Woman and man's highest calling- Cherokee proverb

[rav3n]

I like the concept of an NT pushing mysticism. I would like to see more.

I dislike non-NTs pretending to be NTs pushing mysticism.

 

[MacGuffin]

I like the concept of an NT pushing mysticism. I would like to see more.

They don't exist. Or have severe problems.

 

[sprinkles]

No argument here. I'm just saying: Put it up front, so that people know what they're getting into right from the start.

Oh, sorry. I was misreading what you were saying. I get it now.

 

[RDF]

I dislike non-NTs pretending to be NTs pushing mysticism.

They don't exist. Or have severe problems.

The main thing is that it pisses off all the other NTs.

 

[MacGuffin]

The main thing is that it pisses off all the other NTs.

We expect it from the non-NTs.

 

[rav3n]

The main thing is that it pisses off all the other NTs.

Fixed it for you.

 

[sprinkles]

I still don't see what mysticism there is. I mean all I have to do to see what [MENTION=15773]greenfairy[/MENTION] is talking about is walk outside.

I could see if it was like talking about enlightenment and stuff, but this seems far more pragmatic to me.

 

[MacGuffin]

I still don't see what mysticism there is. I mean all I have to do to see what [MENTION=15773]greenfairy[/MENTION] is talking about is walk outside.

I could see if it was like talking about enlightenment and stuff, but this seems far more pragmatic to me.

Don't worry about it, we men will take care of it.

 

[Thursday]

[MENTION=15773]greenfairy[/MENTION] I've enjoyed my own gender androgyny and so have my counterparts. I do "girly" things and the tomboys I've known and loved have appreciated me awakening them in an intangible way. I need structure and they need freedom. Whoever has the expertise in one should offer the other their gifts with love and respect. Whats your relationship role?

 

[Lark]

The idea that all NTs are atheistic robots has surely got old by now.

 

[FDG]

I think there's a reason why men are usually the ones who go to war.

Men don't "go to war" because they want to, excepting a very small minority. They are (or used to be) drafted by the army, and most of them (us) were deeply unhappy about it.

 

[Rasofy]

Men don't "go to war" because they want to, excepting a very small minority. They are (or used to be) drafted by the army, and most of them (us) were deeply unhappy about it.

I never assumed that. Different countries have different systems, but there is also a reason why only men are drafted in US(is that right?) and no one complains about gender inequality.

The rule is not arbitrary. There's a bio/sociological reason that supports it. Otherwise we would see a handful of deviations around the globe.

 

[FDG]

I never assumed that. Different countries have different systems, but there is also a reason why only men are drafted in US(is that right?) and no one complains about gender inequality.

Yes, because they're physically stronger and they don't make babies.

The rule is not arbitrary. There's a bio/sociological reason that supports it. Otherwise we would see a handful of deviations around the globe.

There's a clear biological reason which no one denies, on the other hand there's no reason to assume that men actually prefer the current sociological setting which makes them "go to war" much more often etc.

 

[Salomé]

Note to self and everyone everywhere who is in the business of giving advice and wisdom: don't speak to NT's with proverbs, mysticism, anything vague, or anything they have to use a function other than logic to figure out. And there we have the thread in a nutshell, folks. We've all learned something today.

You're welcome.

Don’t use touchy-feely New Age motivational posters to suck people into a discussion on pagan yin-yang theories. People are going to resist the latter by focusing on the deficiencies of the former.

Oh snap!

Well no we don't have to separate people into polarities, things just work best in balance. And if one person is extreme in one area, it's usually best for their partner to balance them out. Usually.

No. When one person is extreme in one area, it's always best that they seek balance within themselves, rather than excusing their imbalance as a function of gender, and seeking to compensate for it by symbiosis with someone else equally (though oppositely) imbalanced.

We call this Individuation and it is part of growing up. A process which involves throwing off childish fairy tales and fantasies and overly-simplistic models of the world and the "types" of people in it.

 

[Rasofy]

Yes, because they're physically stronger and they don't make babies.

That's too simplistic.
Strength isn't that much of a factor when soldiers are able to kill enemies miles away.
Both men and women are required to make babies, women just carry them (and breastfeed and take care, etc, which is actually my point) .

There's a clear biological reason which no one denies, on the other hand there's no reason to assume that men actually prefer the current sociological setting which makes them "go to war" much more often etc.

They don't prefer. It's the sort of thing that we aren't wired to question. Kinda like God's existence some centuries ago.

 

[FDG]

That's too simplistic.
Strength isn't that much of a factor when soldiers are able to kill enemies miles away.

So? What's your point? Up to now, I've given some clear facts (men are indeed stronger and men indeen don't carry babies). On the other hand, you're supporting a "sociological" hypothesis which boils down to "it's just the way it is".

Both men and women are required to make babies, women just carry them (and breastfeed and take care, etc, which is actually my point)

Semantics, you know what I mean.

They don't prefer. It's the sort of thing that we aren't wired to question. Kinda like God's existence some centuries ago.

If we're not "wired" biologically to question something, then our stance is bound not to change throughout the centuries. Since we do now question God's existence (and we did questions its existence beforehand, it was just inconvenient to say it out loud), your argument defeats itself.

 

[Rasofy]

I give up, let's just agree to disagree.

 

[gromit]

No. When one person is extreme in one area, it's always best that they seek balance within themselves, rather than excusing their imbalance as a function of gender, and seeking to compensate for it by symbiosis with someone else equally (though oppositely) imbalanced.

Or type!

I would say seeking balance is really only important in terms of the unhealthy or less-functional aspects, but maybe extreme is always unhealthy? For example, for some Fs or some Ts... maybe the Fs learn not to take things so personally and not see all statements they disagree with as an attack, or Ts learn that not everyone processes things as they do and to take others' feelings into account. But I think, even after learning to approach things with more balance, still your tendencies will remain. And those differences between people add so much richness to life. (Fi ) I am drawn to certain people because they are themselves so thoroughly yet also have the maturity to take a calm and reasonable step back from their "natural" perspective as well when the situation requires.

 

[Nocapszy]

That depends on how you see physical strength. Women tend to have better endurance, and weather disease and illness better. If men tend to be the aggressors and women the targets, it would be nice for men to develop some self-policing strategies, but that is different from saying women need their protection.

that's not what it said.
nothing in the semantic of that proverb should make you that women are necessarily weak. there wasn't even any implication.
it only says that his "highest calling," i.e. the greatest thing a man can do is protect a woman.
perception is colored by the hyper-feminist culture we live in now.
by the same logic you're using, i could complain about the "unwarranted implication" that men are soulless, or "Sourceless" [not sure what that means to the cherokee].
but i don't, because the implication isn't there. the implication isn't even that a man needs the woman to find his soul/source. it only says that the highest calling of a woman is to help a man in that way.

when are we going to get off this feminist high-horse? not everything is sexist.

 

[FDG]

Women don't have better endurance than men (ceteris paribus ofc). The world records in endurance sports have been set by men, as well as in Ironmen competitions. It's just a silly myth.