Teal swan - what a woman needs from a man in a relationship

[Hulia]

59 minutes ago, zeroISinfinity said:

But will say this as man,if your gf looks so different then you indeed have that manly sense of conquering, atleast for me. This way I also avoid potential clinginess she and I might instinctivly feel if we are look alikes. Which will fill out relationship with more sex and more time before real bonding and intimacy happens.Unfamiliar and unknown subconciosly for both. 

Ineteresting. Rather complicated shceme  . But I don´t see, how clingines should keep you and her off sex? Shouldn´t be the opposite true? 

Why do you apply this tricky strathegy? Do you think because of illusion of control?

[zeroISinfinity]

7 minutes ago, Hulia said:

Ineteresting. Rather complicated shceme  . But I don´t see, how clingines should keep you and her off sex? Shouldn´t be the opposite true? 

No it doesn't keep us away from sex. Hahaha, it makes it even better. 

I don't like overly clingy women or people at all. I like to be leader and to be free and I always feel like losing it. Also so much being invested into relationship makes me to feel weaker as man. Like some sort of overindulgance. Sugar is sweet but to much of it ruins your health. So not needy at all quite the oposite. 

Quote

Why do you apply this tricky strathegy? Do you think because of illusion of control?

It's tricky, literaly is strategy based on my own selfish desires and needs. I admit that ain't no like @Emerald which will justify her stuff. 

[zeroISinfinity]

Will just say next thing. 

With all this spiritual/emotional nonsense and desire that your ego must be fed you are literally drowning your own man whom you "love". 

Edited March 11, 2021 by zeroISinfinity

[Emerald]

1 hour ago, Gesundheit said:

Sounds like you're trying to challenge me and prove me wrong, which you've projected onto me earlier. It seems like an accurate shot in the foot.

Now, the mere fact that you even ask to hear about my experiences shows how shallow you've gone. I am not sure what it is exactly that you want to hear or even how it would affect your perception of me.

What you're missing is that epistemology is far more important than experience, because you can have all the experiences in the world and still misinterpret them. Not that I don't have the experience (btw, I would be more than happy to tell you all about my experience in private if you are genuinely interested), but that I don't cling to it as absolute truth without first examining and refining it with proper epistemology. The insights themselves are the proof, not the other way around. And as a matter of fact, I've already given you insights that you had no access to before, and in some cases still don't. For example, I've already shown you how selfish all humans are, when you initially assumed that only males are selfish. Another example is the bunch of epistemological errors that you've fell into regarding psychology. Not that I'm trying to convince you of my "high" level. I am not trying to sell you ideology here. Contemplate what I say impartially, and maybe you will realize the truth in it.

I'm sorry, but you haven't displayed any firsthand experience with these things, nor have you shown that you have a solid grasp on the epistemology.

I'd be more that willing to hear you out if you had something to substantial to share as I would with anyone. But I'm not going to DM you. If you want to share truth/wisdom with others as you claim, then go ahead. 

Also, you're still continuing with the condescending talk. Saying "I've already given you insights that you nod no access to before and in some cases still don't" and then not backing that claim up with anything is very unearned. If you want to convince me that you have deeper truths/wisdom (which you don't really need to convince me of that at all), then you're going to have to back it up with more than just empty grandstanding to show me that you know what you're talking about.

Also, go ahead and quote me where I said that only men are selfish. You won't find any such statement. All people are self-focused. It is a feature of our nature. 

Maybe I've got that part wrong.

Actually, I wanted to state many times that I think we would make very close friends in real life, but I kept it to myself out of pride. I am still hesitant as I'm writing this because I'm anticipating a perception of neediness or people-pleasing on your side, which I don't think is an unrealistic expectation, given your history of projection.

Listen, I don't want to hurt your feelings, but you've not been very nice to me including all then finger pointing in this little segment. So, I don't feel the same way. I only have so much time and energy to give, and I prefer to give it to people who are kind to me.

I can't really say anything about this. I will only confirm again that it is all your projection.

You're ignoring my truth and are convinced that I am lying. It's really hard to change a first impression, and I couldn't care less about it.

