It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Thirteen Goals of a Witch

page: 16
26
<< 13  14  15    17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 5 2009 @ 12:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jim Scott
def. of selfish (Random House College Dictionary): devoted to or caring only for oneself; concerned only with one's own interests. I believe this accurately describes the orientation of the wiccan as previously noted by the wiccan believer you cited.


That couldn't be further from the truth. Wiccans tend to be very ecologically involved in their community. Volunteering in animal shelters, planting trees, etc. You know, tree hugger stuff.




posted on Sep, 5 2009 @ 09:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
 


Yes, balance is desirable, but you can hardly blame women for resorting to a dianic viewpoint when their male counterparts continually opress them. There's nothing more I'd like to see than men and women living co-habitually, free of prejudice...but that's not going to happen anytime soon. And, unfortunately, men are primarily to blame for that. Look at your culture today. Would you describe it as, to use your terms, masculinecentric or feminicentric?



posted on Sep, 5 2009 @ 02:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Hazelnut
 


"Now that you've mentioned it I do recall reading that theory before. It makes sense to me. After all, the sustaining energy is feminine. Male energy is the spark, the impetus for creating life. Feminine energy is the sustaining, nurturing, substantial energy found in all existence. The male energy sparks to life then dies out, only to be reignited once again. I can see why this would disturb the male population, seeing themselves unnecessary to the bringing forth of life, before it was commonly known that men provide the fertiliztion to the egg. Intimidated men often strike out in violence. Especially when their ego's are threatened. Its not purposeful either, its natural.

It is an interesting theory. I've been reading the Women's Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets, I believe I recall many instances referred to in it."

In my view, these thoughts are precisely a polar opposite, mirror-image view of Freudian ANALysis. Switch penis envy to goddess envy. Same mentality. It is relentlessly ego-centric. One tries to be a master over another, but they both end up slaves to the system. One half is dominant, while the other half is subversive. The subversive eats away at the dominant until there is a pole reversal of sorts.

Also, separating masculine and feminine energies feeds into the divide and conquer mindset. It is simply a "spell." You are metaprogramming, consciously and/or subconsciously, people into viewing things the exact same way they have throughout the entire age of slavery, but merely with a twist, and a limp wrist. Half of a coin is not the same thing as the coin itself. The worship of cycles merely repeats the same idiocy over and over. It is a good thing that as cycles repeat, they at least have a tendency to repeat in more rapid succession, getting people to see the dynamics of an entire cycle, rather than worshipping details of a particular cycle that is already hegemonic. The devil is in the details, ha ha. Love of symbiotic abstract systems lends itself to a greater level of more concrete, instinctual connection amongst us. Instinctual love provides a basis for the building of symbiotic abstract dynamics. They feed off of the other. They are both necessary. When not in harmony, domination and manipulation exist, hand in hand. It is not a chicken or egg thing, because they see to always coexist, even if only in perception. One dominates in order to avoid being tricked out of a situation, to maintain his or her current status. One manipulates to squirm its way out of a seemingly dominant stranglehold. Both men and women do both.

Oh well, we will figure it out, removing the false images. A lack of balance leads to systemic decay, forcing us to find another way. There is only one sort of perspective that lends itself to the abolishment of cycles, and that is infinite love. Infinite love realizes that only a holistic view can manintain system growth. Division leads to it all falling back into the quicksand from whence it came. A society is judged, ultimately, to the extent that they judge. Two halves in war lead to our current order. One half agreeing to let the other half have all influence leads to lack of balance, leads to war, leads to our current order. There is a very valid philosophical reason why monotheism (secular view is synchronistic order) is THE ideal.

Edit: Remember, both a "C" and a "D" are right next to a butthole. They just carry out the anal-centric mentality through different forms. We can be better than monkeys slinging poo, but only if we give up the desire to crap on others for personal status. As of now, quite a few of both sexes eat it up, becoming full of it, full of crap. Luckily, there are also quite a few men and women who do not like the taste of poo one bit.


