The Anima and The Animus

I’ve always been fascinated by the inner male inside the female (animus) and the inner female inside the male (anima). The terms were coined by the psychologist C.G. Jung.  It seems to me that humans intuitively know we each have those energies as part of our identity to some degree without over-analyzing it. Women and men are both female and male! It’s one of the reasons that the homosexual lifestyle really doesn’t bother most Americans. A Pew Research poll taken in 2017 showed that 62% of Americans support same-sex marriage. We all know that we’re learning about our bodies and our feelings whether we’re attracted to female or male at one time or another.  It’s no big deal as long as you’re honest with yourself in the midst of it and are careful of children’s attachment to parents.

I’m a trained actor with a degree in it, so I know how to have almost instant access to a wide range of emotions, and tears are super easy for me. I spent two years learning how to do that. But I much prefer laughter and happiness as part of my natural personality. Yet when I cry, it feels like a cry for the animus, the male in me that stomps all over my receptive female. My receptive female, all receptive females are beautiful. She is the bearer and producer of life after all. But is she loved and cared for safely the way she should be? Or must she always stroke the male ego to be loved, even if his behavior doesn’t call for it? If love from her partner is conditional based on size and behavior, he cannot say he loves her.  All humans go through hard patches where our self-esteem is bottomed out.  If someone really loves you, and has seen and knows that you have it in you to eventually come out of it, they’ll stay by your side, not bolt.

My experience and intuition tell me that it’s not terribly safe to be an open, loving, female in our society. Most women I know have developed serious defenses now and will even aggressively act out because there is no real equity and heaping amounts of bias based on gender! It’s very similar to unarmed black men being gunned down by police. It’s appalling and tragic!! Women are at about the same level and I’m guessing the stats regarding violence toward women would show this to be true.

Over fifty-four years I’ve maximized my intellect with education, developed firm boundaries in the public workplace (which doesn’t seem to make any difference), insisted on being treated with respect (sometimes it works), focused on my behavior more than my looks (rarely works), and become very focused and skilled in my work. Guys don’t like it. Once I hit my thirties, I learned how to be assertive and opinionated as well. The other thing that goes on is that as a pretty white woman, I feel no obligation to maximize my looks to feed patriarchal bullshit and make myself superficial to manipulate the system. I feel more powerful sitting in my authenticity. Women that aren’t as pretty compete with me or make sure I keep a distance from the man they’re pursuing (so weird) when I’m not even looking. We are so programmed to believe that survival in this planet depends on finding “our level” as prescribed by the institutions and the media that we don’t even know we’re doing it!

It’s not working. I’m still seen as a girl and treated like a girl. No matter how “male” a woman learns to act in public or how many letters she has behind her name with a high I.Q., she’s still paid less than a man and treated like her first order of business is to give something of herself to a man or his system for his consumption. I would never get a sex change operation just so I’d have more money for security but it seems like that extreme could be called for. It’s not unlike MJ bleaching his skin to appear more white. That’s how bad our society is for anyone who is not a white male.

Thank goodness I really love my work and do it very well because of all of my dedication and accomplishment. I work with the Universe who always has my back on this rough planet. If it weren’t for my intuition and rational mind guiding me, I’d probably be dead. I very much want to be alive so it’s a good thing.

Can Your Reasonable Intention Change the Numbers?

The foundation theme for this blog is:

“The balance between rational analysis and intuition create True Reason. One cannot exist or be fully accurate without the other.”-Me

We need to correct the current scientific bias that favors rational analysis over intuition which is why science is currently in a misogynistic black hole (no pun intended). There is a need for both women and men balanced in both their intuitive and rational mind working in the sciences.

Some analogies could be the balance of female/male principle and the balance of right and left brain hemispheres in each individual that takes us beyond the current evolutionary condition. Maybe an individual is dominant in one or the other but a truly reasonable person is balanced in both. I suppose this alone is a new notion and it is my theory. I didn’t read it anywhere. To me, it is logical.

My question is; “Can reasonable, personal intention change the numbers?”

Quantum mechanics says that it can. A thing can change it’s form and vibration if not it’s essential essence. For instance, the number two is always the number two, but it may look and feel different than it ever did before due to evolutionary adaptation.

