Gaia: Transpersonal Dating - Lets create a Transpersonal Relationship!

Re: Wilhelm Reich and Sex Economy

http://jackii.gaia.com — Sat, 24 Nov 2007 05:21:20 GMT

this could be a long road. the sexual shadow (repression and denial) that so many parents (consciously and/or unconsciously) righteously give their children is a really big.

i do believe that there is an acceleration going on in which people, in general, are getting more comfortable with their sensually-driven sexuality, as opposed to the neurosis-driven sexuality.

there might be a critical mass that can be reached, like a 100th monkey.

Wilhelm Reich and Sex Economy

http://WHITEWAVE.gaia.com — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:08:56 GMT

Has anyone ever heard of this? I just stumbled upon it last night and saw myself in the mirror.

Sex Economy

Especially when it came to this portion: Orgastic Potency,
this part: Results of Vegetotherapy (Vegetotherapy works on the Autonomic nervous system) [Consequences for Human Civilization, Self-regulation Fundamental Feature, Natural Children],
this part: Connecting Vegetative Sensations and Religion [Religious Conversion]
and this part: Implications for Politics and Social Environment

"The sex economic position dictates that the principal objectives for all politics must be to shape society and living conditions such that the freely spontaneous and vegetative life can unfold as freely and as strongly as possible; because this is the best possible housekeeping of the sexual energy (which sex economy identifies as the life energy). In order to achieve this objective every human being must be free to administer its own body and be able to freely follow and fulfill their own wishes, sexual and other, as long as in doing this it doesn't violate corresponding wishes of others. Also, society must deliver the external conditions which allow for this to occur. Furthermore, society must produce a rearing process that respects all the natural desires of the children and give them the opportunity to develop freely the way their internal will wishes, in natural interplay with other equally free children and adults. And finally the working process must be shaped such that each person fully, or at least for the main part, are allowed to do the work they like and in cooperation with the ones they enjoy being with, so that work no longer shuts down or kills the free joy of life, but on the contrary becomes itself an expression of it."

What does it all mean? Is this why I abhor the Neuro Linguistic Programing and Speed Seduction ideas so much? Because they take away my full conscious ability to choose? For someone who is in the "neurotic" class, this could be considered a good thing, in a way, because they need outside help in overcoming their resistance. But for someone who does not have resistance, this is a problem. How do we solve this dilemma? How do we create a helpful social environment for everyone?

~Ww

Re: Transpersonal Love within Committed Relationships

Sat, 04 Aug 2007 21:36:39 GMT

That's a good point Gabriel and well worth keeping in mind, maybe also when going into a new relationship to check whether the compatiblity and mutual desire to grow is really there? Seems like a good criteria actually?

Re: Transpersonal Love within Committed Relationships

Mon, 09 Jul 2007 16:42:40 GMT

Nice to see someone else from Scandinavia here! Well, I feel that I can resonate with all of the ideas presented above. I have always had a bad attitude regarding the act of falling in love, it must be something I was born with because it's so strong. I've never fallen in love in my entire life either. "What a silly illusion", is what it always seemed to me to be. And when recently someone who seemed to be of a deep spiritual nature fell in love with me over the internet, I was pretty intrigued. Is it possible to do that (to love without any information about a person through the other senses)? Was he only playing out a fantasy and deep longing for symbiosis? Did he see anything at all in me that was actually true? When it came to arranging for an encounter, the point in time when he had to make his final deciscion about it, he backed away. He blamed me for not having shown my real self and was sorry for himself for having seen things in me that were not there. You know, extreme goodness and all that, which was pretty nice to hear while it lasted but hurt rather bad when it was thrown back into my face. I was however not so naive that I would actually have believed wholeheartedly in the whole affair. I don't think that what I experienced was a self-fulfilling prophesy because all along I really did have an instinct that something wasn't right.

