Femininity - Sage/Loner archetype and Casual Sex.

[Arthogaan]

Hi, what do you think on this topics:

 

1. Are women wired to be more social and need social life more? Or is it cultural. I am a loner type and really do not need much social life to feel blisfull and fulfilled. I can romanticize the idea of being a loner sage for the lest of my life. I do not know many girls that would like her future to be like that. Most of them seem to always need a partner in their future or at least very close circle of friends. Do you think that is cultural and eventually more and more woman will realize that they do not need anybody to be happy and will embody that? I see more female creators on youtube just living in a forest or a van alone. Or rather that is something that just is part of feminine energy and it will probably continue to be like that for most? 

 

2. The same question basically but in the context of sex life. Do you think that women will in the future embrace casual sexuality more or rather feminine energy always will tend to want this sexual activities to be only with a really close one/ones? Because when I feel into the feminine energy it is really connected to the body and it's needs. It actually feels more sexual than masculinity but in current society it does not seem to express in that way. For example I heard that in some country (I think Cuba?) there is a whole culture revolving around being sexy, seducing and female sexuality. To me it seems more natural to femininity, but I am not sure.

 

 Have a nice day 

@Leo Gura, @Emerald, @MsNobody, @flowboy, @puporing

[Gesundheit2]

Most of human activities are arbitrary, except for the core survival function. Even the distinction between genetic wiring and social upbringing collapses at the level you're asking. Everything can change or remain the same, depending on how it can best serve the same purpose.

[Arthogaan]

1 hour ago, Gesundheit2 said:

at the level you're asking.

What is the level I am asking?

I agree with you. I ask to better understand the balances between Masculine energy and Feminine energy - which of course at high enough level collapse and merge.

[Leo Gura]

1) Yes, most women survive by being highly social. But there will always be exceptions. You shouldn't care what most women are doing.

2) Casual sex is not beneficial to the survival of most women. So no, don't expect casual sex to be too widespread. Women who have lots of casual sex will end up hurt and worse off in many cases. Which is why it's frowned upon traditionally. Sex will always be a dangerous activity. So you cannot just treat it casually.

Edited March 5, 2023 by Leo Gura

[Lila9]

Maybe in the far future when or if humanity will be much more developed as a whole, and women being sexual wouldn't be a shame, and the connection between sex and control/violence will no longer exist, then sex will be safe and more socially normal activity, like having a coffee together, but tantric coffee, where women's chances to get hurt will be very unlikely because all the men would be so considerable, caring and loving. 

 

[Leo Gura]

Being sexual isn't a shame. Sex just needs to be understood as a serious thing, with consequences, not merely a toy.

Edited March 5, 2023 by Leo Gura

[Arthogaan]

56 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Yes, most women survive by being highly social.

I agree but as humanity develops and there will be growing abundance of wealth wouldn't that loose it's importance? Do you think there is fundamental different wiring of the brain that causes that survival strategy or is it learned after birth? 

 

58 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Casual sex is not beneficial to the survival of most women. So no, don't expect casual sex to be too widespread. Women who have lots of casual sex will end up hurt and worse off in many cases.

But isn't that confirming that it actually is a cultural thing? Survival strategy of women depends on the environment they find themselves in, and current environment is hostile towards casual sexuality by women so it is not optimal. But will it still be like that in 100 years when humanity potentially will have zero taboo-ness towards sex?

[Lila9]

1 hour ago, Lila9 said:

Maybe in the far future when or if humanity will be much more developed as a whole, and women being sexual wouldn't be a shame, and the connection between sex and control/violence will no longer exist, then sex will be safe and more socially normal activity, like having a coffee together, but tantric coffee, where women's chances to get hurt will be very unlikely because all the men would be so considerable, caring and loving. 

 

And wisdom about sex. There will definitely be deep understanding of sex, unlike today when most adults are pretty ignorant about it.

[StarStruck]

Doesn't matter how progressive humanity becomes, a vag will stay a vag and a penis will stay a penis. For things to be become truly equal both sexes need to have the same genitalia.

[Leo Gura]

12 hours ago, Arthogaan said:

I agree but as humanity develops and there will be growing abundance of wealth wouldn't that loose it's importance? Do you think there is fundamental different wiring of the brain that causes that survival strategy or is it learned after birth? 

Being social is wired into the female psyche. Women are people people. They are relationship oriented.

You can feed a cat until it is too fat to run, but it will still always have the instinct to pounce on birds.

