Women who seek knowledge

Sounds reasonable to me, on the whole. I think there may be some exceptions. Let me throw an example into the pot, though it's about a man. In the Thomas Sowell biography documentary that came out in the last year or so, he tells the story of his childhood. From his perspective as an old man, he looks back at one experience that he says was essential to his development as a thinker. He grew up poor, went to a bad school, etc. But he was lucky in that an older acquaintance saw something in him and suggested he go to another school (or something to that effect). At least according to Sowell, he doesn't think his life would have turned out the same if not for that intervention from someone who saw something in him.

I think it's probably true that those with the most drive will follow the path no matter what the obstacles. Maybe the same would have been true for Sowell? But at the same time, I think there have probably been cases of men and women where circumstances (e.g., living and working on a farm in the middle of nowhere, no education prospects whatsoever, no rich mentors, etc.) did greatly block their full potential from manifesting. Of course, they could still have been the best they could given the circumstances - a wise old farmer, for example. But given access to more educational opportunity, maybe that wise old farmer would've been the next Copernicus?

Or maybe not? If we want to be fatalistic, maybe everyone is exactly where they are supposed to be. If the circumstances seem too oppressive for potential to actualize, maybe that's just another lesson, and next time around, that experience will be put to good use. And maybe, like Sowell, those who really need it WILL encounter a person to guide them on the path, even if it is just one tiny step.

It's an interesting story, and forgive me for digress a bit. Many times I have been thinking about these seemingly fortuitous events that change our lives dramatically. In my case, after a lot of recapitulations, I have managed to isolate at least 3 of them that are truly remarkable.

The first of these occurred when I was 16 years old and finishing high school. It was an absolutely trivial event for an external witness, but with a VERY deep impact on my life. The point is that at the end of the last year of high school I had not passed all the courses because in one of them (geography, my nemesis) I had done very badly and, as the teacher did not like me at all, I had taken the stupid decision of not taking the last exam that would allow me to finish not only that course but also the high school.

I know it may seem a minor matter, but if I did not finish school I would not have been able to go to university and continue on the road to becoming independent from my parents (it was the social model of what a young person should do in those days). God knows what my plans would be, but I have the memory that without studying or working I would have had no choice but to follow in the footsteps of my older brother (who also had not finished school and lived a bohemian life at my parents' expense).

When it seemed that I had already made my choice and one day before the school year closed and my chances of finishing high school on time were definitely gone, something unusual happened. While I was at school (it was the meeting point with my friends), as I was going down a staircase that led to the exit of the building (probably to leave and never come back) I crossed paths with the geography teacher (I insist, he was not a very well-liked teacher, he was one of those who enjoyed bulling his students). I tried not to let him see me, but he came up to me, called me by my first name (weird) and asked me nicely: why didn't you come to take the exam? (which by the way had been several days ago). I don't know what stupid lie I answered, but he started to insist that I should take the exam and that if I was willing he would take a special exam (just for me) the following day.... He insisted so much that that afternoon I started studying like crazy and the next day I went and passed, not only the exam, but also the high school. It is difficult for me to explain what I felt at that time. On the one hand it was like a feeling of freedom, as if thousands of possibilities were opening up before me, but on the other hand (and this was a much deeper feeling) I had a feeling much more difficult to describe, it was like a warm embrace or a maternal caress, as if someone/something was taking care of me, which by the way developed in me a deep feeling of gratitude. After 33 years I can still feel that.

Anyway, sorry if the story got long and boring, but what I was trying to illustrate is that such life-changing events, although some may see them as "luck" that some have and others do not, IMHO are premeditated acts of help that are put in our way because we are in a position to take advantage of them in terms of our learning cycle,.... whether we take them or not, is another story.
 
Last edited:
It's an interesting story, and forgive me for digress a bit. Many times I have been thinking about these seemingly fortuitous events that change our lives dramatically. In my case, after a lot of recapitulations, I have managed to isolate at least 3 of them that are truly remarkable.

The first of these occurred when I was 16 years old and finishing high school. It was an absolutely trivial event for an external witness, but with a VERY deep impact on my life. The point is that at the end of the last year of high school I had not passed all the courses because in one of them (geography, my nemesis) I had done very badly and, as the teacher did not like me at all, I had taken the stupid decision of not taking the last exam that would allow me to finish not only that course but also the high school.

