Gaia: The Integral Pod - Water Cooler - Faceless posters

Re: Faceless posters

http://klarelim.gaia.com — Fri, 10 Aug 2007 19:54:54 GMT

Ewan,

Really good questions. What is personal and public sometimes intermesh on the internet.
This has been written about by several socialogists as well as people interested in media technology. I personally do not like to disclose any personal information anymore after experiencing "stalker" like behavior from people as well as finding disappointment in what people say/write vs. meeting them in person is completely a different experience. What people write is different from what they do, act in person and for me this has the effect of contradiction that turns into disappointment. I don't "look" for social connections online but really enjoy the learning process I normally wouldn't offline.

It's really hard to make any sort of judgement based on online interactions since people sometimes take on online personas for whatever reason. As well as the errors in interpretations as well happens very regularly.

But I do love and enjoy the exchange of discussions that go deeper than offline experience of someone staring at my body parts instead of paying attention to what I say. I don't enjoy forums that much, but like finding information that is relevant at the time in terms of learning or unlearning.

Re: Faceless posters

http://julieaerwin.gaia.com — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 08:19:04 GMT

Michael:The wrinkliest (I think,) Are we talking buns here or face??? :-D Juliee

Re: Faceless posters

http://mqs.gaia.com — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 00:32:39 GMT

Dear Ones,

Really now! Mooning does put a certain perspective on the topic, now, doesn't it? Maybe this is how we could identify ourselves - intimate, yet still anonymous!

The wrinkliest (I think,)
Michael

Re: Faceless posters

http://ewantownhead.gaia.com — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 15:56:26 GMT

Oh, put it away!

Re: Faceless posters

http://plums.gaia.com — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 15:36:19 GMT

Yes, yes, affection received and delighted in, young buns

Re: Faceless posters

http://ewantownhead.gaia.com — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 10:01:33 GMT

Looks like the wrinklys got triggered ;) Be proud of your UR!!!

It was meant affectionately of course :)

Re: Faceless posters

http://julieaerwin.gaia.com — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 08:46:10 GMT

Lauren, Michael

I can't find the 'wrinklier' reference, but if it was Ewan, I think the term is a 'wrinkly' (pl. wrinklies)!!

Its a more or less affectionate term in the UK - better than old codgers don't you think? :-)))
My parents preferred term is 'golden oldies'.

Juliee

Re: Faceless posters

http://summit.gaia.com — Mon, 02 Jul 2007 19:37:42 GMT

For the record Ewan,

When i changed my pic to one of the top of my head -- as opposed to the full, oh what a blonde day in the sunshine face shot i usually use, i actually got pm's begging me to change it back.
Of course i didnt succumb to request.. i pleased myself, but its funny to know how - dispite ones profile, the general jist of who you are gets wrongly filtered through your dying looks!!

Lisa

Re: Faceless posters

http://mqs.gaia.com — Mon, 02 Jul 2007 18:26:00 GMT

I know. The arrogance of youth. He called me a "wrinklier" once before too. I think he means it as some kind of compliment.

Re: Faceless posters

http://plums.gaia.com — Mon, 02 Jul 2007 16:58:32 GMT

Who you callin wrinklier?

Jeez.

Re: Faceless posters

http://ewantownhead.gaia.com — Mon, 02 Jul 2007 12:06:19 GMT

Hey Mr T

Reading your carefully worded posts to me, I realise I've been a bit sloppy with language sometimes in this thread. I've been groping around the issue, posting rather 'off the cuff' without thinking about it too much. I loved Colins points about quick posts including more shadow, and the useful reflection that can give. Often, I've written a post, read it back again, recognised some constrictions on my part, and just thought: "Fuck it", I'll post anyway - its a good record of my reaction in the moment. Its pretty obvious for me when that happens, because it makes me feel uncomfortable - another great oportunity to explore my own contractions, awesome!

But I want to respond to your last post to me, as I think you're reading stuff into my motivations which arn't there. Again, partly because I was sloppy with language...

You've said that people withholding information from you makes you feel uncomfortable, makes you suspicious, and you feel it is inauthentic, in contrast to your intimate group of friends where it is safe to be open, vulnerable[...]So the overall impression I'm getting is the unsatisfactoriness of other people failing to self-disclose. The unsatisfactory part could be that it makes the space less safe for you, or that it makes you feel less connected to others.

Yeah, I did say that, but I really didn't mean it to the degree that I think you may be reading into it; my fault. It's not a big issue for me, I'm very capable of assessing what degree of openess and intimacy is both appropriate and possible in groups that I enter into. This whole thread was more of a curiosity because of the special circumstances we have here...

