Reflecting on my relationship to this forum...

[Emerald]

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.

[How to be wise]

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

[UnbornTao]

On 21/11/2025 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 - referring to the interpretation part.

Edited November 24 by UnbornTao

[Human Mint]

Men are wired to be masculine, is not simply a "bad structure of our society". As a man you need to do a conscious effort to integrate your femenine side, which is super healthy, heals wounds, makes you more succesful and less irritable.

I want to point the downside of too much femininity though: very easy to manipulate. So men are wired to be masculine because of survival.