The "Rational Male and Female"? - Biology and Programs in Relationships

[Laura]

Yes, in the end, it is all about having power over a woman and that is truly the most basic of psychopathic urges/fantasies. And what is that but a wish to appropriate to themselves the creativity of women. Instead of supporting it and cherishing it and participating in its benefits, they want to control and destroy it. It's kind of the ultimate "kill the goose that laid the golden egg" routine.

 

[Skyalmian]

Many things (not all) proposed by PUA and main core of the community have on aim get the control over the woman, which may have given them control over her, in a not openly aggressive way, by through deception. It is a reflection of STS world and creates the imbalance.

"The baby has to be thrown out with the bath water."

 

[Laura]

"The baby has to be thrown out with the bath water."

What do you mean, exactly?

 

[Skyalmian]

What do you mean, exactly?

Rollo's book. (I probably used an incorrect phrase, but couldn't think of anything better.)

 

[Starshine]

My aunt and her husband have 50 years of marriage under their belt, they are 84 and 71. This is the only couple I know of with that long of marriage history. It's inspiring to even see that it exist. From what I can see from the outside, they know each other very well, supported each other all along through family troubles, illnesses, and everything that makes life hard. They had their due. They spend their spring/summer in a bungalow they own near the Atlantic Coast.

They smile and laugh together, have no resentment against each other. They can have a conversation and are really distinct individuals. They don't get offended by foolish things. They are friends, first of all. I've never seen them physically proximate, I guess past a certain point, that's not really what matters.

My knowledge of their relationship is quite superficial (well, we're talking 50 years 24/7) apart from what I've seen myself since a kid and what my mother has told me, we just began seeing each other again recently since we moved in the area. Anyway, they seem to be the most functional individuals in the family and it's always a pleasure to share a moment with them. We can share our point of views and realize that we see the same distorted things in some individuals of the family, which is reassuring.
It's greatly inspiring to see such couples, and it brings about respect. (If I say it right)

I wouldn't trade my place for their though, as I tend to join ScioAgapeOmnis's point of view. I'm really happy to have the relationship I have with my girlfriend/wife, and also to be where we're at considering where we're from. We've made significant steps towards the good and we're always more aware that we need to continuously work for it to get even better. I wouldn't have engaged myself with someone not interested in the knowledge available here, the fact that we talk about it and never get sick of talking to each other makes life way easier. There always are new bits of info to share. She is a good person and a sunray motivating me to become better. We both want to get responsible and progress. We also benefit from living with my mom and step-father, they can see things we don't. Same for us towards them.

One harsh thing that can happen is when you spend 20 years with someone and feel like you had no impact whatsoever in the life of your partner. That's what happened with my parents. He didn't fight for it when confronted with my mother wanting ANY kind of reaction when she told him it's not possible anymore to feel that much alone when in a couple! He didn't say anything. Tried again playing guilt. Won't work eternally. "I am as I am, not gonna make effort to improve. Accept it or leave."
That was harsh, so harsh and infuriating to me that it didn't trigger something in him.
He stuck to gambling, drinking and sleeping on the couch in front of the TV. No problem with him! Yeah. Stay a victim but don't ask for help. Nowadays, he's just the same as he was at that point. Not a model. Definitely a convinced victim. I understand weakness though, it's easier. And from the outside, it's Mr. Nice! On the inside, it's hypocrisy and resentment 101.
You can't change someone not willing to.

 

[furryfrog]

Apparently men in there 50's are the happiest, Job satisfaction is by far the most important, men with kids are happier, men who have kids and can't see them are much more unhappy. My reply function is blocked, so I cant reply to comments on this. Some members may find watching this worthwhile.

 

[BlackCartouche]

I remember originally reading the esoteric theories and channeled material about how 3D is all about "The Choice" and how the higher level beings basically reduced the whole purpose of 3D to being able to make "The Choice." It was all an intriguing intellectual theory and seemed to make sense, but it has gotten rather interesting that the underlying currents behind many of the ideas rippling across the mass consciousness of humanity as portrayed on the internet fundamentally come down to STS vs STO.

I think this is where the Adamic state comes in from eating of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil and why we had to fall into pain of physicality. Evil must become part of us. Without it within us, we cannot exercise Free Will. Here's what I mean...

Firstly, In light of these session excerpts...

