Well you have convinced me of two things....sexism is alive and
well... and you sure know how to revise history!

On Sep 18, 6:44 am, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote:
> I hardly think of Cleopatra, the Virgin Mary or Elizabeth I (etc.) as
> having a limited role in their society, however. HuffingtonPost has a
> current article about the increasing unhappiness of women- post
> militant, liberated feminists- in contrast to a much happier male- as
> time/years go by although health issues weren't mentioned and I would
> posit women have an edge in that department. I think therapy stepped
> in as a form of religion in modern times- instead of being a sinner
> one was screwed up; the therapist took on the role of the priest/
> confession and one's ego and dramatic changes became a petite god
> issuing absolutions. It turns out having control over one's
> reproductive/sexual functions has liberated no one nor turned out
> happier families/relationships. As we cared for parents, husbands,
> lovers, children and ran mini-dynasties of well-ordered homes and
> gardens, checked off domestic arts and skills with talent and grace,
> kept our looks and body parts in tact, our mind and curiousity sharp-
> the toughest order was freedom- probably an existential threat. Plus
> women have an historical reputation for envy and competition based on
> different standards than males and entrance into the public,
> professional world of men has not really changed that. An older ugly
> man with money/power will always trump an older woman but one has to
> wonder who has the last laugh sometimes.// One bothersome thing about
> therapists and many doctors is their over-generous, often dangerous
> prescriptions which is really a newcomer to the human system. Add
> enviornmental issues, poor food safety, modern stress, continued abuse
> and enslavement of women in some societies, etc. and it's no wonder
> that the overall picture of women is disturbing. Oh- there's
> more...:-) lol
>
> On Sep 18, 5:00 am, Justintruth <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Maybe its the lobotomies or electroshock or peri-haldol that was beingty
> > administered back then when the term was coined, or perhaps it was the
> > way they interpreted the dissatisfaction of women with their limited
> > role in society as being a sign of neurosis instead of a lack of
> > liberation. Or was it the doors that lock from the outside. Or was it
> > they way the represented the foundation of their discipline as
> > scientifically valid and as a valid basis for treatment - their
> > "freudian theories"? Or was it simply the lack of results? Or maybe
> > its because of the fees they charged?
>
> > The truth is that often therapy does not work but hey... you must have
> > heard it I know but.... the difference between a neurotic, a psychotic
> > and a psychiatrist? The first builds castles in the air, the second
> > lives in them, and the last collects the rent?
>
> > ... some therapists did good work but at the time that phrase was
> > coined there was a lot of very bad therapy...
>
> > On Sep 17, 6:13 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > > Them is fightn words. I imagine you miust have had a poor experience with 
> > > one of those you
>
> > > refer to as shrinks. Which makes me wonder if anyone is able to give a 
> > > reasonable answer to the perplexing issue as to why
>
> > > psychotherapists and psychoanalysts were saddled with the not so 
> > > flattering term of "shrinks."
>
> > > The truth is - when therapy works - it always expands not contracts.
>
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: rigsy03 <[email protected]>
> > > To: "Minds Eye" <[email protected]>
> > > Sent: Thu, Sep 17, 2009 6:49 am
> > > Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: Newton's Spiritual Laws of Motion...
>
> > > he healer is already in place- one's rational mind/brain. I tend to
> > > hink of shrinks as snake-oil salesmen. But that is a different topic,
> > > sn't it?
> > > On Sep 17, 12:55 am, [email protected] wrote:
> > >  I believe that every one should work on forging a solid identity. I like 
> > > what
> > > oseph Cambell has to say about this in his book The Hero with a Thousand 
> > > Faces.
> > > e says the modern hero is a person who dares to take a trip into his or 
> > > her
> > > nner space, identifies their inevitable splits and dedicates themselves to
> > > econcilling them. Any one can do this but patients have the added 
> > > advantage of
> > > opefully having a relatively objective guide.
>
> > >  -----Original Message-----
> > >  From: ornamentalmind <[email protected]>
> > >  To: "Minds Eye" <[email protected]>
> > >  Sent: Wed, Sep 16, 2009 3:06 am
> > >  Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: Newton's Spiritual Laws of Motion...
>
> > >  ibbs, do you also believe that non-patients should/n
> > > eed to work on
> > >  forging a solid identity...'?
> > >  hanks.
> > >  On Sep 15, 7:42 pm, [email protected] wrote:
> > >   I believe that science and spirituality can mix in the process of a 
> > > patient
> > >  orking on forging a solid identity if by spirtuality is meant connecting 
> > > with
> > >  asic 'spiritual' concepts of faith, hope, trust. love and persistence all
> > >  ssociated with the consciousness of a one year old child.