You may not recognize the misogyny in it as it may be unconscious. But I do see that you have a chip on your shoulder relative to women. This is not a projection. It's a common pattern that is easy to spot. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck... it might be some other kind of bird... but it's probably a duck. And I'm not saying this to make you into a bad guy. Even as a woman, I had issues with misogyny for a long time. But it's a real psychological bind.

But a couple of clues are the "you hate men" statement, which is nothing I've ever said. And then the "you think only males are selfish" statement which I also never said. And then trying to pull me closer as you try to push me away.

The fact of the matter... and I mean this not to shame you for it... is that you are projecting a lot of stuff onto me. Go back in your posts and read them specifically for that. 

 

[integral]

9 hours ago, Etherial Cat said:

It's about time that you consider the hypothesis that you do have a problem with both projections, double standards, aggressiveness and misogyny. You are doing everything you are reproaching Emerald.

The condescending preaching tone is yours.

The unrightful teacher role is yours.

The little experience about the subject you're talking about is yours.

The need for superiority is yours.

The need for humbling  is yours.

And the one who needs to learn stuff is you.

Let me remind you that Emerald is a successful coach and people praise her argumentation and appreciate her posts.

Sorry to ask but where are your credentials/social proof? 

wow this is way off the mark. Most of what hes written has nothing to do with gender lol. 

Im not on his side or anyone side, just observing at a distance. From that position its very clear this is projection. 

Edited March 11, 2021 by integral

[integral]

9 hours ago, Etherial Cat said:

So, you can share your insights but Emerald can't?  She also has the right to share the truth and wisdom that she's got with everyone. So why does it apply to you and not to her?

hmmm got to calm down, its not personal, its about ideas. 

[Emerald]

1 hour ago, zeroISinfinity said:

No it doesn't keep us away from sex. Hahaha, it makes it even better. 

I don't like overly clingy women or people at all. I like to be leader and to be free and I always feel like losing it. Also so much being invested into relationship makes me to feel weaker as man. Like some sort of overindulgance. Sugar is sweet but to much of it ruins your health. So not needy at all quite the oposite. 

It's tricky, literaly is strategy based on my own selfish desires and needs. I admit that ain't no like @Emerald which will justify her stuff. 

I'm not sure what you mean. Can you clarify?

[zeroISinfinity]

Like Leo told you really have to recognize your own bias. 

We all have it. Why? Because regarding this stuff we are all selfish. 

 

 

[Hulia]

1 hour ago, zeroISinfinity said:

With all this spiritual/emotional nonsense and desire that your ego must be fed you are literally drowning your own man whom you "love". 

From my observation the women with higher sexuality tend to be more clingy and emotional. if you don´t like it, you should look for a girl-friend which is a kind of coolly, boyish type. Hmm... But she might leave you some day. Complicated. But at least I would have a good time with her before she leaves, if she leaves. Relationships.... ?

[zeroISinfinity]

@Hulia It's tricky. It really is.

Well for example I would like full feminine but that's full clinginess. So slice it either way you want it you have to accept, you have to compromise and to really learn to swim. Some things you get and some not and it's same for her. 

 

 

[integral]

@zeroISinfinity Paradigm shift is whats needed to resolve the "compromising" problem.

[Emerald]

1 minute ago, zeroISinfinity said:

@Hulia It's tricky. It really is.

Well for example I would like full feminine but that's full clinginess. So slice it either way you want it you have to accept, you have to compromise and to really learn to swim. Some things you get and some not and it's same for her. 

 

 

Femininity and clinginess don’t always go together.

But if what you’re calling “clinginess” is just the drive for emotional intimacy, then yes... you’ll have a very hard time finding a woman who is feminine and in touch with that femininity who isn’t looking for emotional depth and intimacy.

Clinginess in the other hand is a symptom of anxious attachment and fear of abandonment. And this can be experienced by both men and women.

So, it would be unwise to characterize a women in her healthy orientation as being clingy. You will miss the actual experience of truly experiencing the feminine. 

[Emerald]

2 hours ago, zeroISinfinity said:

Like Leo told you really have to recognize your own bias. 