I know it may seem a minor matter, but if I did not finish school I would not have been able to go to university and continue on the road to becoming independent from my parents (it was the social model of what a young person should do in those days). God knows what my plans would be, but I have the memory that without studying or working I would have had no choice but to follow in the footsteps of my older brother (who also had not finished school and lived a bohemian life at my parents' expense).

When it seemed that I had already made my choice and one day before the school year closed and my chances of finishing high school on time were definitely gone, something unusual happened. While I was at school (it was the meeting point with my friends), as I was going down a staircase that led to the exit of the building (probably to leave and never come back) I crossed paths with the geography teacher (I insist, he was not a very well-liked teacher, he was one of those who enjoyed bulling his students). I tried not to let him see me, but he came up to me, called me by my first name (weird) and asked me nicely: why didn't you come to take the exam? (which by the way had been several days ago). I don't know what stupid lie I answered, but he started to insist that I should take the exam and that if I was willing he would take a special exam (just for me) the following day.... He insisted so much that that afternoon I started studying like crazy and the next day I went and passed, not only the exam, but also the high school. It is difficult for me to explain what I felt at that time. On the one hand it was like a feeling of freedom, as if thousands of possibilities were opening up before me, but on the other hand (and this was a much deeper feeling) I had a feeling much more difficult to describe, it was like a warm embrace or a maternal caress, as if someone/something was watching over me, which by the way developed in me a deep feeling of gratitude. After 33 years I can still feel that.

Anyway, sorry if the story got long and boring, but what I was trying to illustrate is that such life-changing events, although some may see them as "luck" that some have and others do not, IMHO are premeditated acts of help that are put in our way because we are in a position to take advantage of them in terms of our learning cycle,.... whether we take them or not, is another story.

Thank you so much. Stories like yours help me understand myself better.

Here is my little story:
I was 15 yrs old when this happened. I didn't perform well in elementary school and ended up in a secondary school, where those girls went, only girls, who didn't have good grades. So I was studying to be a typist. Our form teacher happened to be a maths teacher. She was ok I thought. Not very strict at all. It suited me, as maths was my got ol' nemesis. Until one day at the end of her lesson, she set this homework for us:
Put a layette together. ( I hope I did find the appropriate English word. )
We were looking at each other (12 girls in the classroom)
She looked around and said:
'You probably not going to archive anything else in life.'
I was astonished. Really? Do you already know?
I still remember this, after all those years.
Made me angry? Hell, yes. Pushed me to prove her wrong? Very likely.
 
Last edited:
So true! I saw soo many wives belittle themselves in order to fan their husband's ego. They just cannot look smarter than their husbands. It's a real thing in many societies.

Had been reading out of one of Mary Balogh’s books (Second Chance) and was reminded of part of the discussion in this thread.

The words are from a woman who is struggling of find her way in a time when it was particularly not easy (in western society). She was the daughter of a rector. And her mother played no hand in her education. The discussion is between her and the man that employs her (as his ward’s governess), which goes like this:

Miss Laura Melfort: She felt absurdly like crying. Memories, even good memories-especially good memories-good be painful. They could make the present seem so very barren, so very empty.

Employer: “Who educated you? Your father?”

Melfort: “He taught us all.”

Employer: “Sons and daughters indiscriminately? I suppose he taught you Latin and mathematics and everything else that is usually reserved for a boy’s education?”

Melfort: “Yes, and Greek.”

Employer: “A bluestocking indeed. No man can be expected to take you on, you know. Any man would he terrified of you.”

Melfort: “I don’t care, I’m able to reach out to a world beyond physical being. With my mind and with books I can transcend the frequent dullness and boredom of everyday living.”

The story further enhances both life from her and his perspective, and Laura here never wavered in her mind of what she though of herself, and worked to continuously be at peace within her difficult exterior circumstances she faced as a woman. For the other, who could have had anything he wanted, it was her mind that feel into collinear balance with his own.

Our form teacher happened to be a maths teacher. She was ok I thought. Not very strict at all. It suited me, as maths was my got ol' nemesis. Until one day at the end of her lesson, she set this homework for us:
Put a layette together. ( I hope I did find the appropriate English word. )
We were looking at each other (12 girls in the classroom)
She looked around and said:
'You probably not going to archive anything else in life.'
I was astonished. Really? Do you already know?
I still remember this, after all those years.
Made me angry? Hell, yes. Pushed me to prove her wrong? Very likely.

