page 5
| Introduction to series pg 1 | Introduction to series pg 2 | ||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
| 7 | 8 | Page forthcoming | Page forthcoming | Page forthcoming | Page forthcoming |
| Page forthcoming | Page forthcoming | Page forthcoming | Page forthcoming | Page forthcoming | Page forthcoming |
|
Time and again what do we encounter when the woman wants to "prove" herself? Why she wants to show what she is made of by being "Just as Good As" a man, and... even better than the man at times. (Notice the pause... indicating an underlying uncertainty.)
Yes, she wants to display her so-called individual female uniqueness in terms of standards set by men. And then seek to construe some sort of (misaligned) idea of superiority if she can jump a little higher, last a little longer, or run that mile in a quicker time... yet, does not stop to reflect with any due assessment that each of the tasks, all the courses, all the business, government and religious positions have been due to the design impressions of the male psyche. No less, let us for the moment say that a woman claims herself to have blazed a new trail in some subject area (mathematics, physics, literature, medicine, biology, anthropology, archaeology, geology, etc...), but unable to reconcile the fact that such subjects have their corner stones planted deep by way of a blue-print constructed by men. Does an alternative approach to the construction of a scaffolding set against such a structure amount to anything more than rearranging the furniture, replacing shelf-paper, or changing the "junk" drawer from one side of the sink to the other... when the cabinets were designed by men and the sink was initially manufactured by the mind of a man and perhaps even installed in the base cabinet constructed by a man?
Where is the grand uniqueness of the female psyche in terms of originality? Can we even actually claim that the long-ago presence of matriarchal leadership was instituted without the insistence of men whose primitive mind of long ago may have simply deferred to women that developed an early form of dominant articulation as a competitive expression against male physical prowess? While this says nothing as to why the human voice came to be selectively important in altering behavior... if not by itself but with physical actions involving "positively-negative" reinforcements (such as the presence of a club in hand); we can nonetheless consider that early matriarchism with its once believed in uniqueness (no doubt brought about by a consolidated acceptance of verbalized self-convincements), held its lofted social/political position until men began to develop language skills that could compete... and thus develop ideas (right or wrong) that could be enforced by their physical capabilities to subdue those who disagreed with their views.
Because the human brain is thought to undergo developmental changes in terms of a maturation which frequently comes to dispel earlier views such as those found along the developmental stages of religious ideas, socialization, warfare, ranging habits, etc... (though different areas of human settlement may alternate the specifics of lineage), we may cite a view of the steps along the course even though many non-traditional "history" courses (such as anthropology, archeology, music theory, biology, etc...), do so in their respective courses... even if the word "history" is not spoken of by the instructor such as when the basic structure of a cell is being describe. For the investigator of the many flavors of history, to speak of cell structure is to describe the present stage of a cell's historical development, though evolutionary changes are not as discernable as a readily adaptable virus or bacterium. However, the way we of the present have come to organize them does not necessarily represent the definitive narration, taking in mind that we have to distinguish between written, pre-written, sculptured, pre-sculpture (art, pre-art), and anomalous artifacts and pre-artifactual representations. While we can not make an accurate account of what an early human or pre-human thought by examining a skull, shard of pottery, or even the remnants of a dwelling, we make what are called educated guesses... or "guesstimations".
With respect to what we call the "progress" or "evolution" of the brain (though these ideas do not always mean the same thing), or the maturation of the mind... including ideas involving how we think about the past, our ideas about the primitiveness of the female brain with respect to its place amongst early hominids is re-examined when we come across an article such as: New Women of the Ice Age, in which the article presents us with an introduction to question traditionally held views:
Forget about hapless mates being dragged around by macho mammoth killers. The women of Ice Age Europe, it appears, were not mere cave wives but priestly leaders, clever inventors, and mighty hunters.
Along with the above link garnered from: The Evolution of Religions and removing the rationale of fatith, can be found the following comments concerning Sexism in The Major World Religions:
In human history, when did the religious subjugation of goddess and by extension all women occur? Around 6,000 years ago, it can be hypothesized that male gods hit the scene in full force and about 5,000 years ago, women started to lose more, and eventually all value. In Turkey, archaeologists found 4,000-year-old tablets that cite women’s rights. However, more progress sexism continued to develop after 4,000 years ago. Even today, women hardly have any value or even regained a fully equal status.. The devaluing, disrespecting, and degrading of women came before societies developed the more fixed class/sex structures as we think of today.
Around 2,000 years ago, the manmade god concept took time to develop and finalized completely as the only or main gender of gods. It can be said that one of the male god concept’s goal was for male control and domination of female sexuality and their reproductive potential. Once the male god is established and by extension men with the promotion of patriarchy, it was relatively easy to maintain and enforce through holy books and laws written by men which established women’s lower status that deny women of education, their rights to their bodies, and exclude them from decision-making. Eventually, male dominance and its sexism were establish in nearly every known human society and has lasted for a few millennia.