Quote

But isn't that confirming that it actually is a cultural thing? Survival strategy of women depends on the environment they find themselves in, and current environment is hostile towards casual sexuality by women so it is not optimal. But will it still be like that in 100 years when humanity potentially will have zero taboo-ness towards sex?

It's not hostile per se, it's just that sex has naturally greater consequences for women than for men.

Edited March 6, 2023 by Leo Gura

[puporing]

 Perhaps I exist in a different reality than most people on this planet right now, including the nature of my relationship(s). Some might know what I'm talking about. But mostly the trajectory has been toward more platonicity and transcendence, Truth and Love.

Edited March 6, 2023 by puporing

[flowboy]

20 hours ago, Lila9 said:

Maybe in the far future when or if humanity will be much more developed as a whole, and women being sexual wouldn't be a shame, and the connection between sex and control/violence will no longer exist, then sex will be safe and more socially normal activity, like having a coffee together, but tantric coffee, where women's chances to get hurt will be very unlikely because all the men would be so considerable, caring and loving. 

 

@Lila9 Tell me more about tantric coffee?

I've watched a tantric hairbrushing session once on a tantra retreat. But you've captured my interest with this one.

[flowboy]

On 05/03/2023 at 6:54 AM, Arthogaan said:

1. Are women wired to be more social and need social life more? Or is it cultural. I am a loner type and really do not need much social life to feel blisfull and fulfilled. I can romanticize the idea of being a loner sage for the lest of my life. I do not know many girls that would like her future to be like that. Most of them seem to always need a partner in their future or at least very close circle of friends. Do you think that is cultural and eventually more and more woman will realize that they do not need anybody to be happy and will embody that? I see more female creators on youtube just living in a forest or a van alone. Or rather that is something that just is part of feminine energy and it will probably continue to be like that for most? 

With exceptions, people do best happiness and longevity wise in community. With lots of laughing together, hugs, touches and casual chats. This goes for all genders.

To me it seems very strange that once you realise you don't need anybody to be happy, which is all well and good, you would then use that as a reason to not want to be with anybody. That indicates some sort of shadow to me. What's wrong with people? Why prefer to not have them around? If you can be blissful on your own, it should be even more blissful to share that energy and spread it around. It's unnatural in my opinion. I believe there's reasons to want to spend some years alone which are natural (seeking wisdom, healing from something, going through an awakening process of some sort), but a healed, balanced person will eventually prefer community because why not. That doesn't mean the same community they grew up in, of course. Like minded people.

What is common is for masculinity to seek nothingness, zoning out, blissful unconsciousness after a day of hard work, and for femininity to seek connection through talking as a way to recharge. I could imagine a masculine soul perpetually stressed, hurt or injured to seek aloneness as a way to recharge. I just don't buy that there is something advanced about it, or that it's cool to not need anybody and therefore not have anybody.

[Arthogaan]

19 minutes ago, flowboy said:

To me it seems very strange that once you realise you don't need anybody to be happy, which is all well and good, you would then use that as a reason to not want to be with anybody. That indicates some sort of shadow to me. What's wrong with people? Why prefer to not have them around? If you can be blissful on your own, it should be even more blissful to share that energy and spread it around.

I totally agree and embody that. As i said "I can romanticize the idea of being a loner sage for the lest of my life.". But still I spend like 80% of my time with my girl which I love totally. So that question was totally not about me, and femininity in me, but generally about understanding femininity. 

 

21 minutes ago, flowboy said:

With exceptions, people do best happiness and longevity wise in community. With lots of laughing together, hugs, touches and casual chats. This goes for all genders.

So would you say that PURE masculinity without shadow is equally attracted to living in a community? Do you have an experience living in such community? In such community, are the differences between feminine and masculine energy more visible or rather they seem to balance out?

[flowboy]

9 minutes ago, Arthogaan said:

I totally agree and embody that. As i said "I can romanticize the idea of being a loner sage for the lest of my life.". But still I spend like 80% of my time with my girl which I love totally. So that question was totally not about me, and femininity in me, but generally about understanding femininity. 

Ah, forgive me for assuming it was about you. Even better, then. Yes, it's a romantic idea, I also romanticized it at one time. Though in my version it was a romantic sage who got laid a lot, still ^ ^.

Regardless of romantic ideas, I don't believe in generalizations, so some people will be clearly predestined to spend a huge chunk of their life alone, but they're so few and far apart that it's probably a safe assumption for any one person to make that "you're not that, unless you feel truly called"

Nice that you have such a loving relationship!