>
> > >   -----Original Message-----
> > >   From: Vam <[email protected]>
> > >   To: "Minds Eye" <[email protected]>
> > >   Sent: Tue, Sep 15, 2009 10:24 pm
> > >   Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: Newton's Spiritual Laws of Motion...
>
> > >   ustin is right, elsewhere, when he says that mixing religion or
> > >   pirituality and science belittles both. Not because they cannot be
> > >   rought together in the same frame but, in my view, because it calls
> > >   or an
> > >  extreme sharpness to learn in one and apply in the other,
> > >   nterchangeably, all the way, untill there remains just one.
> > >   Sadly, Neil, your post merely follows the stereotypical mode :
> > >   eligion vs science. It adds nothing and only seems like one more
> > >   ailing against. I can see you are ' for ' ' something,' but with such
> > >   hought patterns I believe you may be doing no good to your cause,
> > >   hatever it is !  The methodology ( to me, today ) seems extremely
> > >   egressive.  Entertaining ? Perhaps, to one who is looking for that.
> > >   I hope you get the job in Dubai. I know it would change your life
> > > 20 uch, for the better. But, you ?
>
> > >   n Sep 16, 4:18 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >    Science has overturned many fables (though not necessarily the power
> > >    of fable) - I often wonder how we might expose the liturgies
> > >   of
> > >    capitalism for what they are and thus discover what was working given
> > >    that it wasn't.  Instead the bwanking priests are still blackmailing
> > >    us along old religious lines - if we don't pay their ransom (tithe)
> > >    they won't do the chanting that ensures our prosperity.  They are
> > >    saying this to us even after all their runes and litanies have just
> > >    failed and we have had to empty our social confers to save them.  What
> > >    we haven't done is formulated a science of living without their magic
> > >    wand.  I actually think Pat is wrong here, though one can see in Vam's
> > >    exegesis notions of f
> > >  orces very familiar in relational physics.
> > >    Physics was never my bag, but my colleagues in it always seemed the
> > >    most religious and inclined to a certain rhythm even if even more
> > >    appalling social misfits than I.  These days they are seeking all
> > >    kinds of Indian rhythmic mathematics to see if it somehow sways in
> > >    harmony with the universe they can prod.  Even quarks sound like
> > >    mystical history - originally 6 there are now just two, clinging
> > >    together because they are so=2
> > > 0much more attractive to each other when
> > >    apart.  Bwankers in sack-cloth and ashes and worker control of capital
> > >    through government directly and openly consulting the people - now
> > >    there's something to pray for.
>
> > >    On 15 Sep, 17:54, Vam <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > >    > Gunas are fundamental to Sankhya philosophy, also termed Sankhya 
> > > Yoga.
> > >    > Krishna himself says in Bhagwat Gita that, among all yogas,=2
> > >   0he is
> > >    > Sankhya Yoga. And, among all yogis, he is Kapil muni, the stalwart
> > >    > Sankhya yogi.
>
> > >    > Gunas takes our realisation of our self beyond the ego, where most of
> > >    > our understanding stops, for the ego is nothing but constituted of
> > >    > gunas.
>
> > >    > Even Prakriti, the nature both primordial and individuated, is 
> > > nothing
> > >    > but constituted of gunas. Only Purusha, or the Witness - Self, is 
> > > not.
>
> > >    > The most popular and well - known of all yogas, Patanjal Yoga, is
> > >    > entirely based of Sankhy
> > >  a principles.
>
> > >    > There is never, without exception, when all three gunas are not
> > >    > present in any being or thing. Only occassions when one may
> > >    > predominate, while the other two are dormant or attenuated. By one's
> > >    > choice of realisation, and in thought and action, one may cause the
> > >    > predomination of one.
>
> > >    > In Prakriti, or the penultimate realisation, all three gunas are=2
> > > 0in
> > >    > complete balance, annulling the effect of each other.
>
> > >    > Each guna becomes a means to liberation, in correspondingly
> > >    > appropriate situations.
>
> > >    > On Sep 15, 4:32 pm, Pat <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > >    > >      When I got home last night, it dawned on me that Sir Isaac
> > >    > > Newton’s main goal and deepest interest was to discover how spirit 
> > > and
> > >    > > the universe interact; which is why a huge percentage of his 
> > > writings
> > >    > > were alchemical—the scientific findings were, more or less, a by-
> > >    > > product of his overall search for a Theory of E
> > >   verything, which would,
> > >    > > necessarily, include spiritual phenomena.  I then had the
>
> ...
>
> read more »
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to