You always provide so much to think about. (As caveat to below comments, I'm just waking up this morning and feeling a bit groggy.)
I wondered reading this, if you had asked your youtube viewer to read your book, take notes, suggest where she would do things differently, write them down, and get back to you, if that would have opened up another possibility? She'd likely have discovered that her convictions about the feminine being 'obliterated' by the masculine was undeveloped in terms of what to do about it. And that you had put more time and thought into it.
"My only dogma: I am no better than anyone else. People are inherently good and, when they behave badly, systems and stories are to blame." Good dogma. :-)
Recognizing the equal underlying value of life - the same for all humans - doesn't seem like dogma to me - it's more like a recognition of reality. Though I appreciate its use here as the personal application of an (impersonal) underlying truth and how that helps advance methodical thinking. (I tend to associate dogma with external religious authorities so I wouldn't necessarily use the term myself.)
I notice a growing resistance in me to intellectual minutia. Naturally I'm curious about that. New phase in my life? New laziness that's crept in? (I don't think so honestly.) Something else?
I intuit (best word I have) that as we move forward humanity will re-access a way of being in the world that comes with a direct-connect in terms of what we 'know' and that will put us collectively on a different playing field. New bandwidth you could say. So I think a lot of what we struggle with on the current field we inherited, becomes moot.
Not that thinking through won't be needed, but that it won't be elevated above this more immediate access. So a tool we pick up as needed, to smooth out and add detail. Something like that.
What's been fragmented in us - and the world - is reintegrating and allowing for deeper remembrance about how this all works. A collective sorting the mess out becomes less about striving and more about aligning to the frequencies behind it all. (If this is true, no idea how long it takes. But I think we're in the process right now)
Meantime it's good to be as clear as we can be about where our values lie, especially given psyops world. You're so good at that - honing in on those parts of us we've left ambiguous.
Quick example on the new playing field analogy (not sure I'm making much sense) the parsing out of our aspects as physical, emotional, mental and spiritual beings and how we address them (even when noting their interconnectedness) becomes less emphasized because they work together more fluidly as one thing. So maybe I wouldn't have a spiritual practice (striving to include that part) it would just be fully part of my sense of a self. No efforting involved. My experience simply includes it as a knowing - same for other aspects.
I imagine it's how we're actually designed and we are returning to that more cohesive state as beings of love, embodied here.
Genuinely funny that Malone uses an 'asshole' rule to ban people. (Under that rule, he should have banned himself years ago.)
Apologies if I rambled. Need another cuppa. Thanks, Tereza.
"agreeably disagreeable"- I look forward to disagreeing with you and hearing your arguments, my dangerous friend.
I think your hair always looks good, even when I disagree with you. So far, I have only disagreed with one thing and it wasn't important enough for me to bring it up. But if we disagree on some big things someday, I am good with that. As long as you don't start telling me what kind of medical interventions I require.... :) I have to draw the line there.
"I wished her luck, and she said that she was hoping I’d be interested in speaking on it. However, I think my reply was more polite than a man’s would have been to someone who suggested they abandon a decade of research and book they’d written with purportedly the same goal, in favor of a discussion group that had already rejected their ideas without bothering to read them."
This made me bark laughter. HAha.
"Women are far more likely to prioritize relationships over their own thoughts and ideas. In this, I believe women need to be more like men."
I do prioritize relationships but they coincide with my thoughts, now. I don't choose the relationship over thought anymore. That's codependency. I am no longer interested in those kinds of relationships. I am willing to work past some crap for the relationship and I am very forgiving, but I will not stifle my own thoughts or opinions for one.
"How is it possible Amy doesn’t have a cool AI snake? " AI is terrible at snakes. I have a few that are decent but none that inspired me to share. MOSTLY AI screws up snakes. It's terrible at them. I have a couple, I will share in the next roll out (coming this week). I deleted all the messed up ones to save space, but some of them were HILARIOUS.
"No longer do the words spell us. We are spelling our own words, casting new dreams into the wide open future." That's beautiful.