I judge a group with a 2nd tier CoG, on completely different criteria than I do otherwise. Partly because they're of course capable of a remarkable amount more, but more so because we are all still feeling into, and experimenting with what an actual Integral community functions like. This is new ground...were ploughing those Kosmic grooves - people havn't done this before. Not all the old rules apply anymore and its a tough process to work out which ones we keep, which ones we adapt, and which ones we throw away all together.

In that regard, I felt it was an issue that needed addressing. One of the gifts of Ken's Integral model is that it refines and reveals relative truth in a way never possible before - a highly efficient bull-shit filter as I like to think of it soemtimes. So what does the issue of Indentity shape up like under an Integral lens, thats what we're supposed to be discussing here isn't it? Integral identity is about shiting the identity bar up to the next level, trying to embody authenticity within the new wider capacity. Does that still include persona, shadow, contractions? Yeah, of course it does, dosn't it always!? But the big diffence is that an Integral community ahs the capacity to recognise and ackowledge those parts in a very different and new way.

None of this is about fear, or uncomfortableness, or shadow-boxing. Its about me, a young man exploring what it means to grow up with AQAL integral consciouness, and wanting to really push into the possibilities of what an AQAL integral community can do. Is it slightly idealistic? Sure, but thats the place I'm at currently, and theres plenty of older, wrinklier, wiser, more conservative heads here to balance the energy.

A non-reciprocal, unconditional view of relationship would be: I avoid making demands on others. I allow them to be or not be as they choose. I enjoy being intimate with others, but the absence of intimacy doesn't arose feelings of lack. I am whole and complete just as I am, both in and out of relationship with others.

Wow, yeah, that must be an amazing place to live from - I'm not there yet, I wonder how many of the people in this pod are there? Is that where you live from? Thats not second tier - thats 3rd tier isn't it? And I think we still have a hell of a lot of work to do working out how the hell we exist in 2nd tier community, before we start talking about community-wide ego transcendence.

For me, 2nd tier means being willing to show yourself in relationship, to the degree of authenticity to which you yourself are aware. Is that a reasonable expectation? I'm not sure, thats why I'm throwing it out here. Thats why I started the thread, so we as a community explore it...and by god we have! Awesome!

Ewan

Re: Faceless posters

http://rannahspirit.gaia.com — Sat, 30 Jun 2007 03:43:24 GMT

Wow, Dear Ewan, thoughts I'd never had. I imagine, now that your post has brought these possibilites to my attention, that each has their own personal expression of self herein and I refrain from giving it another thought!

Maybe this is part of the difference between the naturally "analytical" and naturally "intuitive" thinking styles. My response to your post, similar to my frequent response to my husband, is "too much thinking"!

How does anyone live with so many thoughts? When my mind is full of thoughts I see it as "clutter", or "obsession", and work toward clearing the extraineious thoughts out, or working through whatever the issue is to return to clarity, simplicy, and a blessfully empty mind!

Or maybe I am just too trusting.

Re: Faceless posters

http://onthetrail.gaia.com — Sat, 30 Jun 2007 02:52:45 GMT

Mascha, We must have been typing at the same time - i didn't see your post before I submitted mine - you are very much more eloquent than I could ever dream to be - as they say in Holland: Chapeau! Frans

Re: Faceless posters

http://onthetrail.gaia.com — Sat, 30 Jun 2007 02:45:28 GMT

Mr Teacup, Can we liken this to the chakras? One path leads up to complete liberation, the other leads down to manifestation. Where to go from your description is into full-on relationship, without hesitation or holding back - knowing all the time that you need nothing of the kind, but choose to do so anyway - manifesting awareness through relationship, leading by example (that sounds corporate, doesn't it?). Frans

Re: Faceless posters

http://Mascha.gaia.com — Sat, 30 Jun 2007 02:36:38 GMT

Mr. Teacup: " A non-reciprocal, unconditional view of relationship would be: I avoid making demands on others. I allow them to be or not be as they choose. I enjoy being intimate with others, but the absence of intimacy doesn't arose feelings of lack. I am whole and complete just as I am, both in and out of relationship with others."

This is where it gets really interesting, doesn't it? Here's a perspective on what could happen at this stage of development, a scenario I would like to explore just a little bit here because I've seen it mentioned so rarely. And no wonder - there is a price to pay if you do.