What hit me when I was reading this thread that there's a polarisation into an either-or constellation. To me it seems that both theories presented here are true. I tend to go for the paradoxes :-). Anyway, I think people very often do see real things in each other when they fall in love, but whether those things are real or not are beside the point because surely there is some potential goodness in all of us? I do think that people mostly fall in love with an image of themselves. For instance in my case, the guy that I just mentioned fell in love with aspects of me that he clearly was lacking within himself. Then when confronted with the necessity of having to activate these elements within himself he chickened out. I'm very sure he did not realize this, since he probably did not even think that he should own such characteristics in the first place. I am talking of very fundamental characteristics such as being more attuned to the spiritual spheres as opposed to the physical, and I don't think we can choose to represent either or while still evolutating as spiritual beings. This guy was not able to make an encounter between us happen in the physical reality, and therefore I'm inclined to think that my interest in the physical realm was first interesting to him and then became a threat. I do think he saw a lot of true things in my all the same. But... as is often the case with spiritually minded people, he became somewhat presumptuous and thought he can see everything. While he believed in the good he saw, he then "corrected" his vision into the negative things that he thought he saw later. Some of which were maybe true, as well, but not exactly as he saw them.

I can relate to your childhood experiences, Ww, and I know it's not easy to succumb to many of the pitfalls that exist on the level of personal love. Although I have never fallen in love myself, I have loved. I know I'm capable of it. But attachment and all sorts of other problems hit me in that process. Now I wonder if I'll ever dare to go there again or whether there is another solution. Maybe just dropping the game altogether and embracing life the way it is with or without personal love (thus transcending it)..? But I'm not convinced about that option either. Seems to me somewhat dangerous to try and deny the desire for some pleasure and joy in life, unless it happens without a process of denial, that seems pretty unlikely here in the human sphere.... Anybody got any ideas...?

Re: Transpersonal Love within Committed Relationships

http://jackii.gaia.com — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 18:07:05 GMT

transpersonal love sounds to me like what the ritual of marriage is designed to accomplish, and yet so rarely actually does accomplish. i used to hate the institution of marriage, because it seems so un-christian, un-transpersonal. it seemed like marriage was
'lock the doors, you're mine and i'm yours'.

but the actual ceremony of marriage states just the opposite. the synergy of the bonding love is to be shared as deeply and completely as possible, and the institution was made (imo, based on the words in the ceremony) to exercise that intimate sharing potential. and therefore the effect would seem to be a continually (infinitely) expanding family that embraces the universe in a way that is a devotional surrender to All Things (gross, subtle, causal and every way).

so how can we manifest that?

there are probably infinite different ways, and the first step is intention. and then maybe a mission statement that clearly defines the intention. and then a continual open communication with myself that is shared with my partners when i feel certain that a connection to this intention is mutual.

If loving everyone can't be represented in the physical relationship realm, how do we represent it outwardly?

this is why i like polyamory. i can be totally committed to another and all are welcome to find every appropriate gesture of loving that continues to build on the base of powerful effective loving.

Re: Asexuality!

http://jackii.gaia.com — Wed, 06 Jun 2007 06:31:09 GMT

i've always felt that the published finding that men think about sex every 7 seconds was ridiculous. my guess is that those that try to suppress sexual thinking are more proned to have sexual thoughts. i'm a horn-dog, but i can go for hours and hours without thinking about sex.

Asexuality!

http://WHITEWAVE.gaia.com — Sun, 03 Jun 2007 20:11:03 GMT

LOL Wow! Watch this poor guy from AVEN get all the usual drug-pusher questions from Tucker Carlson on YouTube. He did a fantastic job fielding that inquest.

I think the human body is just becoming more flexible sexually in response to the interior experience of not needing to be physiologically compelled to reproduce anymore. We've been preventing reproduction in many ways for thousands of years and that sends very disruptive signals to the limbic system. Maybe it's getting the message.

Incidentally, I'm a subscriber of Marnia Robinson's "Reuniting" website and I heard about David from her newsletter and article here. I love reading about different ideas about sex besides the 2 or 3 entrenched opinions that the pop-media likes to keep parading in front of us. I'm sick to death of the debate about homosexuality. I don't disrespect either hetero- or homosexuals, I'm just tired of the arguing. Enough already! What does this all mean to our evolution? How are we going to deal with things the way they really are now besides pretending others don't exist or have a right to be happy? Blah! So, seeing this guy just put it out there and stand up to the pressure of a highly sexualized culture and just hold the space for all these people to be okay is refreshing and great! Props to him.

WOOT! Viva la differance!

