Poll: If a woman hits a man is the man allowed to hit back.
Yes, thats feminism.
Yes.
Maybe, depends.
No.
No, thats feminism.
[Show Results]
 
 
If a woman hits a man is the man allowed to hit back?
05-15-2019, 12:34 PM, (This post was last modified: 05-15-2019, 01:56 PM by Bring4th_Austin.)
#31
RE: If a woman hits a man is the man allowed to hit back?
(05-13-2019, 07:12 PM)Cyan Wrote:  Im not trying to troll, rather asking questions I sincerely want answers to. No intention to "troll".

I personally would take you at your word regarding your intentions in asking a question like this, but I also can't be surprised that ulterior motives are ascribed. Like Jade pointed out, this type of question very often drips with misogyny. I mean, where does the question even come from? I understand that you sincerely want answers, but why? What makes you want to explore this particular topic? What makes you want to frame the topic in terms of violence? And (like Merrick is implying) why is the violence framed in terms of expanding the boundaries of violence to include women rather than narrowing it to exclude men?

The reason it's easy to assume that the answers to these questions have a basis in misogyny is because this type of discussion is prominent on websites and communities that claim to be "critical" of feminism, but that is just a thin facade for being blatantly misogynistic. If your curiosity is truly innocent and genuine, it is worth considering the effect that even asking such a question has. Such things do not take place in a vacuum, and all such interactions will naturally be colored by cultural temperature.



Something I find a bit ridiculous about the question itself is that it implies that if "equal rights means equal fights," then there will somehow be more violence against women, because the "taboo" of violence against women actually prevents violence against women. Spoiler: it doesn't. Which makes it all the more curious that the focus of questions like this is about the ways feminism will let us be violent towards women rather than how feminism aims to prevent violence against women through changing the culture that perpetuates domestic violence, rape, stalking, etc.

I understand that women are not the only victims of these things. I also have personally witnessed some pretty toxic behavior in feminist spaces when it comes to helping men who are victims of these things. That is certainly something that I think progressive culture needs to wake up to: its attitude about violence towards men and the ability for men to seek help.

But despite that, it still stands that women are far more likely to be victims of domestic violence, victims of rape, victims of stalking, victims murder at the hands of their partner. These statistics are fairly well established. One example. The chivalrous attitude that says it isn't okay to be violent towards women doesn't seem to be doing its job. So if the trade-off is that it's okay for men to defend themselves against women, but the actual violence against women decreases per the statistics, then seems like a good trade-off to me. But why even focus on the first part yet not the second part? That's the thing that makes this question weird.
_____________________________
The only frontier that has ever existed is the self.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
The following 15 users Like Bring4th_Austin's post:
ada, Cainite, Cyan, David_1, flofrog, Glow, Highrculling, Infinite, Jade, kristina, Merrick, Relax, RitaJC, Spaced, sunnysideup
05-15-2019, 12:39 PM, (This post was last modified: 05-15-2019, 09:44 PM by ada.)
#32
RE: If a woman hits a man is the man allowed to hit back?
For everyone participating and reading, do notice that not a single person has voted on 'yes'.(Was so when I posted this hahaSmile) So.. we are quite balanced on this regard. Whether a mind/body/spirit is incarnated into a male or female body does not mean they cannot do a violent or dangerous act upon another, a female can just as easily pick an object and with a single hit to the head cause serious damage if not death - I am exaggerating of course, but it is possible. We are here to learn in regard to the Law of One, we want to be the best servants, students and teachers that we can, but we are still human, not perfect. The original question was "are you allowed to hit back", allowed? Certainly, it is your free will. Should you? I don't know, we're all learning something a bit different. I think defending can be made out of love.
P.s. I don't mean like in those videos you see a woman slapping/punching a man until he loses it and hits back with full force knocking her out. If they aren't in danger, if they can walk away, or restraint without damage, then that is the best course of action. Hitting and knocking someone out and calling it equality is just mean imo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
The following 6 users Like ada's post:
David_1, Glow, Infinite, kristina, Merrick, Minyatur
05-15-2019, 12:43 PM,
#33
RE: If a woman hits a man is the man allowed to hit back?
   Notice that Ra says “the imagination rather than the carrying out in the physical plane.” So, I think Ra is saying it’s OK to think whatever you wish.  But in the case where an action would violate someone else’s free will, it is not OK to carry out the action.
   It seems to me Ra is suggesting that self-control is a quality worthy of trying to develop.  Perhaps the “balance” comes in noticing I can have all kinds of thoughts, but I will “balance” my actions by selecting what leads to service-to-others.  Is that why Ra closes the quote “with compassion for self and for other-self?”
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
The following 4 users Like David_1's post:
flofrog, Glow, kristina, Merrick
05-15-2019, 01:04 PM, (This post was last modified: 05-15-2019, 01:15 PM by Minyatur.)
#34
RE: If a woman hits a man is the man allowed to hit back?
(05-15-2019, 12:43 PM)David_1 Wrote:     Notice that Ra says “the imagination rather than the carrying out in the physical plane.” So, I think Ra is saying it’s OK to think whatever you wish.  But in the case where an action would violate someone else’s free will, it is not OK to carry out the action.
   It seems to me Ra is suggesting that self-control is a quality worthy of trying to develop.  Perhaps the “balance” comes in noticing I can have all kinds of thoughts, but I will “balance” my actions by selecting what leads to service-to-others.  Is that why Ra closes the quote “with compassion for self and for other-self?”