9 minutes ago, Arthogaan said:

So would you say that PURE masculinity without shadow is equally attracted to living in a community? Do you have an experience living in such community? In such community, are the differences between feminine and masculine energy more visible or rather they seem to balance out?

Yes, I would say pure masculinity without shadow will prefer to live in, or build his own community. It will want to share his vision and leadership qualities, provide, hold space, give his gifts.

I'm not sure what type of community you mean exactly.

I'm referring to any community, from a nothingtown village to a selected tribe of like-minded ones in a large city, to an intentional community, whatever it is.

Edited March 6, 2023 by flowboy

[billiesimon]

23 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

2) Casual sex is not beneficial to the survival of most women. So no, don't expect casual sex to be too widespread. Women who have lots of casual sex will end up hurt and worse off in many cases. Which is why it's frowned upon traditionally. Sex will always be a dangerous activity. So you cannot just treat it casually.

It might be dangerous, but from what I see going on in social circles, women tend to have huge amounts of casual sex. Way more than men. Yes, they also tend to look for someone stable, but before that they definitely engage in massive amounts of random and even dangerous sex. So, I don't agree at all. I think that the feminine benefits from casual sex because it's a way of maximizing her peak sexual age by having lots of sexual encounters.

This is not judging, I'm very progressive minded. It's just something I observed. 

Yes, they risk more than men, yet they still act on the instincts, especially in the 18-25 age range they are very impulsive on sex (of course there are exceptions!).

[Leo Gura]

3 hours ago, billiesimon said:

they definitely engage in massive amounts of random and even dangerous sex.

Be careful with your sampling bias. Plenty of girls don't have many partners, you just don't care about that because it doesn't fit your narrative.

[billiesimon]

8 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Be careful with your sampling bias. Plenty of girls don't have many partners, you just don't care about that because it doesn't fit your narrative.

Ok, I might have a flawed small sampling. But I do not have a narrative, this was not a redpill or other negative BS argument. I have just noticed that they tend to be impulsive with sex, it's not a sexist belief. I might be wrong in my sampling. I'm still pro-feminism though. 

Edited March 6, 2023 by billiesimon

[Leo Gura]

4 hours ago, billiesimon said:

But I do not have a narrative

Are you kidding?? Of course you do!

Of course women are impulsive with sex, they only have sex when the mood is right. The feminine is spontaneous, it goes with the flow, or wherever it is lead. Every woman is open to sex given the guy creates the right mood for it.

But even so, many women aren't your typical party girl club slut.

Edited March 6, 2023 by Leo Gura

[Emerald]

On 3/5/2023 at 0:54 AM, Arthogaan said:

Hi, what do you think on this topics:

 

1. Are women wired to be more social and need social life more? Or is it cultural. I am a loner type and really do not need much social life to feel blisfull and fulfilled. I can romanticize the idea of being a loner sage for the lest of my life. I do not know many girls that would like her future to be like that. Most of them seem to always need a partner in their future or at least very close circle of friends. Do you think that is cultural and eventually more and more woman will realize that they do not need anybody to be happy and will embody that? I see more female creators on youtube just living in a forest or a van alone. Or rather that is something that just is part of feminine energy and it will probably continue to be like that for most? 

Human beings are a social species. It is part of our nature. From a nature perspective, a lone human is a dead human.

Usually when someone is a loner, it tends to relate to issues around lack of belonging. And it just feels easier to disengage than engage. And with modern society, social disengagement is possible.

But there are also enjoyments to be had by one’s self. So, the self-identified loner typically doesn’t feel like they’re lacking, even though they are.

Male or female, we will always rely on others to get our needs met. 

2. The same question basically but in the context of sex life. Do you think that women will in the future embrace casual sexuality more or rather feminine energy always will tend to want this sexual activities to be only with a really close one/ones?

Women will always be more selective than men. Women’s pair bonding and child rearing drives are directly connected to their sexuality. So, the stakes are ingrained in female sexuality.

But surely lots of women currently do engage is casual sex and will in the future.

Because when I feel into the feminine energy it is really connected to the body and it's needs. It actually feels more sexual than masculinity but in current society it does not seem to express in that way. For example I heard that in some country (I think Cuba?) there is a whole culture revolving around being sexy, seducing and female sexuality. To me it seems more natural to femininity, but I am not sure.

Sexuality is an element of the Feminine principle because it deals with the body and instincts.

 Have a nice day 

@Leo Gura, @Emerald, @MsNobody, @flowboy, @puporing