1920px-Circles_packed_in_square_2.svg

500px-delboeuf_illusion

Rupert Sheldrake suggests, “Things have habits, they are not fixed by natural laws. Men make laws, nature doesn’t. The cosmos now seems more like a developing organism than an eternal machine. In this context, habits may be more natural than immutable laws.

Say you follow your GPS and get to the right place you programmed into your GPS but once you get there, you see that it’s completely changed its form and feel. It’s so different that you question whether you are in the right place and check your instruments. It is indeed the right place but it’s not the SAME place. Nothing and no one stays the same even though the address is the same.

A person may be the same height and look generally the same but if they have gone through a spiritually and emotionally life-changing event they may seem like a completely different person when you meet them again. This is unusual but it does happen.

It is entertaining to me to observe that after a woman loses weight most people treat her completely different as though she’s a different person just because she’s smaller. She’s not a different person, she’s a different size! I’ve talked to women friends who were quite large and then shrank and they are disgusted at how nice people are to them all of a sudden, as though their very character changed and they are now of more value and no longer some type of criminal because they are no longer large. This type of size bias is very indicative of the superficial values embedded in our materialistic, media-driven culture that rides on the objectification and over-sexualization of women. The assumption is, a smaller woman is more desirable sexually or more skilled sexually. None of that is true at all obviously. Studies have been done showing that doctors are size biased as well toward patients and make assumptions about health that don’t hold up in studies.

In answer to my question, yes the numbers can change but the sums cannot. How that looks is another matter. 2 + 2= 4 is always true and is very comforting but the way that looks in form is completely variable and sometimes you won’t think it’s math at all. That’s where physics can be of help.

The next idea I’ll be looking at is my theory that there are introspective controls possible in axiology that minimize ambiguity and variance so that something, someone, or some relationship can be studied and stabilized. I’ll be coming up with axioms to demonstrate it in relation to Time Science.

Peace out.

The Source of Intuition

 

“…cognitive scientists think of intuition as a set of unconscious cognitive and affective processes; the outcome of these processes is often difficult to articulate and is not based on deliberate thinking, but it’s real and (sometimes) effective nonetheless.”-Maria Popova on “Brain Pickings”

Cognitive Scientists think of…That doesn’t sound very convincing. The link to a study below is more convincing but the fact that the study focused on genetics makes it very narrow due to the fact that only 2% of human genes are different from one another caused by slight differences in our birth family. When science tries to objectify anything based on the genome, it’s shooting in the dark because they can’t read 98% of it. It’s like science is smoke and mirrors sometimes. They don’t know what it says but they aren’t widely admitting it in public. They just called it “junk DNA”. They’re essentially saying, “Well, we don’t know what it is so it’s just junk to us”. It protects their egos.

Come to think of it, it’s similar to the way male scientists treat women. They don’t understand women, their natures, their beauty, their brilliance, their needs and intuition and thus can’t control us. Consequently, we are objectified and thrown to the curb as “junk” instead of treasured and loved when it suits their ego or performance needs.

Women came out far more accurate at just being able to look at someone and accurately tell what they were feeling. That has been my experience in clinical practice as well over sixteen years. In this study, we have the scientific method, worshipped by males mostly (women use it too obviously but we find it slow moving), proving the fact of intuition.

Intuition study of 90,000 people

Moreover, intuitions get better with practice — especially with a lot of practice — because at bottom intuition is about the brain’s ability to pick up on certain recurring patterns; the more we are exposed to a particular domain of activity the more familiar we become with the relevant patterns (medical charts, positions of chess pieces), and the more and faster our brains generate heuristic solutions to the problem we happen to be facing within that domain.”-Maria Popova, Brain Pickings

Next time a woman next to you says, “It’s women’s intuition” you need to believe her.  Or, if you’re a woman, trust your own intuition, especially with your children and your own body.  It’s backed up by science if you think that somehow makes it more worthy.

Paige Bradley-spring

Artist Paige Bradley

Keep Living

My mother wonders aloud, how I keep going, pay all the bills, live alone and somehow thrive. Maybe friends who know me wonder too. I don’t know. They don’t say anything.

It’s pretty simple; passion. At every turn, out in public, in former jobs and relationships, in politics and on FB, on every TV show and magazine that comes in the mail and song I hear on the radio, it seeks to define and control me as a woman, I suppose for the purpose of money and sex. I never saw so much drivel and malarky, disingenuous ignorant propaganda as what passes for women’s values in print, in media, and in society. “Women’s Day” magazine could be used like the phone book in an outhouse.