We all have it. Why? Because regarding this stuff we are all selfish. 

We are all self-focused. I’ve already said this a bunch of times throughout the thread. Self-focus is a feature of being a human animal. You can observe this. It’s impossible to get away from self-focus.

But the word “selfishness” has a loaded connotation to it that adds certain ideas onto the phenomenon of self-focus that are distortional and/or not actually there. It peppers the reality of self-focus with a lot of projected notions.

Also, I never claimed not to have my own biases. Every person does.

But a person who is emotionally mature and intellectually rigorous will be able to both honor their own bias AND honor and understand the perspectives and biases of others. And furthermore they will be able to distinguish bias from truth. They will be able to hold space for many perspectives.

And this is at the root of why I tend to reiterate women’s biases on here because space isn’t being held for that bias. It is treated like a zero sum game where, if women win that men somehow lose. And that’s a very non-holistic viewpoint.

So, it is most beneficial to share under-represented and misrepresented perspectives and biases when certain perspectives and biases dominate. And that’s because it opens up the air for a more holistic and conscious conversation around human sexuality than is currently being had here.

Can you be specific at where you saw me claiming that we’re not self focused or claiming that I didn’t have my own biases?

What I said is that focusing only from one angle on this topic is a reductive way to look at it. And I never invalidated anyone else’s bias or perspective for that matter... unless the person was sharing an outright falsehood.

Edited March 12, 2021 by Emerald

[Gesundheit]

@Emerald Yes, we live in an era where women don't make mistakes and if you critique one, you will be called a misogynist. If you perceive me like that, nothing in the world will convince you otherwise. And if you want me to suck up to your delusions, then you're dreaming. That's feminism going wrong. And I'm quite sure you will get butt hurt and turn this against me and call me a misogynist again.

Instead, look at my post here:

If that sounds like a misogynistic comment to you, I don't know what won't.

You don't believe only men are selfish? Then what are you disagreeing with exactly? Why have you been against Leo's advice from the very beginning? Or maybe you believe that women's biases are more Godly in nature? I have evidence for that in one of your messages with me.

Overall, you're just showing resistance to whatever I'm saying. This won't go away no matter how I keep talking.

And, no. I won't share my experiences in public. If you're genuinely interested, go ahead, my messenger is open for everyone.

Edited March 12, 2021 by Gesundheit

[Gesundheit]

6 hours ago, Samuel Garcia said:

 

Different teachers say mean different things with ''enlightenment''. Teachers agree that it is knowing one's own true nature whatever that means. Some say that happiness is there. Yous seem to have a similar perspective as Peter Ralston -- enlightenment doesn't change anything including self-survival tendencies but it can help transformation.

That slightly different to what Rupert Spira has said where peace and love is found, having a completeness within oneself but life goes on as one wishes to do so. He admits occasionally he acts unenlightened sometimes but peace is the norm. He famously has said to tell your partners ''I love you, but I do not need (and you cannot give me the happiness I seek)''

Ramana Maharshi differs even more as he said habitual tendencies (vassanas) must be surrendered. Having talked to devotees, they have alluded to that desires are given up, supposedly because they serve a false entity. So when ego is seen through, these desires as well certain behaviours are dropped. A deep surrender occurs.

 Why is the absolute view worth even mentioning? It means nothing. It is an easy way to fool oneself.

Unless that translates into the relative -- a knowing that love is always here. That means contentment of where you are. Of course this means you are free to enter relationships. Yes this is true you are free to do so. But why bother at that point? This is my point. But you are saying there is not translation here. 

It isn't out of the question to imagine a person who does not have any social needs and it happy (but to imagine someone who never eat is difficult even though people might be able to do this). In fact many people will be forced to find happiness with way as God has not given them people to love them for whatever reason. People have such varied experiences. Go talk to people a wide variety of people from different areas of the world. A Christian who couldn't find love, people who go to Mooji's meeting, a  women who lives in a conservative part of the Middle East, an impoverished person who will never see beyond where they live, a women who has such low self-esteem and feels ugly -- I can go on giving examples I have come across. If they are to be happy, there is no choice for most of these people to free themselves from a lot of their need for intimacy in another.