As I understand it, what you describe above and what filters through for me in your posts, is coming from a station where the air is getting thin and the buses stop coming in. Where you (anyone who's there) may want to trudge back to the herd and huddle for warmth and comfort, for its safety and ego-strokes. But you keep finding that you can't stay for long anymore. Something else is calling, an urge deep within compels you to get up, leave the theater where they're playing the same drama for the umpteen-thousandth time again... leave your friends, they want to see it once more.... leave your family, leave everyone you know, and go outside for a breath of Big Air. So there you are, outside the Psychodramadome, alone, standing small in a kosmic wind. And you see: Oh, yeah, that's the Abyss right there -- in front, above, below, and on all sides. Not frightening, though. No, that's you yourSelf, so it's cool. And you're vast. Nothing greater. Awesome - and not even that. No words... not many thoughts... an indescribable feeling of fullness finally.

Addictive. You've got to get more of that whatchallmercallit?, and there's no turning back for long, not for you, you're a goner, it's got you by the -- everywhere.

It's difficult to live with someone who is breaking free. People don't like it, it's as if the young tiger challenges the very foundations of everyone's carefully cultivated identity by nothing more than just being there, talking the way he does, shining perhaps a little too brightly -- too charismatic a figure to ignore, even if such ignore-ance is feigned as a tool to drive him back into the fold. This is where every bit of conditioning attacks you from within And without in the form of your kin.

That's when some old tigers who've crossed this threshold step in on occasion with a bit of miraculous help, totally out of the blue. They draw near and keep you company briefly, maybe soothe you for a moment in the middle of yet another dark night of the soul. But most of all they appear to encourage you to be bold: to go further than they ever have and Be as you Are, unique beyond compare. Roar!

Re: Faceless posters

http://mrteacup.gaia.com — Fri, 29 Jun 2007 21:22:45 GMT

Ewan,

It's not a fear of opening up that motivated this thread for me at all.

I'm not saying that it is.

You've said that people withholding information from you makes you feel uncomfortable, makes you suspicious, and you feel it is inauthentic, in contrast to your intimate group of friends where it is safe to be open, vulnerable. That group has been instrumental in helping you become more intimate and more open. Other people have agreed, saying that when other people fail to self-disclose, it puts a monkey-wrench in the miracle of we.

So the overall impression I'm getting is the unsatisfactoriness of other people failing to self-disclose. The unsatisfactory part could be that it makes the space less safe for you, or that it makes you feel less connected to others. There could be many reasons, but they all boil down to the environment being somehow less than what you would like it to be, and the normal response is to try to change the environment.

So I'm not saying that you are afraid of intimacy -- actually I'm not really saying anything about you specifically, because I don't know enough about you to do that. But I do notice a general tendency for people to make their internal condition dependent on external factors. When I don't get intimacy, I'm unhappy, so I need intimacy. When other people don't self-disclose, I don't get intimacy, so they should self-disclose. Other people need to meet my needs. These ideas are based in a reciprocal understanding of human relationships. A non-reciprocal, unconditional view of relationship would be: I avoid making demands on others. I allow them to be or not be as they choose. I enjoy being intimate with others, but the absence of intimacy doesn't arose feelings of lack. I am whole and complete just as I am, both in and out of relationship with others.

The problem of being too trusting is an interesting one to unpack. I assume that it means you trusted people, and they hurt or disappointed you somehow. They failed to live up to your expectations of how a person should respond to you trusting them. Again, the standard disclaimer applies that this is how almost everyone behaves, and there's nothing really wrong with it. I have an omega symbol on my desk at work that I use to remind me of my expectations that things should be other than the way they are, that people should behave in ways other than the way they do are the cause of a great deal of my suffering. It's not that I'm wrong about how things should be -- I could be totally right, and it wouldn't matter.

~MrTC

Re: Faceless posters

http://undercovertranssexual.gaia.com — Fri, 29 Jun 2007 16:32:45 GMT

Michael wrote: I too "expect" others to be flummoxed, as Lauren says, though I would like to advance towards allowing them (and myself) such uncertainties.

Absolutely. I like to believe that I hold comments in this this forum very lightly. I try to extend the benefit of the doubt to people; though I have no problem calling out those statements that I find questionable or objectionable. I try to keep in mind that I may be mis-reading or that someone may have not been so successful in communicating what he/she was really thinking/feeling. I have consciously come up against the limitations and difficulties in language many times, so, unless I'm really triggered, I try to remember to check in to see if what I am perceiving is really what was behind the intention.

Michael wrote: I have to read the "final draft" again to see how far along the hierarchy of authenticity my product lies. This requires me to be honest with myself - a great practice, and true to my own standards. If satisfied, then I can push "send" and move on relatively de-flommoxed.