~Ww

Re: Transpersonal and/or/vrs Instinctual Relationships

http://jackii.gaia.com — Tue, 27 Mar 2007 16:04:50 GMT

the perfect world is perfect, precisely because there are people who see that it is not perfect and choose to improve it as led by all that they connect to.

thank you for standing up and speaking your truth when you decide it is the right time, even if you step on my toes, or kill me (and my friends). but don't be surprised when the karma hits the fan.

Re: Transpersonal and/or/vrs Instinctual Relationships

Wed, 21 Feb 2007 20:38:20 GMT

I read the description of the "Mimi-doll", and while I could not make logical sense of it (the prose confuses me), I have the general emotion and feeling down pretty well. I do not have the words to describe the level of contempt I feel for such creatures. I also cannot describe how much I might enjoy letting such a creature think e is winning for a while, and then suddenly conciously ending the game.

There may have been a time when somebody could have used sex manipulate me into some very stupid decisions. I know that I can still be badly hurt from sexual manipulation, though, but I do not think that anyone could use that to actually convince me to do something really stupid.

Or maybe, if somebody set out to be manipulative, I would notice and end the game immediately, even before I stood to get particularly hurt.

Sex = violence... I am not sure what to make of this. While there are some people who abhor sex and call it one of the most violent things that can ever be done, I do not see that feeling in the culture around me. This could be a case in which my selective filtering has created a distorted view of the world around me. For instance, I know that sexually violent music exists, but I usually avoid even the genres that promote it, so I do not even know how common it is.

What I do see, even in poly circles, is some people trying to downplay sex, make it a minor element of any relationship. I can sometimes see how this is a sincere statement (I know at least one, and possibly two true asexuals), but often I know that it is an untrue or only partially true statement that is being made in order to try to make their extra relationships seem more "pure". There is still the idea that a sexual relationship is somehow an exceedingly shallow relationship.

What I try to do, and again it is perhaps self-selecting, is to surround myself with the most intelligent people I can meet with intellectually, and try to form emotional and sexual bonds with them. I do not think I would ever be okay with a pre-personal relationship (I would call it a purely physical sexual relationship), but I am quite okay and very much want to take my existing emotional attachments and make them sexual, also.

The key element for me is probably to build up communities that avoid pre-personal relationships, but not at the cost of denigrating sexual relationships.

Besides... why bother with a pre-personal relationship? Masturbation is more fun, runs no risk of disease, and runs no risk of anyone getting attached.

Re: Transpersonal and/or/vrs Instinctual Relationships

http://pantergnosis.gaia.com — Wed, 21 Feb 2007 20:30:45 GMT

KW has made a good point of descerning the pre and postpersonal. Instincts sounds very pre. Still there are other transpersonal theorists that have preferred to include many non-personal archetypal experiences in the term transpersonal. Both CG Jung and Stanislav grof are often doing that. In theory I guess KW is right, still f.ex Grof may have a point that we in a personal journey often will have all these levels mixed. In a holotropic breathwork session there will often be a strong and strange mixture of both pre- and transpersonal experiences, that may make up a wholeness together if one surrenders to it. And then a regressive reliving of ones birth may be a psycological rebirth that open up for deep transpersonal truths.

I guess the same to some degree may be true in a relationship. Many of these levels will play themselves out a bit parallell. Working with shadow, trust, and love. Surrendering to the good, but also exploring the scary parts. Both of admitting lust and of fears of being used or devoured by the other or lots of other stuff. By accepting these "bad" or "unmature" aspects of ourselves they may also heal, which then is a part of our souls journey.

Re: Transpersonal and/or/vrs Instinctual Relationships

Wed, 21 Feb 2007 19:12:58 GMT

You you explain the terms "King" and "Magician"? I have no context in which to understand these terms.

Re: Transpersonal Love within Committed Relationships

http://WHITEWAVE.gaia.com — Sun, 18 Feb 2007 20:48:36 GMT

Greetings, Pantergnosis.

I'm very familiar with Shadow Hugging and I love to talk about it now with the other person while it's happening. It's thrilling. I love understanding why I'm feeling what I'm feeling. I don't necessarily feel any impulse or motivation to stop the process simply because we've taken the masks off and now we understand that it's an "illusion". The process automatically becomes less charged when we both take the masks off, and that's wonderful! But I enjoy putting them on and taking them off and on and off. It's like a game of "peekaboo", and it makes me laugh. It also creates a space, much like Voice Dialog does, where fear falls away and all form and contraction is just as precious and holy as emptiness. This, to me, is a space I want to share with an other. Preferably all others, but just one would be a huge improvment over alone. I cannot describe the joy of being in the presence of another without fear or shame. "They were both naked and felt no shame..."