I think the quote meant that repression will create a backlash in time/space, hence why it is unwise to encourage overcoming.

Say that you contain anger, it is unwise to be unacceptant of it and never release the charge because it will cummulate and grow in intensity. Both acceptance and release are important.

Imagination is an healthier way to release your energy without denying it, but also requires to let it flow within yourself and not see yourself as without it (wanting to overcome this part of you). But this is an alternative to that it is unwise to suggest to overcome one's desires, in this thread I've seen only denial and a focus on overcoming, no suggestion that the energy needs to flow.

There is no self in the sense of separate individuality, yet there is one prevailing identity.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
The following 1 user Likes Minyatur's post:
ada
05-15-2019, 02:06 PM, (This post was last modified: 05-15-2019, 02:08 PM by Glow.)
#35
RE: If a woman hits a man is the man allowed to hit back?
Minyatur- Regardless of all that “being unwise to suppress” stuff this question was clearly posed to recreate dialogue about feminism.

Reread the options, it clearly illustrates an frustration with feminism or what he perceives feminism to be.
I’m not saying trolling but not communicating the issue directly.

The poll wasn’t so much about if it is right to fight back but it (the question itself) is the lashing back as you can see by the poll options.

That’s fine too, good god the world is changing so fast catalyst aplenty and it needs to be worked through and understood but this way of circling the issue(poking the perceived monster then sidestepping) isn’t really making headway. It’s just poking..

Still that is fine too we all could have chosen not to participate but the results of this catalyst being presented over and over is that people will mirror back and or dig deeper.

As to the woman hitting thing you bring up. I swear that only is promoted in movies. I have never once met a woman in my 42 years that thinks it’s ok to hit a man that doesn’t also hit women. Violent people are violent.

In days gone by where people were over all more violent I’m sure it was a thing the slap and expecting not to be slapped back but we are talking the 50s where women were regularly hit anyways, who knows but those that were there how that worked, but now in almost all cases it is the outlier like your girlfriend who thinks that is ok.

The fact sit coms and movies still act that out regardless of its actual rarity in society says to me it is again part of the programming of separation we are fed through media and we can either latch on to that and believe we are so separate and divided or look at what we experience most commonly in society and move past it.

Violent people are violent. Angry people are angry, entitled selfish people are entitled and selfish and people.

Like you I see no right nor wrong just working through catalyst I and a few others might just want to offer a more direct route than circling. Those that engage the circling obviously need to circle, till they change course.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
The following 3 users Like Glow's post:
ada, kristina, Relax
05-15-2019, 02:07 PM,
#36
RE: If a woman hits a man is the man allowed to hit back?
Good discussion thus far, thanks for all participants, we are now much more clearly able to see the biases of each other and the forum and this should help develop the situation.

