Dwai to Marsha:
Again I think you are making the mistake of projecting your ideas
about the gender of Yin and Yang onto this matter.
Yin and Yang are gender-less. The represent duality and opposites of
all kinds. Of which, male and female are but a infinitesimal fraction.
While it is true the women are more Yin in nature, that doesn't mean
that they lack "Yang". Similarly, men are more Yang but don't
necessarily lack Yin. The practice of Tai Chi Chuan (a very vital
taoist practice) or Ba Gua or simply Chi Gung is about balancing the
Yin and Yang within oneself. Yang power doesn't need reconnecting
with. It is developed and harnessed. Similarly with Yin.
I know it is very hard to separate concepts that have snuck into our
psyche and marked their grooves. But I hope you can drop all
judgement and simply feel the power of this book. In my class (Tai
Chi, Taoist meditation) there are both men and women and we all
strive to balance and augment each other's practice. The Tao is not
the exclusive domain of any one gender.
Margaret to Marsha:
after reading Marsha's new posts and SA's interepretation I am - like
Ron trying to at least go halfway...
so here we've got a male and a female looking at what you and SA are
saying.
It's not that I can't embrace some aspect of what you are talking
about...that there is some larger issue about the yin/yang; male/female
energies...Kali/Isis. I too, think it's important that both exist
Kali/Isis - mother/father - creator/destroyer.
But I'm still having trouble with what point it makes exactly. Like Ron
I feel like it is always our perception that defines what we experience
intellectually.
from my
point of view (my perception) - there are many statements that Marsha
makes (i.e. the one about 'am I fluttering my eyelashes enough?') that
sound personal and bitter; as if there is this group of men out here not
listening to her because she's a woman and she's not 'behaving'
properly.
So Laotzu is addressing a group
of men and telling them to "be humble, to be empty, to be low, to allow
the subtle, invisible," and Marsha thinks it would be ridiculous to have
him address a group of women in this way.
I am like Ron - why would it be ridiculous? Because women already have
these qualities? If that is what you think - I disagree. I've known some
women who are much more calulating, manipulative, vain and ignorant of
subtleties than men I know. I think women and men both benefit from this
advice - it's universal.
I too, like Ron, feel that there are yin energies in men, yang energies
in women - they flow back and forth. I believe we all have some
genderless characteristics and yet we are not going to ever going to not
have the biological characteristics of having two basic genders
(transsexuals, homosexuals and other variants not withstanding).
[SA currently]
Well, if it does then your perception seems to
have been off the mark on what Marsha said. So you
have a female problem, not Marsha, for Marsha didn't
bring up a biological female problem, you did. So
how's that work?
Ron:
How does this work SA?
Why are the only statements you have problems are the ones that I made?
I said nothing different than Dwai or Margaret.
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