I save your posts to read later, because I know I will have to stop and think about them. I've worked in mostly female and mostly male environments and I would say they definitely think differently. What I noticed in the mostly male environments was the ease with which males could turn into raging lunatics and even throw things (chairs) and no one batted an eye. I remember thinking if I had done that I would have been labeled the B word. Definitely double standards.
nice essay and, as usual, lots to digest. i could comment on much and will keep it (relatively) short as i'm writing my next essay with its deadline speeding towards me. (it continues from my last essay and starts with your comment to it.)
anyway, as to listener's 'where have all the women gone' comment, your inclusion that the men have also disappeared was right on point. the social structures of the last long while, the last few hundred years at least, has been a steady infantilisation of the human, male and female, and so that we have neither 'men' or 'women' significantly present. (including 'toxin's and unhealthy food practices in the foods and medicines to reduce testosterone in both sexes!) (and as i mentioned before, the original 'fairy' tales, such little read riding hood, were brutal and children were treated as miniature adults looking to experience life in its totality and not to be particularly molly-coddled into false ideas about the totality of life as a nice experience filled with chantilly cream clouds, white knights and swooning and compliant damsels in distress. was that 'great'? maybe not. although much better, i suspect, than the current batch of 'for your own good' ideologies that are exposing children to graphic sex and the hypocritical need for sexual dysphoria and mutilation.)
as to the invisibility of 'women'. i think jasun horsley makes a cogent argument in his latest book 'Big Mother: The Technological Body of Evil https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/135688883-big-mother that the invisibility of the 's-mothering' is because it has become ubiquitous, like the water to fish, and so invisible. few see 'take the jab to save your grandmother' as a rather effective and pernicious form of the devouring 'i'm doing this for your own good' mothering.
as to your point to one of the significant differences between men and women. and now i'll be highly inappropriate. back before 'for-your-own-good' cancel culture was still the somewhat less fanged 'political correctness' preliminary-woke movement i would point to a popular ad at the time that showed a small collection of male friends 'jumping' on the one who had worn an inappropriate shirt (i think it was) that was so 'uncool' that they threw him out of the van. only to welcome him back an hour later and all laugh and jest on their way to a bar, i think. everyone was laughing and no hard feelings were expressed. i would say that that re-integration of the disenfranchised man is one distinguishing characteristic between man and woman — perhaps only to child-like adults of both sexes(?) — because that ad with all women would not be made because it wouldn't be believed by either sex.
that men-centric ad would be banned today because it was all men, with no caricatured trans and mostly white! at the time i boldly suggested that that kind of 'bad' behaviour is far far less likely with women, for whom such harsh play was often for keeps and one-way. at the time in a nice synchronicity, when i followed the the writing of susie orbach who wrote the interesting and important book 'fat is a feminist issue', https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/468872.Fat_Is_a_Feminist_Issue to her her co-authored book called "Between Women: Love, Envy and Competition in Women's Friendships" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3066282-between-women with Luise Eichenbaum. the title obscures the deeper psychological question, which is why it is that female structures organised to compete with/in/against the patriarchy do not survive — because of internal discord, not because of the so-called patriarchy beating them down. an interesting read. mind it is from so long ago now i'm curious to see how well the arguments would hold up.
and that was indeed my experience in my life as it progressed that began with having been born into a family with 3 sisters and an absent father, no brothers. when i was in my 30s i worked as a technician that had within my purview a woman-dominated purchasing office. in those three years i had women disclose some pretty shocking woman abusing woman stories. later i worked for many years as an engineer in a male dominated engineering department. i had more than one of the women tell me that they had deliberately rejected working in woman dominated offices because they were 'absolutely horrible' — yes, quotation. i'm not saying that that *has to be* or that it is truly ubiquitous, just that in three disparate aspects of my life i've seen it embodied.
i think your ultimate point about that is, 'where are the adults?', ie autonomous beings who have the fortitude to step forward boldly into the unknown, to be wrong, share their wrongness, argue deeply and dispassionately in a mutually agreed effort with others to optimise the tangible expression of compassion by actions that ameliorate suffering and division.
i recently read a richard feynman quote from the '80s(!) that describes our time of false-polite discourse in a general way, although it refers specifically to 'science-tm' (scientilsm). (i included it in my last essay). "Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts… The experts who are leading you may be wrong… I think we live in an unscientific age in which almost all the buffeting of communications and television — words, books, and so on — are unscientific. As a result, there is a considerable amount of intellectual tyranny in the name of science." and, of course, much beyond science now, that disagreement has been highjacked to be neutered playground niceness to others (s-motherly) as if disagreement is a hurtful crime to be vaccinated out of human experience. hmmmm.
I learned to feel while saving all suffering animals I encountered. Or trying to…
I taught myself to ride a unicycle really really well. That opened a vast realm of doors.
I learned by accident that I could connect energetically with an audience even though I had to be within quick reach of a bathroom before every single performance.
I was that college student who tried to have a one-on-one conversations with every professor, much to his/her eventual chagrin. I did my best to engage other students but they were almost all checked out zombies.