Im genuinely interested in the answer and not trolling and indeed it feels a little wrong to be accused of trolling for a serious topic. I also noticed that the topics where things such as this or violence are discussed have much more reponses than for example, my channelings or the channeling of Ra I made, which to me speak of unhealthily having overcome something instead of seriously felt through it. I plan to post a few more poll threads but it should be easier instead of such hard topics like these, someone else can post a topic like "if a man hits you are you allowed to hit back" to see what responses we get there. I think most of the important messages have gotten across now so i dont know if ill reply more, ill read surely, ill completely sidestep the personal questions as they are to me inappropriate but thank you for your interest in my misogyny.

Next topic will be " should tourists have the right to vote" and well see what kind of discussion we get there.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-15-2019, 02:21 PM,
#37
RE: If a woman hits a man is the man allowed to hit back?
(05-15-2019, 02:07 PM)Cyan Wrote:  Good discussion thus far, thanks for all participants, we are now much more clearly able to see the biases of each other and the forum and this should help develop the situation.

Im genuinely interested in the answer and not trolling and indeed it feels a little wrong to be accused of trolling for a serious topic. I also noticed that the topics where things such as this or violence are discussed have much more reponses than for example, my channelings or the channeling of Ra I made, which to me speak of unhealthily having overcome something instead of seriously felt through it. I plan to post a few more poll threads but it should be easier instead of such hard topics like these, someone else can post a topic like "if a man hits you are you allowed to hit back" to see what responses we get there. I think most of the important messages have gotten across now so i dont know if ill reply more, ill read surely, ill completely sidestep the personal questions as they are to me inappropriate but thank you for your interest in my misogyny.

Next topic will be " should tourists have the right to vote" and well see what kind of discussion we get there.

Cyan you might take it as unhealthy we do not reply to your channeling threads but I actually take that as a sign of health. Most here I assume are at the point of going inward to find truth, and working on growth within the forum community. Not so much seeking outside ourselves now for truth.

I have zero interesting in any channelings other than the ones I have already read from the group of three that channeled Ra.

Their info resonated so much as truth that I now can trust that inner truth of my own and have no interest in hearing from any other channeling sources.

If we are trying to hear the voice of god within why would we take on more outside noise. That’s my perspective anyways.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
The following 4 users Like Glow's post:
Cainite, kristina, Merrick, Relax
05-15-2019, 05:57 PM,
#38
RE: If a woman hits a man is the man allowed to hit back?
(05-15-2019, 02:06 PM)Glow Wrote:  Like you I see no right nor wrong just working through catalyst I and a few others might just want to offer a more direct route than circling. Those that engage the circling obviously need to circle, till they change course.

I think there's a reason the quote I shared speaks against taking a shortcut, balance comes from following the spiral of consciousness and trying to skip where you are at will create further imbalances. That's the idea that there is no overcoming.

Wisdom is often spoken out against on these forums, but to me wisdom is to know to not manifest the opposite of what you say you want and it baffles me how little value it is given. Then again, maybe I need to learn to let the Creator shoot itself in the foot, it is also part of unity and not to be overcome.

There is no self in the sense of separate individuality, yet there is one prevailing identity.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-15-2019, 06:14 PM,
#39
RE: If a woman hits a man is the man allowed to hit back?
(05-12-2019, 11:24 PM)Cyan Wrote:  In short, if a woman hits a man, is the man allowed to hit back or not, I could share some interesting clips from various fights but I dont think those are needed.

(05-13-2019, 01:18 AM)Merrick Wrote:  
(05-13-2019, 01:14 AM)Cyan Wrote:  I would like to know how the people who voted maybe came to the conclusion.

Isn't the right of self defense absolute and uninfringable, should there truly be any doubt that you are allowed to defend yourself with equal level of violence if violence is cast upon you?

Allowed under the laws of various governments? Probably. Allowed under the law of free will? Absolutely. I don’t think there is any doubt that in many circumstances it is allowed. Is it beneficial or harmful for your soul evolution to strike back? You may feel your violence is justified, but you are only attacking yourself. When you forgive the transgression, you forgive yourself.