In a non-duality meeting, a man said to the teacher that he was fearful of never getting married. The teacher said forwardly ''You won't care about that kind of stuff once you understand this''. 

It's quite interesting how you concrete you portray social needs like physiological needs. But to test what you say, the best thing I can do is for me to see if I can be free of social needs. The pandemic has shown me I definitely don't need other people as much as I believed, though I am not totally free. 

Bro, this is gold! I couldn't have said it any better. I wish I could talk like that, that would have costed me a lot less trouble.

Emerald should read this and reflect on it time and time again, but maybe after she cools down.

[integral]

3 minutes ago, Gesundheit said:

Emerald should read this and reflect on it time and time again, but maybe after she cools down.

You cant put out a fire with gasoline. 

[Surfingthewave]

@Gesundheit The dogged defence of the position you are taking , assumption of another's feelings or disregard for them and saying "your" a lot when interpreting another's comments. 

Agressiveness can be subtle but very clear. 

Absolutely you're right it is down to perception but the wider point is about what people gain from this position. It highlights a wider issue of males dominating over a female perspective when it comes to gender bias. 

A lot of people on here want to listen and learn, a lot of Enlightened folk want to spread joy and love to others. 

Compassion, empathy and love come with this work. 

Instead of jostling with the other (which as you say is imaginary) give yourself some self love. This work is counterintuitive. 

Think about the misuse of the term Enlightenment and perhaps how you have come to use it. 

@Samuel Garcia Great post. I look forward to hearing more. 

Edited March 12, 2021 by Surfingthewave

[AdamR95]

@Gesundheit you are making very good points and i can get you. I wanna say that i consider you ok as you are and i have no problem with how you are presenting yourself here. Everybody are presenting themself in some way and everybody struggle with their ego in some way. We are on the same boat.

But there is one thing i want to point out that you probably wont want to hear it. And that is that you are probably overestimating your developement because you do the same things you are criticizing. Thats it, that is only thing i want to say to you. You probably gonna dissmiss it as a bullshit and that is ok too. But consider you may miss a oportunity to grow.

I can very relate to you because i do the same thing as you do. Its easy to see it when someone else is doing it.

And the last thing, I want to encourage us to grow together towards love. We are all on the same boat.

 

[Gesundheit]

22 minutes ago, AdamR95 said:

@Gesundheit you do the same things you are criticizing.

I won't dismiss that. I don't dismiss any criticisms.

Show me where I'm being a hypocrite, and I'll look at it as objectively as I can. But don't expect me to just nod my head and agree with your perception. You can perceive me however you want and still not have a clue about me. A lot of people confuse standing one's ground and not sucking up to others for a double-standard. I am well aware of the pitfalls here. Bring forth your thoughts and I'll examine them. Don't just tell me what you're perceiving without giving me the context, because that doesn't mean anything to me, and I will eventually dismiss it.

[Gesundheit]

1 hour ago, Surfingthewave said:

@Gesundheit The dogged defence of the position you are taking , assumption of another's feelings or disregard for them and saying "your" a lot when interpreting another's comments. 

Agressiveness can be subtle but very clear.

I'm sorry, but I don't consider any of that aggressive.

Yes, I know that I don't take other people's emotions into consideration when I talk. To be frank, part of that I do on purpose. People cling to their identities through emotions, and I purposefully try to trigger people's emotions which in turn will bring out their shadows and attachments. I do that to alert them and push them further on the path. That's part of my curse when it extends out to others. Some people will benefit from this if they're open to it and ready, but some people won't and will react and go into self-defence mode. It's a risky practice, but it can also be extremely rewarding if one is open to it and willing to grow.

Don't get me wrong, though. I don't do that to avoid looking inwards, I actually do the same thing with myself, even more harshly, and attribute most of my growth to this one practice. You may not believe this, but what you've read so far is kindergarten compared to how harsh I can be. I am more careful with others than with myself, and with women I'm extra careful. It's kind of frustrating when I am told that I am a misogynist, because I am actually trying to help.

Edited March 12, 2021 by Gesundheit