Another interesting account of women can be found at Max Dashu's site: Suppressed Histories Archives (Restoring Women to Cultural Memory)
When we find a list of suggested "qualifications" that the woman should be recognized for her role(s) in the past (and presence), there is a problem which we encounter. This is to ask how we should recognize them... which necessarily entails a presumptive appreciation for what they do, say they can do, and can do even if they do not speak openly of it. If we are expected to humble ourselves in the face of archæological evidence which describes the worship of a give female and that their title was goddess, supreme mother, holy mother, etc..., what exactly do these titles refer to? Did such women have some extra-ordinary perspicacity (acute intelligence) or insight, or creativity, or originality of thought, or linguistic ability, or some great and wonderful physical ability or "power"? When we recognize that some women were prayed to, others given (prostitutional) sacrifices to, or otherwise worshiped, why were they worshiped? Because of some inherent actual quality different from other women or only due to some belief, like the present claims about a male god?
Is this what women of today seeking some business, government or religious position are seeking? To be recognized as a goddess and yet have no actual "great" attribute other than some sort of persuade-ability to create an illusion in the minds of followers who... upon being female... use the presence of such a female leader to project themselves into the same role by way of vicariousness?
And what of the "power" women have to live, generally speaking, a longer life than their male mate? Do they feel an empowerment or a loss? A loss like those five (or more) women who belong to the same church and have all lost their husbands, only to find they speak of the loneliness from the loss? Women who do not seek a presumed female leadership role outside their relationship with a man whom may be the dominant figure, and attended a church run primarily by men who worship a male-figured god? Do we strive to awaken the presumed underlying female greatness in such women who dedicate themselves to a life-style of male dominance? Why is it that such women don't feel empowered to pursue some awakening or re-awakening of the presumed all and powerful female psyche... perhaps by joining in a cult dominated by women who create a hierarchy and ceremony which favors women as the central figures such as in the Lesbian-led LGBTQ cult or some New Age orientation cult, or some witches coven cult, or some Mother Earth cult, or some paganistic ritual of old involving a present-day version of some pre-written history fertility cult... instead of quilting bee cults, or dog training/breeding cult, or sports cult (like woman's softball), or some other present day variation of a cultic orientation subscribing to a modernized Venus or Virgin Mary adoration?
If the woman was so great in her role as a goddess, how is it that she let herself be supplanted by thousands of men who have played out "her own" once designated role in many guises in many different cultures in so many different eras? Was the so-called presumed "power" or "strength" of these ancient goddesses nothing more than the same sorts of false advertisement being used today in business, politics/government and religion? Did she not have the power to stop such a trampling down? Did her all-mighty Mother God not have the power her effigied presence led thousands to believe in? Did she slit her own throat by wanting to effeminize men who then, instead of developing a physical prowess like so many other men were inclined and trained to do within a competitive male culture, compensated for the lack of such by developing an enhance means of articulation and thought processing which came to over-shadow the vernacular, speech, articulation and thought processing of divergent forms of information that which could not only come to question the views of the Mother goddess, but was able to provide alternative perceptions and directions of orientation that even women came to accept as being more realistic and profitable for their personal interests... thus establishing for themselves a sub-cultural venue for applying their 'differences' of body, mind, and spirit towards aligning themselves with one or another man/men in order to effect change from within... just like some women attempt to do by joining a "men's club" in business, government and/or religion?
Would the women of today have us all bow down to some ancient goddess and construct rituals and adorn ourselves with particularized ceremonial garb just so that women could become the central player(s) in all social activities... and yet, its accomplishes nothing but the change of a person in a given musical chair? Is this why women want to fill the ranks of different business, government and religious seats... in order that we may all be impressed upon to retreat to some form of paganish orientation? Are women suggesting that they reason they are striving so hard is because humanity has actually retreated to an ancient past and that present institutions are re-constructed variations of paganistic practices, albeit with present day formulas of ceremonial work routines, dress requirements, passwords, identification badges, and peculiarlized vernaculars?