Absolutely! I really liked this reply for some reason.

Depends on your understanding, and what you are seeking/building. If you seek power over others, and are distorted towards violence, then most likely the answer of absolutely would apply

Through all my searches and seeking, It seems that other portions are obsessed with seeking some sort of absolute to there selves, to the universe. Yet what I am encountering is that the only absolute is the unabsolute, that what we feel, what we do, what we think. Is Infinite, there is no end and it is absolutely impossible to apply any other absolute other than Oneness.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
The following 4 users Like Infinite Unity's post:
ada, kristina, Merrick, Relax
05-15-2019, 06:27 PM, (This post was last modified: 05-15-2019, 06:55 PM by Glow.)
#40
RE: If a woman hits a man is the man allowed to hit back?
(05-15-2019, 05:57 PM)Minyatur Wrote:  
(05-15-2019, 02:06 PM)Glow Wrote:  Like you I see no right nor wrong just working through catalyst I and a few others might just want to offer a more direct route than circling. Those that engage the circling obviously need to circle, till they change course.

I think there's a reason the quote I shared speaks against taking a shortcut, balance comes from following the spiral of consciousness and trying to skip where you are at will create further imbalances. That's the idea that there is no overcoming.

Wisdom is often spoken out against on these forums, but to me wisdom is to know to not manifest the opposite of what you say you want and it baffles me how little value it is given. Then again, maybe I need to learn to let the Creator shoot itself in the foot, it is also part of unity and not to be overcome.

I don’t see how people mirroring back, or offering a direct option of communication is attempting to overcome anything.
If anything it is allowing the creator to either continue facing the same catalyst, the same way or make a new choice.
Regardless all parts are the creator doing as is right in that moment of experience. Including this offshoot conversation.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
The following 1 user Likes Glow's post:
Relax
05-15-2019, 06:58 PM,
#41
RE: If a woman hits a man is the man allowed to hit back?
(05-15-2019, 06:27 PM)Glow Wrote:  
(05-15-2019, 05:57 PM)Minyatur Wrote:  
(05-15-2019, 02:06 PM)Glow Wrote:  Like you I see no right nor wrong just working through catalyst I and a few others might just want to offer a more direct route than circling. Those that engage the circling obviously need to circle, till they change course.

I think there's a reason the quote I shared speaks against taking a shortcut, balance comes from following the spiral of consciousness and trying to skip where you are at will create further imbalances. That's the idea that there is no overcoming.

Wisdom is often spoken out against on these forums, but to me wisdom is to know to not manifest the opposite of what you say you want and it baffles me how little value it is given. Then again, maybe I need to learn to let the Creator shoot itself in the foot, it is also part of unity and not to be overcome.

I don’t see how people mirroring back, or offering a direct option of communication is attempting to overcome anything.
If anything it is allowing the creator to either continue facing the same catalyst or make a new choice.
Regardless all parts are the creator doing as is right in that moment of experience.

I just mean that the questionning is valid to be had and all the more on a Law of One forum. As to why, I already said why and the overcoming part was mainly about that no one should ever hit anyone, which is unrealistic.

There is no self in the sense of separate individuality, yet there is one prevailing identity.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-15-2019, 08:16 PM, (This post was last modified: 05-15-2019, 08:17 PM by Infinite.)
#42
RE: If a woman hits a man is the man allowed to hit back?
(05-15-2019, 11:41 AM)Minyatur Wrote:  I disagree with your idea that the question does not have its place on a Law of One forum. The Law of One would be about recognizing yourself equally in both man and woman and turn to questions like how do you want to respond to being hit? How do you want to be responded to when you hit someone? Should you be protected for phisiological reasons when you lack respect for another? Should you be returned your own energy?

The problem isn't the question in itself. It's that attempt of trolling. The guy hates feminism and now it's trying to prove his point.

(05-15-2019, 11:41 AM)Minyatur Wrote:  I'm sorry to say this, but posts like your own make me realize there are little people on this forum who have an actual focus toward the Law of One.