I dropped out of pre-med after three years and went to Clown College. Unicycling and performance skills got me hired and I lived on the dingy roach-infested circus train for three months until I realized just how not funny elephant trainers whacking elephants on their knees with a bullstick is. And how not funny caged Tigers are.
I resigned. I moved out of the circus train, and rode my motorcycle for thousands of miles. This was a very good thing to do.
I studied and performed classical theater for over a decade until I realized that very few audiences were worthy of my sacrifices.
Intermittently, along the way I took post graduate level classes in Despair. These were initiations into greater capacity for compassion both for myself and others.
I worked as a job coach for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities for 15 years. Covid insanity shut that door hard.
I spent two years and well over 2000 hours studying the multitude of psychological, sociological, economic, scientific etc. aspects of the global psychological and physical assault. I became disgusted with humanity.
At the bottom of that shit pile I was required to let go. Required to understand that no amount of research and logical presentation could change the mind of a single person captured by the fear narrative. Nothing left to do but love them as best I could anyway.
This is an ongoing process. At best I will master this unconditional love incompletely. So I’m just another human doing the best I can, finding other humans doing the best they can.
I watched (listened to) this at 4am last night after having drunk coffee in the afternoon, something I do maybe 2-3 a year these daze. But remembered just now that I wanted to comment. ✨
I really appreciate this piece. However, I have to say I don't believe all people are inherently good. I firmly believe that there is such a thing as psychopathy. I don't think they can help it, I think they are born that way, but they are not suitable to mix with empaths because of their complete lack of conscience. It is actually physical. Their brains are underdeveloped in some areas.
We absolutely need a society where they cannot gain the upper hand over others. They are why heirarchies don't work. I think educating children, and indeed all of society, on how to spot them is essential.
I came to comment on the Tree of Judgment section. Take a look at this comment thread on Gregg Reese's Stack. Alternate views get Demonized. Gate Keepers (of info / Controlled Ops) Always result to ATTACKING with insults, not the ideas.
You always provide so much to think about. (As caveat to below comments, I'm just waking up this morning and feeling a bit groggy.)
I wondered reading this, if you had asked your youtube viewer to read your book, take notes, suggest where she would do things differently, write them down, and get back to you, if that would have opened up another possibility? She'd likely have discovered that her convictions about the feminine being 'obliterated' by the masculine was undeveloped in terms of what to do about it. And that you had put more time and thought into it.
"My only dogma: I am no better than anyone else. People are inherently good and, when they behave badly, systems and stories are to blame." Good dogma. :-)
Recognizing the equal underlying value of life - the same for all humans - doesn't seem like dogma to me - it's more like a recognition of reality. Though I appreciate its use here as the personal application of an (impersonal) underlying truth and how that helps advance methodical thinking. (I tend to associate dogma with external religious authorities so I wouldn't necessarily use the term myself.)
I notice a growing resistance in me to intellectual minutia. Naturally I'm curious about that. New phase in my life? New laziness that's crept in? (I don't think so honestly.) Something else?
I intuit (best word I have) that as we move forward humanity will re-access a way of being in the world that comes with a direct-connect in terms of what we 'know' and that will put us collectively on a different playing field. New bandwidth you could say. So I think a lot of what we struggle with on the current field we inherited, becomes moot.
Not that thinking through won't be needed, but that it won't be elevated above this more immediate access. So a tool we pick up as needed, to smooth out and add detail. Something like that.
What's been fragmented in us - and the world - is reintegrating and allowing for deeper remembrance about how this all works. A collective sorting the mess out becomes less about striving and more about aligning to the frequencies behind it all. (If this is true, no idea how long it takes. But I think we're in the process right now)
Meantime it's good to be as clear as we can be about where our values lie, especially given psyops world. You're so good at that - honing in on those parts of us we've left ambiguous.
Quick example on the new playing field analogy (not sure I'm making much sense) the parsing out of our aspects as physical, emotional, mental and spiritual beings and how we address them (even when noting their interconnectedness) becomes less emphasized because they work together more fluidly as one thing. So maybe I wouldn't have a spiritual practice (striving to include that part) it would just be fully part of my sense of a self. No efforting involved. My experience simply includes it as a knowing - same for other aspects.
I imagine it's how we're actually designed and we are returning to that more cohesive state as beings of love, embodied here.
Genuinely funny that Malone uses an 'asshole' rule to ban people. (Under that rule, he should have banned himself years ago.)
Apologies if I rambled. Need another cuppa. Thanks, Tereza.
I like your description of our purpose here.
"agreeably disagreeable"- I look forward to disagreeing with you and hearing your arguments, my dangerous friend.