The sexual act creates this field for a few moments, but if the partners can't consciously expand into it, then it can't be held and it collapses again.

I find the other theory compelling as well, and ironically, equally true. It seems familiar to me, prolly because it resonates with something I remember from one of C. S. Lewis' writings. "The Weight of Glory". It would take too long to find the quote, but it is essentially that each of us has the capacity to expand into what would seem to be like an angel, or contract into what would seem to be a demon. That we are always walking around teetering on the edge of these, all the time, and we each have the power to push one another further towards one side or the other.

I have to go for a while. Extreme exhaustion...

~Ww

Re: Transpersonal Love within Committed Relationships

Sun, 18 Feb 2007 07:28:17 GMT

My opinion is closer to the normal psychological approach than anything else.

"Falling in Love" is something that most of my community views as a drug. We call it "New Relationship Energy" and it is that period of infatuation that begins a relationship. This is the euphoric phase of first meeting this bright, shiny new person, who fits every wish we could ever want filled!

Many of us have seen people make horrible, disasterous decisions during this phase.

The thing is, this phase really is just us projecting ourselves onto the other person. As we get to know the other person better, we get to know that person's quirks and failings. We learn how the person truly lives eir life, and all of the layers of joy and hurt that makes em.

Somewhere in there, we either form an emotional attachment to the other person, or we do not. Either way, somewhere in there, as we learn about the person and learn how to truly open up, that is when we find out who e really is. Should all goes well, and should we not hurt each other too much in the process, an actual loving relationship begins somewhere in during the NRE, and then survives or even thrives when the euphoria wears off.

Re: Transpersonal Love within Committed Relationships

http://pantergnosis.gaia.com — Fri, 16 Feb 2007 20:05:15 GMT

Hello!
A very common psychological theory is that to fall in love is to be attracted to our shadow and projections, and that it can help us be more conscious about those aspects of ourself. This means that we are basically fooling ourselves when we are loving an other person, and that we will stop to love them when the spell is removed or the illusions are resolved. Or that some "truer" love might appear, as the first "superficial" love has evaporated.

There is probably a lot of truth in that, but there is an other theory that I like even more, that I heard from Sandra Maitri, my teacher within the Diamond Approach/ Ridhwan School.

They say that we in the first experience of love actually are seeing and responding to the soul, and then feel immense love in seeing them more or less as they are. Then we are becoming less and less in love as our defences gradually will build themself up again. So that after a while we will iin fact often be more of the illusion of our personality than in the beginning, when it was a more "pure" perception.

Somehow a more or less oposite theory! In the eyes of the Diamond Approach the struggle is to keep our first perception open, and not let all our fear and stuff overtake us. Or, since it is more or less impossible for this not to happen, at least we should do our best to work with all of these sheets of our personality as they are becoming present.

The first theory of more normal psychology somehow thinks we are seeing things more clear when the magic of the other disappears, and we are all becoming dull again, while DA thinks that this magic is always within reach, but must be worked for.

Love from Øyvind in Norway!

Re: Polyamory vs. Monogamy vs. Personal vs. Transpersonal

http://WHITEWAVE.gaia.com — Fri, 16 Feb 2007 18:08:49 GMT

This deserved a much sooner response, but I've just been too busy. You're suggestions are great and we're gonna discuss them today. You're stretching me as well. Wonderful. I will respond more specifically when I can. Hopefully later tonight... not sure..

Thank you, so much!

~Ww

Polyamory vs. Monogamy vs. Personal vs. Transpersonal

Thu, 15 Feb 2007 19:41:52 GMT

I will start, I think, with a little relationship nitpicking, specifically on the Personal vs. the Transpersonal. Or, maybe this is not nitpicking. Or, shoot me down if this does not work for you.

Based on descriptions, I know that you used a monogamous example for Personal, but I do not actually see that as necessarily monogamous. I view my own relationship structure as a set of Personal relationships. By this, I mean that I am in a physically and emotionally intimate relationship with each of my partners. We support one another, build each other up, share space, provide aid when needed, provide aid when not needed, create shared experiences, discuss shared experiences, have and resolve arguments, and do many additional things I have not listed here.