Thanks for sharing that. It exist for so many.
 
I have been thinking more about the idea of "mosaic thinking" as mentioned in a session quote by Laura earlier in this thread. What happens if I put myself in the middle of a mosaic, as mentioned by the C's and apply it to what we are talking about here? As I picture my mosaic it contains all of my past lives including all the colors and flavors of all my existence..all the situations and challenges, all the lives as male or female, all the so called successes and failures. It is pain and joy, it is life...all put together as one beautiful learning and growing experience. So, in that context I am less likely to see division or entertain black and white thinking in a linear way only. All the experiences and puzzle pieces just fit together perfectly, make sense and have resolution when I step back and view it that way.

So, here I am today, at this juncture in what could be the choice point and turning of the ages. Why is it that in this lifetime I have this drive to quest for the truth? There are many others who have had challenges in their lives similar to or worse than mine. What pushes me regardless of my circumstances to attempt to master these spiritual principles in the way that I do? Why is my daily prayer..."I just want to know". Why do I often desire to see the bigger picture when those around don't and why do I question everything at this point in time? Why do I know inside that I am more and know more regarding universal wisdom than I can remember or access? And on and on...and I am sure that others here go through the same processes. I wonder about this because it came from within...it was a gift to me and I know I have been guided along the way. Who is the guide and why? I did not produce this yearning for answers because I am a female or I am special in any way. Yes, there have been many painful catalysts as well, but would that alone be enough to push me in the direction I am speaking of? It is difficult to explain but there is no choice in it...I cannot NOT do it...it just is.

So, another part of me is right there when we are talking about the details of how I have been held back as a female in this time period. I can really feel sorrow for the atrocities against women all throughout history, as well. However, most importantly, I can also clearly see that as a female or a male, it is simply one part of the mosaic and adds to the whole...one of many varied experiences throughout the ages. All is necessary and is welcomed by my soul. This is what I think, anyway.
 
a correction to the above: The C's actually describe "mosaic consciousness" in the transcript rather than "mosaic thinking" as I termed it. I think mosaic consciousness obviously takes it to a deeper and more expansive level than just thinking. I apologize for not being more concise on that. Perhaps I am still in the thinking stage of things more than the consciousness part. good lesson.
 
In the Thomas Sowell biography documentary that came out in the last year or so, he tells the story of his childhood. From his perspective as an old man, he looks back at one experience that he says was essential to his development as a thinker. He grew up poor, went to a bad school, etc. But he was lucky in that an older acquaintance saw something in him and suggested he go to another school (or something to that effect).

Yeah, he moved to New York? (or that area) to live with an Aunt, I believe. Once he was there, someone took him to the library and showed him how to check out books. The rest, as they say, is history.

Nice discussion ladies, BTW.
 
Thank you Andromeda! After reading your post things started clicking into place on a deeper level. It goes deeper than identifying or disagreeing with any 'ism'. It's about different lesson plans and how best to obtain the needed knowledge and growth. And having a true community of like minded people or at least somewhat on the same path is so important. I had been thinking feminism had destroyed the family but in reality, looking back, families have been a mess since Cain killed his brother. I know it's just a story but it does seem to represent our situation a bit. Just thinking out loud here but this puts a more accurate twist on our current situation I think.

If more people were engaged in a true community of like minded (or co-linear minded people rather), I think it might go a long way in helping to heal a lot of the suffering caused by the divisive feelings so rampant in the world today. I guess that might actually be what a lot of people are trying to do so badly out there with fast-food ideologies. They are trying to find the right community for their soul growth and to relieve their suffering... but they are having a hard time because of lack of self-awareness and being overly focused (unconsciously, of course, because of the lack of self-awareness) on relieving their suffering. So then, maybe most people really do belong amongst those ideological groups at this juncture in their learning cycle, and the system isn't broken, it's working just as it should!! In that case, the best way to relieve the suffering caused by divisive feelings would be to become both self-aware and caring enough to resonate with the right community.

