters. Because what woman is going to leave her newborn children behind to seek enlightenment in a cave? That action is far more suitable for a man than a woman. To prioritize truth over everything and everyone else — is a hell of a thing, and it comes more naturally to men than women. Of course female mystics, yogis, and nuns exist. And there are witches and fortune-tellers. But my general point stands.

How is this a good point for men?

Imagine if we flipped the scenario: women are far more suited for truth because which woman would go fight a war to protect her family? That action is far more suitable for a man than a woman. To prioritize truth over everything and everyone else is a hell of a thing, and it comes more naturally to women than men. That’s why nature allowed men to be stronger, to fight and protect, while women focus on spirituality, doing their yoga and witchcraft. 

Who’s really facing the true, harsh reality of survival here? The one who’s protecting something so vulnerable, just after giving birth, in a jungle, while struggling to keep a newborn alive? It's funny how convenient it is to abandon your wife and children in the name of "spiritual seeking," and then turn around and claim she’s the delusional one.

You can’t flip-flop and nit-pick these arguments. You can’t say men are "more hardcore" because they go to war "Grrr... raw survival, pragmatism, guns, bombs, aghhh!" and value truth for that, but then say that they leave their families to go sit in a cave, abandoning the women to take on the brutal, life-or-death responsibility of caring for the child. How does that make sense? How does that follow? It should take zero brain cells to realize that nurturing a newborn, especially after experiencing the death-risking potential of pregnancy, is extremely hardcore. To assume that women don’t value truth in order to survive is simply naive.

In fact, the history of countless men, many of whom were intellectual, spiritual, or simply able to sit in caves for years, contemplating mathematical problems, highlights the privileged and cushy survival conditions they had. Meanwhile, most women were immediately thrust into roles where they had to please their husbands and work to ensure their own survival. On top of that, they were often viewed as prizes or targets in war, subjected to rape, torture, and sexual exploitation. To claim that women lived in some sort of airy, protected survival fantasy is a narrow, myopic perspective.

Edited Saturday at 11:34 PM by Xonas Pitfall

[Emerald]

@Xonas Pitfall It seems to me that the perspectives that Leo shares about men and women are just a way for him to feel like he's a member of the superior team... and also because he seems to fear the Feminine and has little respect for and understanding of the Feminine principle.

I'd take his perspectives on men and women about as seriously as a white supremacist who waxes poetic about how white people are more aligned to truth than black people. It's clearly not true. You can look around the world and see that people of all genders and racial backgrounds have a variety of different relationships to truth. But the concept of white supremacy it's a feel-good narrative for those who are hyper-identified with the white identity... and belonging with the white supremacist in-group.

The same exact thing is true with gender supremacists. It doesn't matter what's true. What matters is that they get to be the superior ones in their own mind.

And the vast majority of men are just as muddied as the next person when it comes to perceiving what's true, because men (like everyone else) also have worldviews and identities to cling onto. And it's primarily the preservation of the identity/worldview that muddies the waters to truth in the first place.

And when there's an ego to preserve, every human person will unconsciously lie to themselves to blot out the truth that might undermine their ego. And the more attached one is to an identity, the more distortion filters there will be that prevent that person from seeing the truth.

It's only when a person is able to look beyond and detach from the identity and worldview that the perception of truth becomes non-threatening... and one can perceive it more easily.

And I see zero evidence that men are less attached to their identity and worldview compared to women. So, while many men might speak with less tact than women do when interacting with other people, that's not an indicator of a person being capable of perceiving truth.

The real indicator of how well someone can perceive truth is the degree to how much one can surrender to uncomfortable truths about themselves and reality. 

And let's be real. Hypothetically, if Leo did come across some solid evidence that women were superior truth-seekers compared to men... do you think he would have acknowledged it and make an article about it?

Or do you think he would find some way that that evidence doesn't count and rationalize it away?

My money is on the latter.