[edit on 5-9-2009 by orwellianunenlightenment]

[edit on 5-9-2009 by orwellianunenlightenment]



posted on Sep, 5 2009 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by VergeofObscene
 


Everybody is oppressing everybody else. I do not understand why a part of a segment of the population that spends 60 percent of the money, has institutions in place for its protection and advancement, has a higher percentage of college attendees, etc., feels oppressed. In fact, I do understand; it is the selfish unwillingness to admit that we are all oppressed. And we oppress ourselves!

[edit on 5-9-2009 by orwellianunenlightenment]



posted on Sep, 5 2009 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by orwellianunenlightenment
reply to post by VergeofObscene
 


Everybody is oppressing everybody else. I do not understand why a part of a segment of the population that spends 60 percent of the money, has institutions in place for its protection and advancement, has a higher percentage of college attendees, etc., feels oppressed. In fact, I do understand; it is the selfish unwillingness to admit that we are all oppressed. And we oppress ourselves!

[edit on 5-9-2009 by orwellianunenlightenment]


That rambling went through one of my ears and straight out the other. What exactly are you saying? Technichally, everyone faces some form of oppression at some stage in their lives, but that's not the issue here...it's obvious that you are only viewing this situation from your own country (although the problem exists there, too). Take your viewpoint to some of the middle-eastern countries where the muslim religion is prevalent, or to some of the other developing countries where the status of women is akin to subhuman...or if you can't see outside your own country, at least examine its history. I'm sure you'll change your tune.

Of course, it's not the case for every human being, but the general consensus is that women are continually oppressed by men. It's a human tendency that crops up WAY too often to ignore or brush aside for the worthless sake of political correctness. It doesn't matter HOW philosophical or diplomatic you are, whether you are male or female, because the problem is rooted in biology. I'm not accusing all men of sharing this behaviour, but it should be at least examined objectively, as if you were a genderless observer. Generally speaking, men have a lot of catching up to do with their female counterparts. Women have rarely, if ever, attempted to dominate or control men. The worst they have ever done is form their own dianic groups...but men wouldn't even allow this, and relentlessly persued and massacred them (the inquisition, etc.). Even today, the troubles and hypocrital treatment of women is overlooked too often for my liking.

So now, maybe you understand why women feel oppressed?



posted on Sep, 5 2009 @ 06:04 PM
link   
reply to post by VergeofObscene
 


You do not correct a wrong brought about by going to a extreme by going to the opposite extreme. I really wish those civil rights leaders that just want to swap the situation and pretend they aren't racist would notice this. And I do not oppress anyone or want to oppress anyone so I am not sure I know what your talking about.

And quite simply men and women need each other. This crap is counterproductive.


[edit on 5-9-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]



posted on Sep, 5 2009 @ 06:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by VergeofObscene
 


And quite simply men and women need each other. This crap is counterproductive.

[edit on 5-9-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]


I couldn't agree more.

I would like to see men and women appreciate each other FOR their differences. It should never be a contest or battle between us.



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 12:49 AM
link   
I do not feel oppressed.

I feel...rather powerful.



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 05:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts

Originally posted by Jim Scott
def. of selfish (Random House College Dictionary): devoted to or caring only for oneself; concerned only with one's own interests. I believe this accurately describes the orientation of the wiccan as previously noted by the wiccan believer you cited.


That couldn't be further from the truth. Wiccans tend to be very ecologically involved in their community. Volunteering in animal shelters, planting trees, etc. You know, tree hugger stuff.


My post was regarding the original 13 cited by the OP. Have another look for yourself at the 13 goals.



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 05:10 AM
link   
reply to post by VergeofObscene
 


Neither you, nor I, am a woman. And not all women feel oppressed. If it is sensitivity that is oppressed, then that is oppressed in men as well, If it is self-autonomy that is oppressed, we are all oppressed. A man might be in a "leadership" position, but he is a lackey to the man above him. This "leader" is a total submissive. Hell, the hierarchy makes everyone a submissive to the dominant modus operandi. Mothers and fathers often deny their sons' emotional expression. Mothers and fathers often deny their daughters' bluntness. The more a man objectifies a woman, the easier he is to manipulate. The more a woman objectifies the usefulness of a man, the more likely she is to put up with mindless domination. Besides, there is domination by force, and there is domination by "leading him by the nose." Things are changing for the better for sure, but they will not complete the change until things are looked at holistically. We are all at fault. It is not them at fault. It is the them mentality that perpetuates the bullcrap. Domination and manipulation coexist.; They are a synchronicity of sorts.