Session 5 October 1994

A: Review. If the concept was the eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge provides all knowledge, then one is being deceived, because no one particular source can provide all knowledge. Therefore, when one believes in the deception, one has now trapped oneself within parameters.

Session 18 October 1994

Q: (L) Were they already in bondage to someone else when the Lizzies came?

A: No. They were free. The symbolic story of Adam and Eve was a story of enticement to false knowledge. The tree of knowledge of good and evil was focused, imprisoned knowledge.


Although the "tree of knowledge" on its own is a falsehood, under its full name as "the tree of knowledge of good and evil" implies something slightly different. Eating of the tree of "knowledge of good and evil" is the metaphor representing the moment pre-Adamic man became "aware", to become of "Adam" man, to become a sentient 'Being' capable of "choice" on truly a individuated conscious-awareness level capable of individuated soul-growth. STS = Evil = Original Sin, as become made inherited. But to not eat of the fruit is to ensure man does not know evil and remains unconscious, or pre-Adamic.

In light of the sins of Adam passed down through all of mankind...
I was raised a Catholic and was taught to believe Jesus was born without Original Sin aka inherited Evil aka inherent STS. This is why Jesus was pure of heart of Light aka STO (his physicality notwithstanding), and I was taught thus: it was simply impossible for Jesus to deviate from "Light". There is also the Islamic equivalent of Mohammad having his chest cut open by Angel Gabriel to remove Mohammad's heart to have cleansed completely the 'black spot' of Sin aka inherited Evil aka inherent STS, before his 'purified' heart was put back in his chest thus the prophet could follow God's will in pure of heart without ever deviating from the divine path he was chosen for - of STO (there may be a link here with Gabriel purifying Mohammad's heart of black Sin, and the black stone of Kaaba, some said to have come from Eden, which was originally white with purity before it was turned black upon being touched by the sins of men... I digress)

The point is Jesus (and Mohammed) had no Free Will because the otherwise inherently-born-with STS was completely absent/absolved/removed from the soul. Because of this, Jesus could absolutely NOT in any way deviate from the path of truth/righteousness/Light aka STO because he had no STS within to allow him the "choice" ability to deviate.
Essentially, because of this, Jesus never had any "choice" whatsoever! He had no Free Will! Therefor, to be of pure STO without a speck of STS reflection means to NOT in any way make possible to conceive, much less implement, in "choosing" an STS thought or action... And conversely, to be pure STS without a speck of STO reflection would also mean, just as equally, to NOT in any way possible to conceive, much less implement, in choosing an STO thought or action.
To have all of one without any of the other is to remove the ability of "choice" absolutely, and therefor, remove any notion of "Free Will".

To remove STS from the soul is the greatest abridgment of Free Will because the capability of actual exercising of Free Will itself ceases within that soul-consciousness as of that moment the instant STS is wholly removed. The path to STO needs STS to ensure "choice" is maintained... Without it, we don't have Free Will to strive for STO - and true STO by its very definition must oblige "choice".

Conclusion: STS vs STO within consciousness is absolutely essential to ensure "choice" and "Free Will" continues.

OSIT.

Hope I explained myself well enough.

 

[goyacobol]

To remove STS from the soul is the greatest abridgment of Free Will because the capability of actual exercising of Free Will itself ceases within that soul-consciousness as of that moment the instant STS is wholly removed. The path to STO needs STS to ensure "choice" is maintained... Without it, we don't have Free Will to strive for STO - and true STO by its very definition must oblige "choice".

Conclusion: STS vs STO within consciousness is absolutely essential to ensure "choice" and "Free Will" continues.

Makes sense to me. That is why we are STO "candidates" instead of STO. But just think we can choose! I wouldn't say we have to worry about STS being wholly removed from us for quite awhile yet (maybe 6D or the return to 7D).

 

[1peacelover]

They smile and laugh together, have no resentment against each other. They can have a conversation and are really distinct individuals. They don't get offended by foolish things. They are friends, first of all. I've never seen them physically proximate, I guess past a certain point, that's not really what matters.

In my observations, Being Best friends makes long lasting life partnerships. I say partnerships because society has programmed our social concepts/constructs of accepted roles and relationships. In doing so it leaves out those who do not fit into "normal societal" roles. To be clear I am referring to consenting adults.

