Emerald

Reflecting on my relationship to this forum...

204 posts in this topic

20 hours ago, Inliytened1 said:

That's incredible.  As a man I've always had a sensitive side. Heck - I cried a few minutes ago about @Yimpa she brought me to tears because of the warmth she brings here which I've always known.  And now she is making a gender transition.  I guess im one of the lucky ones as a guy that can tap into the Feminine.   But that only truly bloomed  after my enlightenment.   Prior to that I had built up a wall.  To where there was no penetrating it. All of my emotions were tucked behind this wall.  That's what made my enlightenment so liberating.   Now I cry on a dime.  That sensitivity I feel now so freely I would like  your thoughts on how that plays into the deep Feminine. 

:x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, How to be wise said:

@Emerald Is it only me, or was this forum more spiritual 6 years ago?

It was moreso when he first started the forum. It was a very different online culture.


Are you struggling with self-sabotage and CONSTANTLY standing in the way of your own success? 

If so, and if you're looking for an experienced coach to help you discover and resolve the root of the issue, you can click this link to schedule a free discovery call with me to see if my program is a good fit for you.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Emerald said:

It was moreso when he first started the forum. It was a very different online culture.

I'm no longer seeing the focus on enlightenment that this forum was filled with 6-8 years ago


"Not believing your own thoughts, you’re free from the primal desire: the thought that reality should be different than it is. You realise the wordless, the unthinkable. You understand that any mystery is only what you yourself have created. In fact, there’s no mystery. Everything is as clear as day. It’s simple, because there really isn’t anything. There’s only the story appearing now. And not even that.” — Byron Katie

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/21/2025 at 2:07 PM, questionreality said:

First of all, you keep describing your ayahuasca visions and symbolic interpretations as "direct firsthand experiences of the Feminine" but that’s not actually what "direct experience" means.

What you experienced was internal imagery and emotional states, which you interpreted through the lenses of Yin/Yang, Jungian archetypes, mythology, Taoism, and your existing ideas about the feminine.

That's a personal spiritual experience but it is not direct experience of some external metaphysical feminine principle. You interpreted the symbolic content (that your mind produced) through the frameworks you already believe in. 

This is no different than members of Santo Daime who claim to see and meet Jesus during their ayahuasca trips. They all interpret it as direct experience and contact with Jesus.

In both these cases, the experience is internal, generated by the mind and is shaped by pre-existing beliefs and cultural symbols.

The issue is that you are mixing an internal experience with an external metaphysical claim.

(Just in case, I am not a materialist, have done my share of psychedelics including 5-meo, etc) 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And now back to the main point.

You keep redefining "femininity" itself in a way that removes it entirely from the real world.

You’ve shifted femininity from something observable in human behavior into a cosmic, mystical, archetypal force that only exists in symbolic visions and psychedelic states.

That’s your personal metaphysical belief, and you’re free to hold it.

But once you define femininity as:

- non-empirical

-unmeasurable

-inaccessible to observation

-rooted in altered states and mythology

-something "culture gets wrong" by default

-something only available through symbolic interpretation

Then you’re no longer talking about femininity as it actually exists in human societies. You’re talking about a private spiritual cosmology.

And that cosmology has no ability to explain or even acknowledge the very real cultural differences in feminine expression that my original point was about.

It’s metaphysical, personal, and symbolic, which is fine, but it can’t be used to dismiss or override real-world patterns of femininity.

So when you label cultural, behavioral femininity as "patriarchy costumes", what you’re really doing is rejecting anything that doesn’t fit your mystical model.

I was talking about femininity as it shows up in actual women in actual cultures.

You’re talking about femininity as an archetypal force that you experienced in your psychedelic journeys.

Those two things are completely different, and it just means we’re discussing different subjects entirely - with respect. 

I can see what you mean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now