Edited Sunday at 01:14 AM by Emerald

[Xonas Pitfall]

8 hours ago, Emerald said:

 It seems to me that the perspectives that Leo shares about men and women are just a way for him to feel like he's a member of the superior team... and also because he seems to fear the Feminine and has little respect for and understanding of the Feminine principle.

I'd take his perspectives on men and women about as seriously as a white supremacist who waxes poetic about how white people are more aligned to truth than black people. It's clearly not true. You can look around the world and see that people of all genders and racial backgrounds have a variety of different relationships to truth. But the concept of white supremacy it's a feel-good narrative for those who are hyper-identified with the white identity... and belonging with the white supremacist in-group.

Yes! 

Although I’m not sure if it's unconscious or conscious. The reason I have the energy to write all this out is because I’ve seen it far too many times with people I’ve considered highly intelligent. The issue of ingrained misogyny and gender wars is so deeply embedded that it seems to be highly persuasive, even for independent thinkers. I think I was just shocked to see it (Leo included). I’ve known both men and women, and I can tell you these were extremely independent, almost disagreeable thinkers who refuse to succumb to the status quo and unoriginal thought. Yet, they still have and believe in these worldviews, which slip into their psyche through the arguments they make and the comments they pass. That’s when I realized this isn’t necessarily an issue of independent thinking; sometimes these things are just so deeply ingrained that it’s hard to break free from them. You need heavy reframing and alternative arguments to break out of them.

So my guess is that Leo likely has a lot of these unconscious biases, and maybe he’s also attracted to a specific type of "feminine" woman, which filters his perception. I also find it funny that men often ignore or claim that women they’re not attracted to are “not feminine” and are instead more “masculine.” It’s a strange double standard. I know plenty of men who are masculine but whom I’m just not attracted to or who aren’t my type. I remember Leo talking about one of his girlfriends who was neurodivergent or had Asperger’s (I think?), and he called her “masculine” because she wasn’t overly dramatic or emotional, and it was one of his most functional and calm relationships he has ever had. That’s a funny remark to make, "Oh, she’s not going too crazy, so she must be more like a guy!" I don’t know where this stigma came from that any woman who isn’t emotionally unstable or who can think rationally is somehow more “manly.” If you subconsciously believe this, then, of course, you’re going to think men are the more stoic, truth-seeking ones.

There are obviously a lot more points I’ve brought up above, but Leo’s arguments in both of those posts were extremely myopic. It’s also funny how he completely neglects the fact that most of the people he called untruthful, biased, and narcissistic in his blog were not women at all. And his dear friend Trump… well, of course, we completely forget about these men, they aren’t "real" men. But if a woman acted like Trump, she’d be a true woman, right? She’d only do what she "feeeeeeeels like doing," such a drama queen breaking up with Elon on Twitter... tsk, tsk, tsk!

My hope is that the more powerful arguments and reframing strategies I (We) find, the easier it will be to break down this deeply ingrained issue. That's why I think parodies can be a great tool for this: if you can poke at egos and show them how silly they can be in a way that makes them realize it themselves, you might start to see a few lightbulb moments here and there. But who knows, shrug shrug!

Men are just as emotional and deeply ingrained in their egos as anyone else. Trump, Andrew Tate, tyrants, and narcissistic world leaders are perfect examples of what happens when masculinity goes too far. The difference is that when women are irrational or emotional, it’s more overt; we see them cry, whine, be hurt, or vulnerable, which makes it more recognizable. With men, it's often more covert because they aren't "allowed" to express their emotions as openly. Instead of seeing a guy cry when he's rejected, you might see him do a complete 180 and call the woman a slut or a bitch, or act like she wasn’t good enough for him anyway. Instead of admitting loneliness, he might start a Reddit or 4chan red-pill movement. Instead of admitting he feels powerless and wants to feel superior, he creates a whole ideology where his race, gender, or beliefs are supreme, and everyone else should be suppressed, subjugated, or worse. He so desperately clings to finding some rational argument to justify it, trying to make it seem "objective, sensible, reasonable, and rational." Even Leo's posts are a perfect example of this, so much writing justifying his bias.