Do I really mainly care about clothes, shoes, hair, makeup, women’s pharmaceuticals, reorganizing my closets, romantic books and movies, babies, cooking and the latest cleaning products?

No! I want to increase my education, my income, and my independence. I want to feel my body so keenly that I’m the best lover I can be. I want my 20-year-old son to never feel obligated to take care of me because I take care of myself and I want nothing more than to see him happy as a man. I can’t wait to get my next book in the mail to read and use to improve my mind, and I only clean in 5-minute spurts so I don’t have to think about it. I’ve got more interesting things to think about than a clean floor.

I wake up every day to be happy and well, to create and define myself as a human birthright and I get a passionate kick out of it. My blank canvas to create on is my life and I’m giving no more away than I already have. I’d rather live than die a slow death, calling it life, while reacting to someone else’s vision of the world that I don’t feel or care about.

At least I’m not bored, I’m enjoying my own company and having fun.

journeypower

Science: A Masculine Disorder?

fb_img_1490447974802.jpg

“Science is based on the professional creation and certification of knowledge which is tied to powerful interest groups, notably the state, corporations and the scientific profession itself. Patriarchy is based on male control of dominant social structures and the exclusion of women from positions of power through means such as direct discrimination, socialization and the gender division of labor.

Patriarchy within the scientific community is manifested through male control of elite positions and various exclusionary devices. The scientific method incorporates masculine features such as the objectification of nature. Scientific knowledge is masculine in its neglect of women’s experience and its adoption of paradigms built on assumptions of competition and hierarchy.”-Jill Bowling and Brian Martin, Ph.D.

Here is another article from an expert! It’s longer but VERY interesting.

Science: a masculine disorder

I woke up this morning, after being hijacked by “a friend” on a thread yesterday and then territorially denigrated in the patriarchal tradition, pondering the question; “Is the scientific method itself horse-and-buggy, materialist, patriarchal B.S.?  Is that possible? Before today, I pretty much supported it, although its methodology seemed very simplistic to me and not at all holistic. Was I the only one wondering if this might be true?

I wonder this because as a fifty-four-year-old female who is trained in science as far as needed in licensed health care, my intuition is as consistent and rational as anything I see or feel in this material world.  I also listen to it.  This phenomenon is mostly ignored, cynically scoffed at, and at best, not understood by most people including my ex-friend who has patently disrespected my intuitive read of the Mayan Harmonic for months now.  He just now told me how much better he is than me which kind of says it all.

My patients have confirmed my hands-on intuition with their bodies for fifteen years so it’s like breathing to me now.  I put my hands on someone and I can feel everything that’s going on. Then they confirm it verbally after I tell them what I sense.  Then I treat on the manifested body and they feel it again. I don’t feel it physically initially; I sense the energetic cause of the physical manifestation which is the cause of all illness; thoughts and feelings or vibrations then I assess and treat tactilely.

My ex-friend, who fancies himself a scientist, knows nothing to very little about the body and doesn’t even work in the sciences. I’ve made my living in healthcare for seventeen years. There are lessons to be learned by all.  For instance, in the last week I’ve learned two lessons:

  1.  It is unwise to only see the good in people when their shadow is blasting you in the face. They operate from cynicism and usage; not love, and you can feel it.
  2.  Many men do not have intuition on their radar and if they do, they subjugate it for the purposes of patriarchal power (money and control) or addiction. They view intuition as feminized or sub-cultural which would weaken their position in society. Other cultures can follow their intuition but patriarchal men from all cultures do not. They only use and objectify women sexually and poor people economically, no matter how nice they may seem and politically correct with their rhetoric. It’s fake. It takes an experienced and trained eye and ear to see it.  The first tip-off is, they never ask you how you are, and if they do, it’s not genuine.  You can feel it.

“Long-term structural change in science must be predicated on changing the relations between men and women.”

This applies across cultures, all over the world.  The real issue of disparity on the planet is between women and men all over the world and the rest of the issues follow.  Women are still treated in a barbaric manner, especially the child bride phenomenon.

“Complementing this approach is that taken by those specifically focusing on the reasons why there are not more women involved in the sciences. Several writers have examined science education, particularly looking at the reasons why girls leave science in their school years. Following the observations that boys get more teacher attention and girls have less confidence in their ability, in Australia, there have been some experiments with all-girls science and mathematics classes.