Then again, let us give the "woman", the female psyche, the benefit of the doubt. Let us express the opinion that there is some sort of as-yet-to-be-defined in modern terms, an inexplicable "power" that the female psyche has tapped into, ages ago, but that in some cases it became misapplied, diluted, or... in the case of a few women, it was kept secret and may for the moment be labeled a "mystery religion", so as to coincide with the primitive forms of identification and interpretation used by men in their analysis of ancient socialized practices, be they a cult or otherwise. Let us say that many, if not all women at one time or another do in fact have a unique capacity to perceive at least some semblance of a unique quality that is not to be confused with her sexuality. And in as much as historians have noted the hermaphroditic character of humanity with respect to the two sexes, we might also want to include the ability of some, if not all men with the same perceptual ability at some period of their life... perhaps as a phenomena of a transition involving a developmental receptivity such as in the case of language acquisition criticality. Indeed, we should then also have to begin a means by which we can not only isolate the property(s) of such an ability, but the parameters of its operational dimensions... in that if it is misapplied to coincide with the currency of living requirements in a given era, it will be diluted. Hence, while some women are swearing their is a sort of untapped "power" to be had, their attempts to get closer to the secrets by an adoption of old or new variations of old procedures, causes fragmentations to which they attempt to supplement with, in order to disguise the disquieting realization that the full power sought after has not been achieved, some fanciful representation involving varying combinations of inebriation and sexuality.
Because inebriation can take many forms (music, rhythmic body movements, alcohol, drugs, etc...), and that varying components of ceremony, language, and garments... coupled to number-designated applications (at certain times within a given time period for a designated length of time), all such activities can act as "fillers" which over-whelm the senses and add to distractability through intensified involvement; leading the once genuine search for this perceived "power", into divergent paths that may satisfy the varying lusts of individuals who have no real sense of the "power" to which some have a perceptual hint of, and may simply refer to it as a sense, 'something there', spectral presence, indistinct phenomena, subtle energy, etc... All of which begs the question of how do we refine our search parameters if our present expectations are part of a self-engendered process of dilution that we've unknowingly adopted as an adaptive characteristic that we somehow have convinced ourselves to accept as being rational behaviors?
If we do not let sexuality dilute our interpretations, definitions and search efforts, is this cause to consider that other abstinences will also be helpful... and yet when we look at those who have sought some such presumed "ultimate" truth, knowledge or understanding, we can see no actual benefit to such ascetic practices... unless we presume that the assumed "power" that many women deduce as existing... whether they can accurately define it or not, is to be found in a simple way of life free from many unconstrained worldly practices involving sensuality? Or are there some who refuse to believe that such a quiet life-style has any real worldly-applicable power other than as a prescription for an over-self indulgence and preoccupation? Do they thus image themselves to be left with nothing other that to turn away from the living, and/or light, and seek some power in darkness and death... whatever and whichever symbolism they care to ascribe to such things coupled to what they believe is the appropriate repetitive language, repetitive dress code, repetitive ceremonialisms, even though some people do not recognize (repetitive) daily routines as ceremonialism that are what can be described as being "sacred" to them?
Does the presumed "power" that many women (and men) intuitively perceive become applied to conventions of activity dependent on the era into which one is born, but that such practices... some of which have the means of affecting millions of lives, are not the actual "thing" being diffusively perceived by the senses prior to the development of a conscious image or impression? Do we falsify the meaning or description of this perception by assigning to it various activities which we think describe this perception alternatively described by some as "power", such as levitation, invisibility, great physical strength- speed- agility, telepathy, control of or understanding of animals, weather patterns, or cards with different symbols on them, as well as various types of applications used in old divination practices? Are such activities an inherent defense mechanism against the requirements for pursuing a more definitive grasp of the "perception of p0wer", however and by whomever it may be termed? Are they self-made, socially acceptable distractions that effectively exhibit a crutch to be used as an excuse not to pursue the actual domain of this "power", like someone who reaches for a cigarette or drink when they get nervous... or some dialogue which excuses their participation? And yet, let us ask: Does such participation require a sustained effort like an athlete in training? Is this why the indistinctly defined impression that many women (and men) have is so rarely achieved... but that some do... yet do not share the secret(s) of with anyone except a few initiates?
If it is a "power" found in this world, is it thus committed to being used in this world, or it is a gateway to one or more other times, places and beings? And if in finding this "super-normal" accountability, does one then become super-normal themselves in some way? Or are all preceding speculations little more than the efforts for seeking the golden fleece, golden chalice, and philosopher's stone of transmutation? Or are such questions yet but another type of distraction? Are so many "writings on the wall" that we tell others to read, created by ourselves as former marks used as breadcrumbs to find our way back because we are fearful of getting lost in a labyrinth of consideration we lose touch with a world which has no place for such efforts because those who control commerce consider their activities a search for the holy grail entitled gold, silver or some other man-made currency? Is there something better and this "better" is that which many women can somehow psychically glimpse but are forced to define according to the ideas promoted by those who are orientated to hedonistic practices? What then does the woman do if she is forced to identify, label and use the unique abilities of her psyche along paths marked out by men for engaging in enterprises where men will always hold the reins or outline the path or use women to deliver the goods for his self-interests... even if those interests are defined as "family values"... yet they never exactly describe what the values are or who a family member is... and which members of the family are to be used as scapegoats, stepping stones, rungs on a ladder or set-up for defeat in order that more favored members are supported.