Essentially, since emotions aren't overtly allowed for the masculine, they have to find ways to covertly or indirectly express them, often using other "masculine" tools like rationale, anger, domination, fighting, and status games to validate and justify their emotions. This pattern is something I see everywhere, all the time.

It really feels like we’re forgetting that we’re all human, with fragile egos. Ego follows emotion. How is it that men suddenly seem like these alien creatures, detached from it all? It’s absurd.

Quote

And when there's an ego to preserve, every human person will unconsciously lie to themselves to blot out the truth that might undermine their ego. And the more attached one is to an identity, the more distortion filters there will be that prevent that person from seeing the truth.

It's only when a person is able to look beyond and detach from the identity and worldview that the perception of truth becomes non-threatening... and one can perceive it more easily.

And I see zero evidence that men are less attached to their identity and worldview compared to women. So, while many men might speak with less tact than women do when interacting with other people, that's not an indicator of a person being capable of perceiving truth.

Just as you said, exactly!

It’s honestly hilarious how men will openly say, "Oh, just appeal to my ego, teehee ;-)," and even take pride in it, giving tips to women like, “Show him respect, cater to his ego.” They’ll overtly admit they love their egos being stroked, yet still somehow believe this won’t cloud their judgment or put them in a biased state. And then they turn around and claim masculinity is all about pure rationality and unbiased truth-seeking. Leo himself said, "Ego is the little devil on our shoulder." It’s almost like they’re completely blind to how much their ego influences their perceptions.

Catering to the ego makes "logical" sense in terms of survival. But survival, in the spiritual or enlightened sense, isn’t about feeding the ego. It’s actually about letting go of it, transcending it, and embracing things like love, compassion, beauty, and the pursuit of purity. All these things are often stereotypically feminine. But for some reason, they keep getting brushed aside.

I think this is where a lot of the "flaw" happens: men are seen as more rational in terms of pushing their survival agenda, and to the ego, this seems like the most rational, smart, pragmatic, and truthful thing to do. But again, we are forgetting that spirituality is not about the ego. So, you cannot claim that what the ego finds to be true is the actual truth.

Edited Sunday at 09:38 AM by Xonas Pitfall

[theleelajoker]

You mentioned gender war and I see it a lot, going both ways. A lot of emphasis on differences and superiority instead of appreciating the differences and leaning from each other. 

Don't know how representative it is, but I was lucky to have an 2 years older sister with whom I have a great relationship. So for me it was normal since my birth to learn from a woman, and to have a woman around me that a) was not my mother and b) not interesting for me beyond her being my sister. (It can be hard to keep friendships between m-f if there is attraction)

Men often seem too insecure to learn from women while for me it often was a "jackpot" to learn from female friends, girlfriends, family: Free knowledge? Different perspective? Experiences I don't have access to? Amazing, tell me, show me

If I had to name one thing that I learned through the women I met in my life, then it's intuition. Seeing how they do and them putting me in touch with mine.

If I had to name one thing I believe I could put women more in touch with, it's a vibe of clarity and calmness. Not to prove that I am detached or stoic, just balancing the energies. And to pass on calmness, I need to be clam myself of course. (Not saying that I'm calm or have clarity all the time, but it's something I sometimes can tap into to create a comfortable vibe.)

So, to put a positive touch on the whole gender stuff:

What did or do you learn as a man from women? And vice versa, what you learn as a woman from men? Where do you experience synergy effects?

 

PS: A quote comes to mind.

Audre Lorde: 'It is not our differences that divide us. It is our inability to recognize, accept, and celebrate those differences.'

She said it more in a context of racism, but I believe it perfectly fits in gender stuff, too