It seems to me that most isms out there were founded on a seed of truth, but being reactionary in nature and with little understanding to make sense of anything, were easily run off the rails. That kind of blind emotional effort seems to just provoke an opposite looking, but essentially similar, reaction, rather than a solution. And, that back-and-forth has probably been the story since the beginning of time, as you say. In fact, we could even take it back to Adam and Eve, which I believe the C's commented was in a way allegorical for how we all became 3D beings in the first place. Something along the lines of the female part of the energy of creation consorting with the idea of STS. Well, now, all you fellas keep in mind that we ALL have a mixture of female and male creative energies within us to call upon!! And then, it could even be said that Eve's action, or reaction, was based on something presented as a choice. I've also heard it supposed somewhere that, generally speaking, the masculine creative energy can be compared to 'knowledge', while the female counterpart can be more essentially likened to 'being', as from the quote Chu posted earlier:

"There are," he said, "two lines along which man's development proceeds, the line of
knowledge
and the line of being. In right evolution the line of knowledge and the line
of being develop simultaneously, parallel to, and helping one another. But if the line of
knowledge gets too far ahead of the line of being, or if the line of being gets ahead of
the line of knowledge, man's development goes wrong
, and sooner or later it must
come to a standstill.

"People understand what 'knowledge' means. And they understand the possibility of
different levels of knowledge. They understand that knowledge may be lesser or
greater, that is to say, of one quality or of another quality. But they do not understand
this in relation to 'being.' 'Being,' for them, means simply 'existence' to which is
opposed just 'non-existence.' They do not understand that being or existence may be of
very different levels and categories.

[...]

And they do not understand that knowledge depends on being.
Not only do they not understand this latter but they
definitely do not wish to understand it. And especially in Western culture it is
considered that a man may possess great knowledge, for example he may be an able
scientist, make discoveries, advance science, and at the same time he may be, and has
the right to be, a petty, egoistic, caviling, mean, envious, vain, naive, and absent
minded man. It seems to be considered here that a professor must always forget his
umbrella everywhere.


"And yet it is his being. And people think that his knowledge does not depend on
his being. People of Western culture put great value on the level of a man's knowledge
but they do not value the level of a man's being and are not ashamed of the low level
of their own being. They do not even understand what it means. And they do not
understand that a man's knowledge depends on the level of his being.

"If knowledge gets far ahead of being, it becomes theoretical and abstract and
inapplicable to life, or actually harmful, because instead of serving life and helping
people the better to struggle with the difficulties they meet, it begins to complicate
man's life, brings new difficulties into it, new troubles and calamities which were not
there before.


"The reason for this is that knowledge which is not in accordance with being cannot
be large enough for, or sufficiently suited to, man's real needs. It will always be a
knowledge of one thing together with ignorance of another thing; a knowledge of the
detail without a knowledge of the whole
; a knowledge of the form without a
knowledge of the essence.

"Such preponderance of knowledge over being is observed in present-day culture.
The idea of the value and importance of the level of being is completely forgotten.
And it is forgotten that the level of knowledge is determined by the level of being.
Actually at a given level of being the possibilities of knowledge are limited and finite.
Within the limits of a given being the quality of knowledge cannot be changed, and
the accumulation of information of one and the same nature, within already
known limits, alone is possible. A change in the nature of knowledge is possible only
with a change in the nature of being.


"Taken in itself, a man's being has many different sides. The most characteristic
feature of a modem man is the absence of unity in him and, further, the absence in him
of even traces of those properties which he most likes to ascribe to himself, that is,
'lucid consciousness,' 'free will,' a 'permanent ego or I,' and the 'ability to do.' It may
surprise you if I say that the chief feature of a modem man's being which explains
everything else that is lacking in him is sleep.

"A modern man lives in sleep, in sleep he is born and in sleep he dies. About sleep,
its significance and its role in life, we will speak later. But at present just think of one
thing, what knowledge can a sleeping man have? And if you think about it and at the
same time remember that sleep is the chief feature of our being, it will at once become
clear to you that if a man really wants knowledge, he must first of all think about how
to wake, that is, about how to change his being.

"Exteriorly man's being has many different sides: activity or passivity;
truthfulness or a tendency to lie; sincerity or insincerity; courage, cowardice; self
control, profligacy; irritability, egoism, readiness for self-sacrifice, pride, vanity,
conceit, industry, laziness, morality, depravity; all these and much more besides make
up the being of man.

"But all this is entirely mechanical in man. If he lies it means that he cannot help
lying. If he tells the truth it means that he cannot help telling the truth, and so it is
with everything. Everything happens, a man can do nothing either in himself or
outside himself.