There has also been an analysis of the way in which science is constructed to reflect male values and suggestions about how to create a different sort of science. Arditti, for instance, argues for a feminist perspective which “would re-introduce and re-legitimize the intuitive approach”.

To be continued…

 

I Just Realized…

…that I’ve either presented myself to be objectified by a man or turned around and objectified a man in revenge for societal objectification my entire adult life. A man can chase me and demand sex from me and that is as it should be right?… but I can’t turn around and do the same to him just because I’m female. It’s too direct. Feel that fear and sting guys, when a strong woman objectifies you and asserts herself because she’s got the hots for you? It’s dehumanizing and overpowering and that’s what we’re supposed to accept from you…all the fucking time. Two can play the control game and women do! It repels most men and statistics prove it because nature makes females receptive…or does it? See, we don’t know anymore.

No doubt, this may be the case for most of us because it’s the way we’ve been socialized. Because I live alone now, I can finally feel myself and see myself.  It’s amazing!

My father objectified all of us as a dyed in the wool misogynist; my mother and my three sisters. There was no love there. My mother in turn, as a true misandrist,  in resentment, taught us to use and objectify men. “Women are just better people,” she said. I know a few feminists that would agree with her. Men are good for money, sex, and giving us babies if we play the game; that’s it. Neither one of them has ever changed their story and there is no belief in love possible between the genders.

I know that many people have seen their parents or grandparents love each other or other couples love each other but I don’t think most people have. The divorce rate and disintegration of the family is a testimony to that despite the posturing on FB and Disney movies. Human life is cheap and each gender first suspects that the reason for talking to the opposite sex is to ultimately use them for sex or money, not friendship.

Also, though, my whole adult life, I’ve held as a value, as an ideal, a human awakening, a deep feeling where somehow, someone, somewhere, in the universe, or on this planet will show me how to behold a man as just another human being and not a predator. I know men think women are predators too but they barely talk about it. They’ve said it to me about other women!

I have no problem wanting humaneness. I don’t see it, but I hold it as an ideal.  Women and men are human beings first. I desperately want to believe and see that in my world. There’s no sexual tension there though is there? What a conundrum, our damn brains.

Where is the top ridge, higher up the mountain where we can put the programming of gender, whether based in biology or not, down in the valley where one day it will just flood and wash it away?  I want, with all of my heart, to just have a friend that I love.  Frankly, I don’t care if I ever have sex again if we can just stop running from one another in fear and distrust because of hurt from the past. If we can just stop using sex and seeing sex as a control game, a power game, a thieving of energy rather than sharing. Why must we suck energy off of one another instead of sharing our true selves? Why do we have to compete? Why can’t we both have great ideas perceived in different ways? Why can’t we just be kind to one another?

I’m at zero.  I really am.

redbubble

“The Science Delusion” by Rupert Sheldrake

Rupert Sheldrake relentlessly asks mainstream so-called objective science to balance itself with its nemesis; the relational feminine principle; the dragon lady. He does not say this in the book but he alludes to it in every chapter.

I’m not sure he realizes it, but when he refers to the subjective, open inquiry, the dark cave, and the humanization of scientists as opposed to demi-gods, he seems to invoke the mythical goddesses Athena, Artemis or even Demeter in her nurturing, fecund ways. He wants scientists and the public to sit around the kitchen table and bake science bread together. It’s really rather charming, personally speaking, although I can see how traditional scientists would rather put their pants back on reading this book. He does hit below the belt as he reminds us that each scientist was born of his mother whether he liked her or not. You wouldn’t be here if it wasn’t for her. Scientific fact #1; she made you in her body. That is the purpose of patriarchy and science right?; to forget that fact, or to erase the predominance of the way nature works. Yes, well, we all need reminding of that lest hubris utterly annihilates the planet through militaristic science funded technology in the name of progress and the virility of men.

I can’t get enough of Rupert’s support of balance between the earth, shamanism, intuition, psychism, natural healing and good old-fashioned fun. I bet he had a cool Mom. Yes, Mr. Sheldrake assaults all of that in this book with a lucidity full of probing questions and facts that would make Harvey Weinstein blush.