As was already stated in this thread, we all need each other. Masculine chauvinism and feminine chauvinism are passing fads, haven't you heard? I know you mean well, but I wholeheartedly disagree with your sentiments. I have experienced those patterns of thinking as well, but I now see the infinite loopiness of those sorts of thoughts. Perhaps we will just have to agree to disagree. I can just honestly state that I have strained my brain thinking about things like this, and have come full circle to a certain extent. I know futile infinite loops of "thought" when I see them.

Edit: BTW, men could be stereotyped as biologically active forces, according to the sum effects of his biological interactions. Being an active force does not translate into violence. Violence is a branch of unloving, selfish roots. A man can just as easily use his active determination to focusing on making the world a better place. Instinct plus perspective equals the reality of the individual.

On the flip side, women could be stereotyped as being biologically reactive through fear (offspring protection instinct) and as being "everywhere" in perception. This does not necessarily lead to a woman cowering in fear. One could even be partisan to their particular thought fetish, and they could blame the fear in women for the violent behavior in men; for example, a fearful woman would get hot and bothered by a man who is a brute to everyone but herself. You know, he would beat the living crap out of everything but her, supposedly. A man is more inclined to act the part, and then become the part, to get some. But these are thought-tunnel realities that are nonsense when applied to an individual woman. There are many strong women, just as there are many weak men. Also, the so-called everywhere, flowing perspective of woman might lend itself to lying, if a woman chooses. But women are certainly not biologically-based liars. They have choice. A woman can just as easily, under this paradigm, be a source of powerful creative inspiration, as she could be a destructive, conniving, liar.

In summation, saying that men are inherently violent is equivalent to saying women are inherently deceptive. Both are bullcrap. Anal/territorial/hierarchical to the core. Not in the least bit conducive to peace. These characteristics, however, do develop in relation to the development of the other, the mirror opposite characteristic. They develop to the extent that they are perceived as necessary. If only more would see that the one grows the other.....


[edit on 6-9-2009 by orwellianunenlightenment]



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 05:23 AM
link   
reply to post by hadriana
 


Good for you. Wearing the label of oppression changes you into the label. We are not labels, we are sentient beings for crying out loud.



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 09:37 AM
link   
Watcher in the Shadow, I'm not proposing that women should take things to the other extreme, and claim female superiority or whatever. THAT would be counter-productive...but when you look at human history, and the treatment of women, the formation of dianic groups is at least understandable, if not justifiable. Dianic groups such as the dianic wiccans were not tyrannical, just gender exclusive. Fraternal groups like the freemasons do the same thing...


Originally posted by orwellianunenlightenment
reply to post by hadriana
 


Good for you. Wearing the label of oppression changes you into the label. We are not labels, we are sentient beings for crying out loud.


Sentient beings, yes...cows and chickens are also sentient beings, but that doesn't stop people from splattering them on their plates at the dinner-table...



[edit on 6-9-2009 by VergeofObscene]



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 10:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Jim Scott
 


I had a christian come to my house yesterday with two little girls trying to give me literature. I have been accosted plenty of times going to the store. That is simply not true.



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 10:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Jim Scott
 


And then the whole community is shocked and let down when that pastor/preacher is found to have engaged in illegal activities or is having an affair. And how well can you help someone if your clouded with your own problems and judgement?

If Christianity is the largest religion and A&E were given the task of taking care of the Earth, then the religion is not doing a very good job of it.



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


Good point, but I will add something even further in defense of your view. If one views oneself in relation to the whole, seeking balance between self and other, then seeking to do things for the interest of oneself is equivalent to collective interest. This kind of selfishness is beautiful.



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by VergeofObscene
 


Listen, I don't want to argue. You are right about many things you see, pointing out certainly understandable responses to problems in this world, among other things. I don't think we see things too differently, in light of our sought after destination. I guess we see a different way of approaching that point, at this point in time......