I think your hair always looks good, even when I disagree with you. So far, I have only disagreed with one thing and it wasn't important enough for me to bring it up. But if we disagree on some big things someday, I am good with that. As long as you don't start telling me what kind of medical interventions I require.... :) I have to draw the line there.
"I wished her luck, and she said that she was hoping I’d be interested in speaking on it. However, I think my reply was more polite than a man’s would have been to someone who suggested they abandon a decade of research and book they’d written with purportedly the same goal, in favor of a discussion group that had already rejected their ideas without bothering to read them."
This made me bark laughter. HAha.
"Women are far more likely to prioritize relationships over their own thoughts and ideas. In this, I believe women need to be more like men."
I do prioritize relationships but they coincide with my thoughts, now. I don't choose the relationship over thought anymore. That's codependency. I am no longer interested in those kinds of relationships. I am willing to work past some crap for the relationship and I am very forgiving, but I will not stifle my own thoughts or opinions for one.
"How is it possible Amy doesn’t have a cool AI snake? " AI is terrible at snakes. I have a few that are decent but none that inspired me to share. MOSTLY AI screws up snakes. It's terrible at them. I have a couple, I will share in the next roll out (coming this week). I deleted all the messed up ones to save space, but some of them were HILARIOUS.
"No longer do the words spell us. We are spelling our own words, casting new dreams into the wide open future." That's beautiful.
Mmmmm!
Tereza, you are a deft dropper of large cognitive rocks into the collective well. Then your readers join in...
What to call the subsequent dynamic?
SubfractalFrothyCollectiveCogitation?
SapioOrgasmicShudders?
Whatever...
🤣
Much love, respect, and appreciation.
Well thank you Tereza for un-spelling these words
• Yodel-oh-ee-dee
• Diddly-odel-oh-ee-dee-yodel-oh-dee
And teaching me to yodel
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LybSS4amIS0
I save your posts to read later, because I know I will have to stop and think about them. I've worked in mostly female and mostly male environments and I would say they definitely think differently. What I noticed in the mostly male environments was the ease with which males could turn into raging lunatics and even throw things (chairs) and no one batted an eye. I remember thinking if I had done that I would have been labeled the B word. Definitely double standards.
hola, tereza.
nice essay and, as usual, lots to digest. i could comment on much and will keep it (relatively) short as i'm writing my next essay with its deadline speeding towards me. (it continues from my last essay and starts with your comment to it.)
anyway, as to listener's 'where have all the women gone' comment, your inclusion that the men have also disappeared was right on point. the social structures of the last long while, the last few hundred years at least, has been a steady infantilisation of the human, male and female, and so that we have neither 'men' or 'women' significantly present. (including 'toxin's and unhealthy food practices in the foods and medicines to reduce testosterone in both sexes!) (and as i mentioned before, the original 'fairy' tales, such little read riding hood, were brutal and children were treated as miniature adults looking to experience life in its totality and not to be particularly molly-coddled into false ideas about the totality of life as a nice experience filled with chantilly cream clouds, white knights and swooning and compliant damsels in distress. was that 'great'? maybe not. although much better, i suspect, than the current batch of 'for your own good' ideologies that are exposing children to graphic sex and the hypocritical need for sexual dysphoria and mutilation.)
as to the invisibility of 'women'. i think jasun horsley makes a cogent argument in his latest book 'Big Mother: The Technological Body of Evil https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/135688883-big-mother that the invisibility of the 's-mothering' is because it has become ubiquitous, like the water to fish, and so invisible. few see 'take the jab to save your grandmother' as a rather effective and pernicious form of the devouring 'i'm doing this for your own good' mothering.
as to your point to one of the significant differences between men and women. and now i'll be highly inappropriate. back before 'for-your-own-good' cancel culture was still the somewhat less fanged 'political correctness' preliminary-woke movement i would point to a popular ad at the time that showed a small collection of male friends 'jumping' on the one who had worn an inappropriate shirt (i think it was) that was so 'uncool' that they threw him out of the van. only to welcome him back an hour later and all laugh and jest on their way to a bar, i think. everyone was laughing and no hard feelings were expressed. i would say that that re-integration of the disenfranchised man is one distinguishing characteristic between man and woman — perhaps only to child-like adults of both sexes(?) — because that ad with all women would not be made because it wouldn't be believed by either sex.