 

[Laura]

I think this is where the Adamic state comes in from eating of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil and why we had to fall into pain of physicality. Evil must become part of us. Without it within us, we cannot exercise Free Will. Here's what I mean...

Firstly, In light of these session excerpts...

Session 5 October 1994

A: Review. If the concept was the eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge provides all knowledge, then one is being deceived, because no one particular source can provide all knowledge. Therefore, when one believes in the deception, one has now trapped oneself within parameters.

Session 18 October 1994

Q: (L) Were they already in bondage to someone else when the Lizzies came?

A: No. They were free. The symbolic story of Adam and Eve was a story of enticement to false knowledge. The tree of knowledge of good and evil was focused, imprisoned knowledge.

Associations I had when reading the above: as a consequence of recent discussions on the "Darwin's Black Box" thread, I thought of the role of "science" and materiality as "focused, imprisoned knowledge". It sure fits the discussion there!

 

[mrtn]

Eating of the tree of "knowledge of good and evil" is the metaphor representing the moment pre-Adamic man became "aware", to become of "Adam" man, to become a sentient 'Being' capable of "choice" on truly a individuated conscious-awareness level capable of individuated soul-growth.

I rather thought the fall doesn't actually introduce choice or increases free will, but does the opposite, it limits. It doesn't introduce the general possibility of distinction (which was there before), but rather that of preference. Preference diminishes free will / choice because it makes one thing easier and another thing harder to choose.

 

[nicklebleu]

IPreference diminishes free will / choice because it makes one thing easier and another thing harder to choose.

But isn’t that just the point? To be able to choose what is difficult, over what is easy? Isn’t that the exercise in free will?

 

[mrtn]

But isn’t that just the point? To be able to choose what is difficult, over what is easy? Isn’t that the exercise in free will?

I guess that is the exercise after the fall. To restore your freedom you would have to be able to do the right thing even if it's harder. I don't think you would or you have to exercise free will in pre-fall conditions (exercise not as in training but only as in applying).

 

[goyacobol]

I guess that is the exercise after the fall. To restore your freedom you would have to be able to do the right thing even if it's harder. I don't think you would or you have to exercise free will in pre-fall conditions (exercise not as in training but only as in applying).

We had free will and "preferred" to choose more physicality. And then we were offered the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Of course that tree being presented was only one source of Knowledge.

It's like hey you guys want some Knowledge here's this fantastic source "science"/Tree of Knowledge/Darwinism/(fill in the blank) take some. But it is only one/restricted/focused/narrow-minded source tied together with lies. But it looked enticingly delicious.

Session 18 October 1994:

Q: (L) Were Adam and Eve attempting to obtain knowledge to free themselves from bondage when they ate of the fruit of the tree of knowledge?

A: Adam and Eve are symbolic.

Q: (L) But were they in bondage and trying to help free themselves with the help of a benevolent "serpent"?

A: Not benevolent.

Q: (L) Were they already in bondage to someone else when the Lizzies came?

A: No. They were free. The symbolic story of Adam and Eve was a story of enticement to false knowledge. The tree of knowledge of good and evil was focused, imprisoned knowledge.

 

[John G]

We had free will and "preferred" to choose more physicality. And then we were offered the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Of course that tree being presented was only one source of Knowledge.

It's like hey you guys want some Knowledge here's this fantastic source "science"/Tree of Knowledge/Darwinism/(fill in the blank) take some. But it is only one/restricted/focused/narrow-minded source tied together with lies. But it looked enticingly delicious.
...
A: No. They were free. The symbolic story of Adam and Eve was a story of enticement to false knowledge. The tree of knowledge of good and evil was focused, imprisoned knowledge.

The Cs once confirmed that more knowledge equals more free will thus with this imprisoned knowledge, there's less free will after the fall. As has been discussed a lot here over the years, the horrible part is that the imprisoned knowledge isn't all false. That adds to the enticement. The book in this thread isn't all wrong about our machine; it isn't even always wrong about things we can do with our machine to make it happier.

The problem becomes that if you spend a lot of time playing games with your imprisoned machine (even if it didn't hurt others), you are taking time away from actually learning things that help get your machine out of its prison. It's kind of the general idea that all of these us vs them debates are distractions away from more important things to be looking at though looking at the debates in a more outside of the battle kind of way can be useful.