I think (but am not sure) that I would still apply the term "Personal" even if the people involved formed a tight empathic connection.

Transpersonal, though, seems to me to be a relationship with something that is not an individual human, but more of a collective ... something. A collective conciousness? I am not sure exactly what because I have never been able to touch that, but I wil speculate a bit.

Perhaps somebody who is sincerely doing pathworking on the Tree of Life could be said to fit your definition of forming a Transpersonal relationship. Kabbalistic teachings (the little that I know) state that all is God and God is all and that the two cannot be separated nor are they even two. Pathworking would in this context be developing a intuitive or experiential relationship with all of creation.

Maybe I see Transpersonal as developing a set of relationships that softens the boundaries of identity which prevent me from sharing conciousness or even really feeling myself as part of a larger whole.

All of this means that I do not view a polyamorous relationship as Transpersonal, or a monogamous relationship as Not Transpersonal; or that view Monogamy and Polyamory as being a separate categorization system.

I would like to hear your comments on these thoughts before I address anything else. Especially about your boyfriend. Addressing that is going to be really hard, even if I do understand your terminology.

Re: ...Starting with the person in the mirror...

http://WHITEWAVE.gaia.com — Wed, 14 Feb 2007 23:57:03 GMT

This is good. I'm glad that these things integrate with one another. And I'M SO GLAD THERE IS SOMEONE ELSE WHO CAN RELATE!! YAY! YAY! YAY!!

I have some really tough questions that I need help with really urgently. I'll post them where I think they'll be most appropriate.

My first question actually belongs here, so I'll jump in:

I am with a partner right now who is very much grounded in the Personal level of relating. I love him. I adore him. And I want to love more. Both more of him and more people. I don't believe that this is bad, however, because he is in such a Personal place, he feels threatened - my loving others diminishes my love for him. I'm trying to 'splain to him that my love is not grounded in the Beloved, but in something much less changable and temporary - in the Infinite, which then comes through me to him. The Infinite also comes through him to me, which is what's so great about all this. It's not about the temporal little me and him. It's about the Infinite contractng and circulating through flesh. Is there anything I can do to help him understand?

He hasn't really been motivated to understand until the last week or so. Actually less than that. I had pretty much given up on him ever understanding and was ready to let him go because I didn't want to torment him with this. There's lots of pressure on me to dump him for two reasons: 1 I'm just leading him along and so I'm a bitch, and 2 he's just trying to change me and keep me on his leash and he's a jerk. These things are only true in the Personal realm of relating. He has asked if I know of anyone else who he can talk to about it, someone that isn't a woman, or just someone who isn't me in case he just can't hear it from me.

LOL Well, you're not "a woman"... Actually, it might help if you're both/neither because then you could speak for both/neither, and that's kinda the point. The point seems to be that separation, exclusion and isolation don't necessarily serve transpersonal love, but can be a barrier. I don't know. Whadda ya tink?

The polyamorous stuff would prolly be relevant for this, and I want it to be grounded in my relationship with the Infinite within myself, and then the Infinite in all of creation.

What would you say to him, if you could?

~Ww

Re: ...Starting with the person in the mirror...

Wed, 14 Feb 2007 05:31:51 GMT

This excercise makes one aspect of Buddhist Vipassana meditation. All of it focuses on insight, and on noting what the mind is doing. I view the sit-down meditation time as practice for actually doing this all the time.

I find it very difficult, though. It is so easy for my watcher to go to sleep. But when the watcher is awake, I find that it is able to watch me, and watch emself at the same time! That is the point at which I become aware of how I am reacting to things, what persona I am trying to depict, and how my body is feeling the world around me.

The results excite me a lot. They are difficult to achieve, and when the stress piles up I can easily forget all of this, but otherwise... wow. Actually knowing what I am doing and why I am doing it, or that there is something I need to dig for to find more!

One of the communities I am involved with emphasises this for, I think , for similar reasons to what you are talking about. We call it “I am my own primary partner”, almost as a mantra, but the idea is that, above all of my other relationships, I must have a strong, healthy relationship with myself. Once I can do that, and once I can like or love myself with all of my flaws and with all of my shadows, I can really be far more concious with any of my other relationships.