that men-centric ad would be banned today because it was all men, with no caricatured trans and mostly white! at the time i boldly suggested that that kind of 'bad' behaviour is far far less likely with women, for whom such harsh play was often for keeps and one-way. at the time in a nice synchronicity, when i followed the the writing of susie orbach who wrote the interesting and important book 'fat is a feminist issue', https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/468872.Fat_Is_a_Feminist_Issue to her her co-authored book called "Between Women: Love, Envy and Competition in Women's Friendships" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3066282-between-women with Luise Eichenbaum. the title obscures the deeper psychological question, which is why it is that female structures organised to compete with/in/against the patriarchy do not survive — because of internal discord, not because of the so-called patriarchy beating them down. an interesting read. mind it is from so long ago now i'm curious to see how well the arguments would hold up.
and that was indeed my experience in my life as it progressed that began with having been born into a family with 3 sisters and an absent father, no brothers. when i was in my 30s i worked as a technician that had within my purview a woman-dominated purchasing office. in those three years i had women disclose some pretty shocking woman abusing woman stories. later i worked for many years as an engineer in a male dominated engineering department. i had more than one of the women tell me that they had deliberately rejected working in woman dominated offices because they were 'absolutely horrible' — yes, quotation. i'm not saying that that *has to be* or that it is truly ubiquitous, just that in three disparate aspects of my life i've seen it embodied.
i think your ultimate point about that is, 'where are the adults?', ie autonomous beings who have the fortitude to step forward boldly into the unknown, to be wrong, share their wrongness, argue deeply and dispassionately in a mutually agreed effort with others to optimise the tangible expression of compassion by actions that ameliorate suffering and division.
i recently read a richard feynman quote from the '80s(!) that describes our time of false-polite discourse in a general way, although it refers specifically to 'science-tm' (scientilsm). (i included it in my last essay). "Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts… The experts who are leading you may be wrong… I think we live in an unscientific age in which almost all the buffeting of communications and television — words, books, and so on — are unscientific. As a result, there is a considerable amount of intellectual tyranny in the name of science." and, of course, much beyond science now, that disagreement has been highjacked to be neutered playground niceness to others (s-motherly) as if disagreement is a hurtful crime to be vaccinated out of human experience. hmmmm.
I learned to feel while saving all suffering animals I encountered. Or trying to…
I taught myself to ride a unicycle really really well. That opened a vast realm of doors.
I learned by accident that I could connect energetically with an audience even though I had to be within quick reach of a bathroom before every single performance.
I was that college student who tried to have a one-on-one conversations with every professor, much to his/her eventual chagrin. I did my best to engage other students but they were almost all checked out zombies.
I dropped out of pre-med after three years and went to Clown College. Unicycling and performance skills got me hired and I lived on the dingy roach-infested circus train for three months until I realized just how not funny elephant trainers whacking elephants on their knees with a bullstick is. And how not funny caged Tigers are.
I resigned. I moved out of the circus train, and rode my motorcycle for thousands of miles. This was a very good thing to do.
I studied and performed classical theater for over a decade until I realized that very few audiences were worthy of my sacrifices.
Intermittently, along the way I took post graduate level classes in Despair. These were initiations into greater capacity for compassion both for myself and others.
I worked as a job coach for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities for 15 years. Covid insanity shut that door hard.
I spent two years and well over 2000 hours studying the multitude of psychological, sociological, economic, scientific etc. aspects of the global psychological and physical assault. I became disgusted with humanity.
At the bottom of that shit pile I was required to let go. Required to understand that no amount of research and logical presentation could change the mind of a single person captured by the fear narrative. Nothing left to do but love them as best I could anyway.
This is an ongoing process. At best I will master this unconditional love incompletely. So I’m just another human doing the best I can, finding other humans doing the best they can.
Smart cookie, I love what you say wrt dogma.
I watched (listened to) this at 4am last night after having drunk coffee in the afternoon, something I do maybe 2-3 a year these daze. But remembered just now that I wanted to comment. ✨
I really appreciate this piece. However, I have to say I don't believe all people are inherently good. I firmly believe that there is such a thing as psychopathy. I don't think they can help it, I think they are born that way, but they are not suitable to mix with empaths because of their complete lack of conscience. It is actually physical. Their brains are underdeveloped in some areas.
We absolutely need a society where they cannot gain the upper hand over others. They are why heirarchies don't work. I think educating children, and indeed all of society, on how to spot them is essential.
I came to comment on the Tree of Judgment section. Take a look at this comment thread on Gregg Reese's Stack. Alternate views get Demonized. Gate Keepers (of info / Controlled Ops) Always result to ATTACKING with insults, not the ideas.
https://gregreese.substack.com/p/parasites-and-the-virus-deception (all comments)
https://substack.com/@protonmagic/note/c-51334247 (short version)