"But of course there are limits and bounds. Generally speaking, the being of a
modem man is of very inferior quality. But it can be of such bad quality that no
change is possible. This must always be remembered. People whose being can still be
changed are very lucky. But there are people who are definitely diseased, broken
machines with whom nothing can be done. And such people are in the majority.
If
you think of this you will understand why only few can receive real knowledge. Their
being prevents it.

"Generally speaking, the balance between knowledge and being is even more
important than a separate development of either one or the other. And a separate
development of knowledge or of being is not desirable in any way. Although it is
precisely this one-sided development that often seems particularly attractive to
people.

"If knowledge outweighs being a man knows but has no power to do. It is useless
knowledge. On the other hand if being outweighs knowledge a man has the power to
do, but does not know, that is, he can do something but does not know what to do.

The being he has acquired becomes aimless and efforts made to attain it prove to be
useless.

[...]

"In order to understand this and, in general, the nature of knowledge and the nature
of being, as well as their interrelation, it is necessary to understand the relation of
knowledge and being to 'understanding.'

"Knowledge is one thing, understanding is another thing.

"People often confuse these concepts and do not clearly grasp what is the difference
between them.

"Knowledge by itself does not give understanding. Nor is understanding increased
by an increase of knowledge alone. Understanding depends upon the relation of
knowledge to being. Understanding is the resultant of knowledge and being. And
knowledge and being must not diverge too far, otherwise understanding will prove to
be far removed from either. At the same time the relation of knowledge to being does
not change with a mere growth of knowledge. It changes only when being grows
simultaneously with knowledge. In other words, understanding grows only with the
growth of being.


"In ordinary thinking, people do not distinguish understanding from knowledge.
They think that greater understanding depends on greater knowledge. Therefore they
accumulate knowledge, or that which they call knowledge, but they do not know how
to accumulate understanding and do not bother about it.

"And yet a person accustomed to self-observation knows for certain that at different
periods of his life he has understood one and the same idea, one and the same thought,
in totally different ways. It often seems strange to him that he could have understood
so wrongly that which, in his opinion, he now understands rightly. And he realizes, at
the same time, that his knowledge has not changed, and that he knew as much about the given
subject before as he knows now. What, then, has changed? His being has changed.
And once being has changed understanding must change also.

And if that's the case, perhaps we can find clues in that passage not only about how to see and grow the two within ourselves, but also can extrapolate the idea out to the relationship between men and women more widely.

But, back to the community idea. I suppose that if there were more communities based on true learning and cooperating, for each other and for the higher good, based on the self-awareness and caring mentioned above, it's theoretically possible that a much larger range of types of people could get along and benefit each other. There would be at least a little less suffering and division. As long as they were all heading in the same direction soul-wise, the other details would be subordinate to that. I think that perhaps the idea of the nuclear family was just one bad idea, amongst a string of many, which did a disservice by minimizing things down to a single cell, mainly focused on procreation of the species rather than procreation of the soul. Also, in such larger co-linear communities perhaps they could more comfortably fit a few oddballs (such as women seeking knowledge) and offer a wider range of experience and examples (good and bad) to safely learn from for people on various levels of the learning curve. Ideally speaking!!
 
In fact, we could even take it back to Adam and Eve, which I believe the C's commented was in a way allegorical for how we all became 3D beings in the first place. Something along the lines of the female part of the energy of creation consorting with the idea of STS. Well, now, all you fellas keep in mind that we ALL have a mixture of female and male creative energies within us to call upon!! And then, it could even be said that Eve's action, or reaction, was based on something presented as a choice. I've also heard it supposed somewhere that, generally speaking, the masculine creative energy can be compared to 'knowledge', while the female counterpart can be more essentially likened to 'being'...

:lol:
It seems to me that if what the C's say is true, then male and female are sort of physical expressions of different aspects of a 'higher being'. In 4d, one can apparently go to bed as one gender and wake up as another - assuming of course that there is such a thing as 'sleep' in 4d.

So, it's kind of silly to harp on Eve for biting that dang apple, or Adam for being a stupid man and upsetting Eve to the point where she needed to bite that apple (or whatever the story may be)!

Assuming that 'male energy' and 'female energy' are supposed to be complementary, and that by incarnating in 3d we each end up as either male or female, it kinda makes sense that all this gender-bending nonsense is being, er, 'activated' at the present time as Planet Earth heats up.

Even just within each of us as individuals, there are female and male aspects that we should probably work on to the best of our ability... and then on top of that we should work to perfect our relationships (of all types) with other men and women.