As you said, if I already know a flaw is there, and I have accepted it and maybe I am even trying to change it, somebody else pointing it out to me becomes less threatening. Maybe it is because it is just one of those things that I can look back and say “yeah, I know”. It is not something that I must deny.

Re: Transpersonal Love within Committed Relationships

http://WHITEWAVE.gaia.com — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 20:43:10 GMT

Last week, I became aware of myself "falling" in love. I was descending into a Personal level because it was shaping itself into an ideal security zone for me. As I became aware of this sensation of falling, I also realized that I was falling into an equally powerful threat zone. That this place was totally conditioned. And that eventually, sooner or later, the winds would change and I would feel threatened. I marvelled at this - sensing the temporariness of it all. And I felt compassion for myself. And my lover.

So, last night, that crash came and I felt the anticipated threat. But I didn't feel completely threatened like I have previously during such Personal events. I could almost sense an orgiastic pleasure - not perverse pleasure, but rather a sharp spike of compassion energized by the sense of tragedy - and this compassion felt extremely good.

As I ponder this, I am reminded of a question that my current lover asked of me the other night, mid-session: "What does it feel like? Does it tickle?" I couldn't find words. I could only shake my head and continue to gasp. Then when I asked him the same question, he could only manage: "Good!" LOL

Could I have really grokked the compassionate impulse of True Non-duality before I had experienced it if someone had merely described it to me? I don't think so. Not in the way I've heard it described so many times, at any rate. It's usually couched in very archaic and moralistic terms that shame me for "attatchment" and belief in "illusion". I experience those terms to be very anti-female.

Last night, as I watched the Grammies, I marvelled at Shakira's wonderful art. Not just her music, or just her dancing - but her frenzied, physical drive to simply give something beautiful to the eye - to the awareness. All of awareness. Unlike some other hip-hop work, she doesn't seem to be too distracted by the impulse to entrap. Just to enjoy.

Can't it all be like that? Can't we just enjoy this? Must we constantly be made to feel ashamed for "falling for the lie" or becoming a "slave" or some other such polemic?

How does this strike anyone?

~Ww

Re: Transpersonal and/or/vrs Instinctual Relationships

http://WHITEWAVE.gaia.com — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 06:46:57 GMT

I have just been having the hardest time figuring out how to write about this! It seems I can think about it and find something to say when I'm busy doing other things - housework, driving, fucking... - but when I'm sitting at my desk and my hands are on the keyboard, it disappears. It must be in a part of my brain that I just don't usually use at this time. That's all I can figure.

In any case, I hesitated to write about this in Kenneth's beautiful "Instinctual Relationships" thread because his version is... well, beautiful. But there is currently a huge wave of instinctual or impulsive relating that is going on right now that is completely devoid of beauty - or rather, it contains only the thinnest veneer of beauty. Or perhaps, the veneer of beauty is all it is and therefore contains nothing. Baudrillard lives! This is what I've observed:

Both men and women descending to a very low level of sexuality that is sub-human. Purely animal. In fact, those who can articulate the phenomenon inevitably end up using the term "animal" to describe it. Marilyn Manson. Britney Spears. Jenna Jamison. On and on. The only thing that justifies or explains coupling is animal attraction. "Animal attraction", meaning a sort of collection of beauty standards which evoke only the most primative impulses and drives and refuse to be tainted or poisoned in any way by any civilized human values or standards of relating of any kind. If the reasons for coupling are derived from human values in any way, it is sexually incorrect. It must be purely instinctual. And the instinct is usually, that of predator and prey.

I'm not speaking as a moralist. I'm observing as objectively as I can and using as value-neutral terms to describe this as I can while still trying to convey the sense of urgency that is going on. This is clearly a cultural backlash to something. I think I see it pretty clearly now, but its still a bit fuzzy. Yesterday I was doing some reading and came across some blogs and what-nots that contain this zeitgeist quite nicely. Here are a few examples:

-O-

"Sometimes I miss her, the ole Mimi-doll. I miss being raped by a focusless gaze, the anonymity of being the centripetal force in a roomful of dicks, of being the other woman, the faceless other woman we females all fear, that bitch who makes our boyfriend / husband / lover drool and cower and snicker and groan, balls heavy and leaden and loaded with lust for the something more, the something more men always want because monogamy is just not in their sex. I want to be the high carbohydrate, benzene loaded, phenylanine fizzy smack, laced with aspartame and bursting with sugary, acidic cancer agents. I want to be the snack which fails to satisfy, the food for the hungry ghosts with empty holes where a stomach should be. I want to be Mimi again, for all the good it does me, did me. Sometimes, I miss her.