Let us also ask which activities today will be described as "mystery religions" in centuries hence, or if those in the future will wonder who amongst us in the present actually acknowledged (and recorded) that many institutions of today are to be described as pagan practices... such as the present formula of despotic democracy. Will the National Organization of Women (not to mention the Lesbian led LGBTQ "community"), to be cited as pseudo-fertility cults masked by dress, activity and language... not to mention venue practices for exhibitionism...whether or not the "exhibitionism" is expressed in overt forms of indulged-in displays of sexual activity or body parts? Will historians of the future denote that many women don't want to reflectively view themselves as an expressed product of some re-cycled bygone era activity because they believe themselves to be physically, mentally and spiritually far removed from ancient practices of animism, totemism, divinatory speculation, fertility rites and the like? To which we must ask, how far removed are women, much less men, from their pre-history social practices if such practices are expressed today even in a symbolic way... like the bread and wine of the Eucharist defined as the flesh and blood of Jesus and is reminiscent of an ancient practice suggested as involving an actual sacrifice... if not cannibalism? While there are other activities one might use to describe how ancient activities have become symbolically canvassed (white-washed) over, one actually needs only to ask how far removed has humanity actually come if ancient practices are still in effect, be they of a symbolic character or not?
Is the "something better", the "something else" that may be ascribed to some perceptions that some come define as a "power", that which is a desire, a hopefulness... for a full move of body, mind and spirit away from the past to the point even symbolic representations are no longer used? Does this move, if applied forcefully today, entail the destruction or at least non-usage of many present day cherished structures of ideas and beliefs found in business, government, religion, science and education... like the worshiped idols and social stratification... including buildings, which came to be removed by those seeking to take humanity into what they believed to be a better future? For example, the wide-spread usage of ithyphallic (erect penis) and explicit vaginal images during eras when such physical attributes were not obscene (not to mention acts of public body excretions)... many of which were aligned with fertility beliefs, came to be denounced by later individuals who wanted to gain control of the public's worshiping (and temple offering) tributes who cited such practices as being against "their one, true (male)-god" instead of a female goddess whose worshiping requirements were attributed to sustaining measures of injury, injustice, captivity and ill-health. In short, how do we move forward if even those women who initially started out with their efforts had seen the "message" of their "something better" perception as a unique instance of realization, but have misapplied it to travel a path of business, politics or religion which maintains old practices of social ritualism in modernized guises that they come to defend because they have learned to navigate the waterways of present murky waters defined as "things as they are" that they believe themselves to be forced to chart a course along? What do we do with women who decide to "play the game" of men, even if they can see such games as dead ends for humanity, and have developed a repertoire of rationalizations to defend their actions, and will use the "power" inherent in the tricks of the trade they have been initiated into?
How would you react to someone who says that all your life-long efforts have been for naught, and that you must relinquish your position in order that an actual new and better way can be achieved? How do we convince them if we act like a guru seeking followers to sacrifice their all for us to gain and live in luxury while they have been convinced to live a life of humility and selfless abandonment of most earthly concerns, considerations and "things"? Because there have been and still remain so many advancing one hypocrisy over another (such as can be found in business, government and religion), how is anyone to be certain you are telling a greater truth? Because proof is so very necessary, where is one's proof that their way, or that by being placed into a given position, is substantially better than another person, be they a different gender or not? Since politicians are know for lying, how can we be certain a woman will not lie through her teeth in order to gain a position so that she can advance ulterior motives... and can not be held accountable for any lie told to a prospective constituency? Just because a given woman expresses one or more beliefs you strongly hold, how does this admission equate with being able to provide a solution for a problem or a blue-print for a better law, if the system in which she must work is rigged not only against her, but most of the public as well?
How do women seeking some political position keep from becoming like those within a government culture dedicated to principles which are not often in the best interests... short term or long, for the public. How do we keep women from being corrupted by a system which was initially designed by the originators as a corruptible enterprise of governance that was defined as an entrepreneurial go-between... thus permitting the people to be used as fodder for whatever volley they cared to pursue, for practicing self-indulgences, for mis-guided purpose, and mis-aligned political philosophy? How can we help the female psyche achieve a factual embodiment of herself that she may only have vague impressions thereof? Is the once heralded Matriarchal illustration of body, mind and spirit but a remnant of what the female psyche is able to achieve, and that no women yet... even those declared as former goddesses, has ever achieved a full realization of that which is possible? Is such a perfection achievable, or is it but the illusion of an ego variously reacting to one or another presence of the psyche of a man or men... be they good or bad?
Page Origination: Sunday, 1st July 2018... 6:14 AMInitial Posting: Wednesday, 4th July 2018... 11:18 AM