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 05:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Hazelnut
 


The goals seem good to me. I just dont practice anything personally. I just have a faith and belief in the prime creator first and humanity second. My mother is called a centress by her friends but I have no clue if thats some kind of witch or not. Shes always babbleing about chakras and auras and remedys. We just let her do her thing what ever it is. But seriously some of the crap she advises us on actually works.Once when my son was about 12 yrs old he had a wart on his finger about the size of a pencil eracer. Well, crazy ole mom said,"cut a potatoe in half and rub the wart with a half. Then throw the potatoe in a weed patch. As the potatoe rots, the wart will dissappear. To humor her we tried it and damn if it didn't work. Weird.....
Anyway Hazelnut, good post.

[edit on 6-9-2009 by Magantice]



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 11:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Jim Scott
 


And one should not get one's own house in order before assisting others??? Also, the list concerns the spiritual, which is centered on the self. not the mundane, which is centered on the physical world.



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 11:37 PM
link   
HI,

It has nothing to do with thinking of oneself as special,


Shamans enter into trances through such methods as autohypnosis, the ingestion of hallucinogens, fasting, and self-mortification, during which time they are said to be in contact with the spirit world. Shamanism requires specialized knowledge or abilities, which are often thought to be obtained through heredity or supernatural calling. Among the Siberian Chukchee, one may behave in ways that Western clinicians would characterize as psychotic, but which they interpret as possession by a spirit demanding that one assume the shamanic vocation. Among the South American Tapirapé, shamans are called in their dreams. In yet other societies, shamans choose their career: Native Americans of the Plains would seek a communion with spirits through a "vision quest," while South American Shuar, seeking the power to defend their family against enemies, apprentice themselves to accomplished shamans. Shamans often observe special fasts and taboos particular to their vocation. Oftentimes the shaman has, or acquires, one or more familiars, usually spirits in animal form, or (sometimes) of departed shamans. Shamans can manipulate these spirits to diagnose and cure victims of witchcraft . Some societies distinguish shamans who cure from sorcerers who harm; others believe that all shamans have both curative and deadly powers. The shaman is usually paid for his services, and generally enjoys great power and prestige in the community, but he may also be suspected of harming others, and may thus be feared. Most shamans are men, but there are societies in which women may also be shamans. In some societies, the male shaman denies his own sexual identity by assuming the dress and attributes of a woman; this practice is rare but has been found among the Chukchee. See Dyak , Araucanians , Arapaho , Cheyenne , and Ute .


Shamanism requires specialized knowledge or abilities, which are often thought to be obtained through heredity or supernatural calling. Among the Siberian Chukchee, one may behave in ways that Western clinicians would characterize as psychotic,

I would say more like a odd or peculiar people, they are different,

www.encyclopedia.com...

It is best not to talk about it.

I have experienced some amazing things, frightening things, and wonderful things, sometimes I think it is a curse.

Above all
Respect,

it is not a game, it can be dangerous, and it can take a great toll on the mind and body.

[edit on 113030p://bSunday2009 by Stormdancer777]



posted on Sep, 17 2009 @ 11:19 AM
link   
For you Jaxon,

Intelligent Design Found in DNA

BYU Written with DNA

By LiveScience Staff

www.livescience.com...
In an advance toward developing nanoelectronic devices, scientists in Utah arranged segments of DNA into tiny letters that spell "BYU." Credit: The American Chemical Society

090916-byu-dna-02.jpg
In an advance toward developing nanoelectronic devices, scientists in Utah arranged segments of DNA into tiny letters that spell "BYU." Credit: The American Chemical Society

Using a new technology, researchers at Brigham Young University have written BYU with DNA.

The letters are so small that hundreds of thousands would fit inside the period at the end of this sentence.

Adam Woolley and co-authors Elisabeth Pound, Jeff Ashton and Hector Becerril have devised ways to fold DNA into nanoscale structures that have multiple branching points. They also describe procedures to form nanostructures of various different sizes using the method of "DNA origami." This work has potential application in forming nanoelectronic devices.

The "small, thin structures with square junctions have potential applications in nanoelectronics, addressing the need for narrow, branched features for wiring," the researchers said.

The feat will be detailed in the October issue of the American Chemical Society's journal Nano Letters.


www.livescience.com...

as knowledge increases, watch

Image

www.livescience.com...


[edit on 113030p://bThursday2009 by Stormdancer777]




top topics



 
26
<< 13  14  15    17 >>

log in

join