If this gender thing really is a key feature of 3d and if it is indeed tied to 2 sides of some 'higher being', then it seems to me that this would be one of the "simple understandings" that we need to master in this life/realm.

And that would include learning to deal not only with physical groups of men/women, but also learning to live with and grow female/male energies within ourselves and others.
 
So, if men and women equally expected in a family to deal with trivialities and stuff, why when a woman deals with all of them, is not acknowledged as such? I am pretty sure that when I got married and would have heard, ... and you’l be doing all the housework and cooking and take care of everyone while having your own job, there would have been no marriage.
It is not about the housework, it is about the principle.

I dunno, I think it depends on the individual case. Are you saying a woman cleaning a house never receives any acknowledgement? I think it's important here to recognize that we can only talk from our individual perspective. We can never speak for a group.
 
I'd like to draw everyone's attention to an excerpt from the quote of Gurdjieff posted by Chu and Andromeda above:

People whose being can still be changed are very lucky. But there are people who are definitely diseased, broken machines with whom nothing can be done. And such people are in the majority.

Did you catch that? That the majority of people are diseased, broken machines with whom nothing can be done?

That's tragic, but it does appear to be what we are faced with in our world today (and probably have been for a very long time).

Cross referencing that idea to something in Political Ponerology, Lobaczewski noted that damaged, broken people are both searching for a "home", a place they fit and feel normal, and to minimize their feelings of being different by trying to force their view of reality, their experiences, on other people (as many as possible).

What is absolutely crazy-making for sane, normal, healthy people (a minority according to what Gurdjieff said above), is to see the world being run by such damaged people. But that is certainly what we are seeing. And it seems that most of the 'isms' we encounter are systems created by just such people.
 
Did you catch that? That the majority of people are diseased, broken machines with whom nothing can be done? /.../

What is absolutely crazy-making for sane, normal, healthy people (a minority according to what Gurdjieff said above), is to see the world being run by such damaged people. But that is certainly what we are seeing. And it seems that most of the 'isms' we encounter are systems created by just such people.
But isn't it what is called 'democracy' and considered the highest standard for nations? The more I think about it, the closer I get to seeing it as another utopian idea. We can rarely make it work in household settings, so how on earth can it be realistic to apply it on a much larger scale? (I don't even mention an inevitable corruption of that appealing idea). It more and more looks to me like some kind of a perfect trap that facilitates keeping the status quo: those diseased, broken machines being the ones who set rules and standards for all. But that's a huge topic on its own, so I'll better stop here.
 
Did you catch that? That the majority of people are diseased, broken machines with whom nothing can be done?

That's tragic, but it does appear to be what we are faced with in our world today (and probably have been for a very long time).

Cross referencing that idea to something in Political Ponerology, Lobaczewski noted that damaged, broken people are both searching for a "home", a place they fit and feel normal, and to minimize their feelings of being different by trying to force their view of reality, their experiences, on other people (as many as possible).

What is absolutely crazy-making for sane, normal, healthy people (a minority according to what Gurdjieff said above), is to see the world being run by such damaged people. But that is certainly what we are seeing. And it seems that most of the 'isms' we encounter are systems created by just such people.

I assume it is also related to this stress relieving thing:

A: These are the times that try men's souls. And perhaps now you can understand the full meaning of that statement. Some souls do not do well under stress and pressure and the human system is constructed to alleviate stress by whatever means necessary.

So every ism we know of throughout human history is an attempt or component of the system to alleviate stress. Sadly it behaves like morphine. It relieves pain but you become addicted. Addicted to lies... And like any hard drug addict, there is a considerable decrease in consciousness.
 
Or those are the ones, who don't teach their children anything, only creating and recreating the drama and letting the little souls to their own devices.
 
Why is it that in this lifetime I have this drive to quest for the truth?
Here it was mentioned:

A: "Passion" does not set one "free," quite the opposite!

Q: (L) But what if your passion is for knowledge?

A: That is not passion, it is soul questing.

Imagine the long line of 'broken machines' passing on their pain and disease to their children, the next generation.

When reading The Narcissistic Family (Stephanie Donaldson-Pressman and Robert M. Pressman) this really becomes apparent, and really sad as the next generation, as you say, is caught up in the ripples of it all. Some, though, manage to escape the flow and take refuge in calmer eddies as they learn to navigate their own lives.
 
Back
Top Bottom