This is tricky for me. Sometimes I spend as much time reading my final draft and editing again as I did contemplating and writing the rough one. In many of these instances I do so in the attempt to make sure I've aligned the words on the page with my conscious intentions, whether shadow is arising and whether I am being authentic; I learn a lot about myself and the difficulties of trying to communicate.

Sometimes I quickly compose a reply and hit Send Post without looking and editing and repeating again; in these instances, sometimes it is a function of a restriction on time resources; other times, I do so to simply communicate whatever arises the first time, with the awareness that shadow is more likely to get left in what I've written. This allows for the possibility that someone might catch that unconscious wave and draw attention to it. Sometimes I've gotten feedback that really resonates on that level, and I pay special attention with the possibility that I may glean some previously inaccessible information. Sometimes people make comments that are more about their assumptions; sometimes I simply run into the difficulty of aligning words with thoughts which may manifest in having to clarify what I've said.

I enjoy playing with both ways of posting.

Re: Faceless posters

http://undercovertranssexual.gaia.com — Fri, 29 Jun 2007 15:52:57 GMT

MrTC wrote: I did add all those qualifiers. I balk at saying "I'm authentic" because it makes authenticity into a kind of a performance. Look how authentic I can be! Better to say, "I try to be authentic."

Now we seem to be getting into semantics. I am personally not trying to say (and I'm very serious here) "look at me! look at me! I'm authentic!" I simply come here with as much authenticity as possible. Given my experience in this world, the level of authenticity I've achieved is astounding and I've worked very, very hard to get here, busting my ass as I contemplate, inquire, dispute, celebrate and stand wary of all of my internal dialog and my ways of interfacing with myself, other selves (whereever they may lie on the authenticity spectrum) and the various systems we've developed. I have been looking at my mental and emotional bodies for a long time, mostly because I have so often suffered great psychic pain due to not fitting into hegemonic culture. (On that note, what I find quite compelling is the concept that (nearly?) everyone who has developed some level of authenticity feels they don't fit into the hegemonic standards in some way; I used to think that just queer people or other marginalized populations felt this insane incongruence. Now that I see things from more integral and spiritual perspectives, I see more of the nature of the ego and shadow and how that affects all humans.)

I choose to engage with people with as much authenticity as I can; however, sometimes that means that I consciously choose to limit disclosure (mostly in 3D contact with people, not as much here) when the circumstances are appropriate for that. A significant percentage of the time, tho, I am able to very consciously manuever in this way, holding cards close when others are holding theirs close (whether or not they are doing it consciously), often simply so that I am matching the wave(s) that I can discern (or clashing with the wave, which itself is a kind of resonance).

I appreciate what you're saying in this thread, though. It feels to me like a very important conversation to have.

Re: Faceless posters

http://ewantownhead.gaia.com — Fri, 29 Jun 2007 14:13:33 GMT

Hi Mr T

The problem is that now, you have effectively said, "I can't open up until someone else makes me feel comfortable and takes away my fear." Is that true? The truth is that you could open up, but like all of us, you are afraid.

It's not a fear of opening up that motivated this thread for me at all. I'm about as open here as I think I can be on an internet forum. And I've never had any issues about opening up to people. If anything, its probably a tendency to lean the other way, and trust people too quickly sometimes.

I have other fears, big ones, but fear of intimacy and opening up is definitely not one of them, never has been. Is it one of yours?

Ewan

Re: Faceless posters

http://ewantownhead.gaia.com — Fri, 29 Jun 2007 13:49:43 GMT

Liz.

Grandma.

Sure, totally appreciate that personal experience is not solid evidence of whether stalking in the UK is a big issue, although thats accross the board, regardless of whether I'm 25 or 65 (I'm 25 by the way...the 5 is imporant...I've worked hard in those 5 years ;)

What I can vouch for, is the fact that the 'percieed threat' of stalkers is not strong on our cultural radar here in the UK. Frans seemed to be suggesting something similar for Holland too.

Is stalking more common in the States than Europe/UK? Dunno. Is the 'percieved threat' of stalkers more common in the States...? Maybe thats the more interestind dynamic.

Just an example to chew over: I heard a piece on a big current affairs radio show here, about 6 months ago. It was on child abduction, and how dangerous it is for kids in todays society. They had *loads* of people ringing i saying the threat of children being abducted in this country and killed, was really worrying, and that they don't let their children outside on their own. They had some child protection expert on expressing all her fears too, condemning the state of our society, and how much worse it is now than it used to be.

Then they got one of the Law Lords on, and he asked this woman "how many children do you think have been abducted and killed in this country in the last 30 years?" She said, "oh, hundreds and hundreds". He replied, "actually, it 27, and the annual average hasn't increased for 30 years." (or some similar figues anyhow).

Ewan