I miss her most, I think, when I slide back into her again. I feel it when I overhear another girl talk, a civilian – you know, not a stripper. “So in front of the whole lecture theatre the Professor made her take her lab jacket off because it wasn’t pressed, and all she had on underneath was a bra. All the girls in the class were crying.” There are days when you weep because your precious pride and your indignation and your idea of self has been destroyed by the simple act of exposure, and I will be staring at you with a sneer resting upon my lovely face, the fires of purgatory in my lovely eyes, fanned fires, swallowing up great gulps of oxygen. Haven’t we all seen the movie featuring the quivering female servant forced to undress in front of the stone-eyed master of the house, how her eyes slide with a choked sob to a distant corner of the room as his hand reaches, greedy, into his pants?..."

http://miminewyork.blogspot.com/2006/09/me-me.html

"The ravages against black womanhood are legion, but with big butts on endless display in videos and "bitch" and "ho" all but commonplace in hip-hop lyrics, one particularly sad and disturbing case comes to mind. Sarah Baartman (1789-1816) survived the slaughter of her people, only to be exploited for centuries hence. She was born in what we now call South Africa as a Khoikhoi, and enslaved in Cape Town by wealthy Britons. Her exceedingly large rear end, especially prominent on a short 4-foot-7 frame, gave associates of her enslavers the idea that there was money to be made. So Baartman went off to London, where she was christened "Hottentot Venus" and put on public display. She was marketed as the freak show to end all freak shows. She was made to bandy about in a cage, her derriere in full and barely clothed view, and would be told to perform a song or dance for the leering, jeering patrons. The spectacle became a smash hit, inspiring bawdy parlor songs. Baartman actually enjoyed a brief measure of dignity in her downtime from "performing", but such luxuries were a thing of the past by the time the enterprise made its way to Paris. Have we really progressed much since the days of Sara Baartman? ... "

http://blissfullyclueless.blogspot.com/2006/03/video-vixens-victims-of-exploitation.html

-O-

And on and on. These are also rooted in the "non-personal experiential archetypes". "Gut-deep acting out" indeed. There is a direct link between sex and violence which the Modern World has been trying to break for a very long time. For many, it seemed as though we were making progress. Then this.

I wanna figure out what is going on here. Especially since I'm innerested in Shadow Work so that means that this is not going to go away. It may go underground again for a while, but it won't really go away until we figure out what we need out of this. Is there anything here that is worth keeping? Any babies in this bathwater?

I am especially captivated by mimi's fantastic prose as she secures the future of unevolved male biases by knowingly betraying her gender from within. Paid by a higher bidder, she throws the game and brings all her teammates down with her. Who is this higher bidder? What are they paying her? What do they really want? Is there another way to get that without doing this? Or is this really necessary?

Is this the result of the legend of Lilith or is Lilith the result of this?

Something is telling me - no, whispering to me... that this is somehow necessary. [Anyone else hearing that TOOL song in their heads?... "This is necessary. This is necessary. Life feeds on life feeds on life feeds on life feeds on.. This is necessary..." ~Disgustipated.

I'm prolly not going to make too many friends among the New Age crowd with this line of thought, but I'm not too concerned about that. What I'm mainly concerned with is helping humanity to become what it was meant to be - the Manifest expression of God. So, while I realize that in one way everything is "always already" perfect, in another way, this is really not okay and something must be done. But repression isn't it.

So, what do we do? Is is fair to adopt a mythology that makes sense of it all? A metaphysics? Ken Wilber is making the case for dropping all the metaphysics because it is like a ball and chain at the moment, keeping us from ascending above the level of Mutual Assured Destruction. That's fair. And I guess he encourages us to integrate this impulse as individuals and find a way to fit it into our daily life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. Dropping the Old, Old Story, isolating the impulse and fitting it into the new Story that is being created as we speak.

Is this the task before us?

From what I see, the people who are promoting this aesthetic or life-style choice are ready and willing to own this impulse... and not much else. It seems they're not gonna drop it or get out of our faces until we all follow suit. Can we do this? How should we proceed?

~Ww