The post after your reply, answer for me. Jesus answer for me. I don't saying that we must die if someone hit us until the death. I'm talking the violent react is the last option, depends of context and situation. But, this is irrelevant on the context of the thread that looks like a attempt of trolling as I said above.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
The following 2 users Like Infinite's post:
David_1, Relax
05-15-2019, 08:49 PM,
#43
RE: If a woman hits a man is the man allowed to hit back?
(05-15-2019, 08:16 PM)Infinite Wrote:  
(05-15-2019, 11:41 AM)Minyatur Wrote:  I disagree with your idea that the question does not have its place on a Law of One forum. The Law of One would be about recognizing yourself equally in both man and woman and turn to questions like how do you want to respond to being hit? How do you want to be responded to when you hit someone? Should you be protected for phisiological reasons when you lack respect for another? Should you be returned your own energy?

The problem isn't the question in itself. It's that attempt of trolling. The guy hates feminism and now it's trying to prove his point.


(05-15-2019, 11:41 AM)Minyatur Wrote:  I'm sorry to say this, but posts like your own make me realize there are little people on this forum who have an actual focus toward the Law of One.

The post after your reply, answer for me. Jesus answer for me. I don't saying that we must die if someone hit us until the death. I'm talking the violent react is the last option, depends of context and situation. But, this is irrelevant on the context of the thread that looks like a attempt of trolling as I said above.

Im not trolling nor do I hate feminism, pls try to remain civil, ok.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-16-2019, 03:29 AM,
#44
RE: If a woman hits a man is the man allowed to hit back?
Two of the greatest spiritual teachers in our planet’s history, Jesus and Gautama Buddha, both advocated for nonviolence. From my understanding of the Ra material, nonviolence is a quality of those on the STO path as well. I see the urge to violence as catalyst. In my heart I have no desire to hurt anyone or anything. Sometimes in my mind, I get upset and wish for violence, but that is a fleeting feeling and does not last or truly resonate. When I was younger, I could not recognize the fleeting nature of those feelings, and I let them consume me. Now I recognize the other options available to me when I get upset and I’m always rewarded when I opt to discuss my feelings openly, honestly, and maturely.

I don’t feel like I’ve overcome the desire for violence. I feel I’ve learned to recognize that a desire for violence is a desire to be seen/heard/witnessed.
I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
The following 5 users Like Merrick's post:
David_1, Glow, kristina, Minyatur, Relax
05-16-2019, 10:37 AM,
#45
RE: If a woman hits a man is the man allowed to hit back?
Our society drips with violence at every corner, men are raised to have inclinations towards violence to prepare them to be good little soldiers of war. It's one of the oldest functions of society: to create an army, whether to conquer or defend. Justifying or convincing another to go to war to fight and kill strangers who deep down they truly love has consumed a lot of energy of those who have formed the basis of what we understand as humanity.

For me, and here we go breaking those darn gender laws again, my sister was extremely violent towards me when we were children (she broke my collarbone, she would bite my until I bruised severely or even bled, she would break all my stuff) and very luckily for myself I'm the type of person who decided very early, because of extreme abuse from her and others, that if someone did something to me that made me feel bad, I wasn't going to do that to anyone else. There is a lot of programming, however, to make us feel otherwise, and this is there to keep us firmly stuck in the lower chakras out of fear.

One of my favorite advocates of nonviolence, Leo Tolstoy.

Quote:Men are so accustomed to maintaining external order by violence that they cannot conceive of life being possible without violence.

Quote:Every reform by violence is to be deprecated, because it does little to correct the evil while men remain as they are, and because wisdom has no need of violence.

An eye for an eye leaves every man blind. Violence =/= wisdom. There is a reason why Ra says the negative path embraces falsity.
There is no magic greater than honest distortion toward love.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
The following 4 users Like Jade's post:
David_1, flofrog, Infinite, Relax
05-16-2019, 03:40 PM,
#46
RE: If a woman hits a man is the man allowed to hit back?
=/\=

Im sending you all love, the misandry in this topic is strong and i hope you all find love for your hurts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-16-2019, 03:44 PM,
#47
RE: If a woman hits a man is the man allowed to hit back?
I’ve seen no misandry in this thread.
I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
The following 1 user Likes Merrick's post:
Relax




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)