Just because you’re a man, doesn’t mean you get to ram your billions of dollars through every last science program you can get your hands on, declare yourself God, mistreat the intelligent women, hog the awards and call Science The Truth!  Again, he doesn’t say that.  Those are my words, but he is British so he says it all nicely.

I just finished this book. The title is misleading because he is a scientist and has worked in science his whole life. He supports and has taught science; he is just seeking to have clearer and more honest communication with scientists themselves. In fact, the book is set up in a format to enhance a three-person discussion about materialistic science. As he says in the book, scientists are just people like you and me; no more correct or objective than any normal human being. Some of the time they are correct and some of the time they are not. We should no more put scientists on a pedestal than pastors, priests, or presidents!

In the book, he poses ten questions to the materialist scientist, explains his position and then challenges the scientist to examine his own thinking;

  1. Is Nature mechanical?
  2. Is the total amount of matter and energy always the same?
  3. Are the laws of Nature fixed?
  4. Is matter unconscious?
  5. Is Nature purposeless?
  6. Is all biological inheritance material?
  7. Are memories stored as material traces?
  8. Are minds confined to brains?
  9. Are psychic phenomena illusory?
  10. Is mechanistic medicine the only kind that really works?

I enjoyed the last question because I’ve worked as a holistic practitioner for twenty years and have seen the answer first hand. I’m not going to be a spoiler on this one; I encourage you to read the book and comb through his logic. In each chapter, he poses historical fact and scientific evidence to challenge the materialist dogma. He’s clearly trying to have a conversation with his peers if anyone will respond!

He ends the book talking about scientists illusions about objectivity and the future of science. I read it and posted it as an audio clip. Happy Reading.

The Science Delusion Cover

 

 

 

 

 

Woman’s Intuition Gone Awry

The Female Price of Male Pleasure

by Lili Loofbourow

Female price of male pleasure

One of the compliments girls get most as kids is that they’re pretty; they learn, accordingly, that a lot of their social value resides in how much others enjoy looking at them. They’re taught to take pleasure in other people’s pleasure in their looks. Indeed, this is the main way they’re socially rewarded.

This is also how women are taught to be good hosts. To subordinate their desires to those of others. To avoid confrontation. At every turn, women are taught that how someone reacts to them does more to establish their goodness and worth than anything they themselves might feel.”

I hope you clicked on the link above and at least skimmed this article.  I found it to be another one of those disturbing ones. This quote from the article, for instance, is very true.  But I have never chosen to be with the type of man that would be that inconsiderate of my body.  Is the author suggesting that women don’t have a choice in the type of partner she chooses?  That’s ludicrous.

I wish we lived in a world that encouraged women to attend to their bodies’ pain signals instead of powering through like endurance champs. It would be grand if women (and men) were taught to consider a woman’s pain abnormal; better still if we understood a woman’s discomfort to be reason enough to cut a man’s pleasure short.”

I wouldn’t give a man with this type of attitude the time of day.  I might even give him some grief! Men don’t have the right to cause us any type of pain and we don’t have the right to cause them any type of pain either!  This is a human issue.

My nineteen-year-old son swears to me that his generation has quite a different attitude toward sex.  Yet, as his mother, I really have never found him to be terribly respectful of me as a female.  He learned that from his hippie generation father who had mama issues.

But those aren’t actually the lessons society teaches — no, not even to “entitled” millennials. Remember: Sex is always a step behind social progress in other areas because of its intimacy.”

I’m not sure what she means here but it could have to do with the expression of emotions.  That is something that you definitely are raised to do or not do. My son has always expressed his feelings so I can only hope he will listen to his female partners’ feelings as well.  I can’t imagine it to be any other way, but who knows.

This article is well worth the read and I’m still chewing on it.  The short of it is that woman’s intuition needs to come UP when it comes to her body.  The days of patriarchy and misogynist men dictating to us our physical reality are ending.  It needs to end! I have never hesitated to speak up and communicate what I like and what I want to my male partner and have had a pretty good sex life because of that. I notice that as I take care of my body better and can move better, I feel more confident.  All of that is completely within my control and I encourage women to take care of themselves, focus on what they want for their bodies and move forward with that instead of blaming men and society for issues that are fully within their control if they’ll just focus their will and mind.

 

Crossing Over, Coming Together, Part II

I’m almost done giving you the scoop on “Molecules of Emotion” by Dr. Candace Pert, Ph.D. I’m going to finish summing up Chapter 11 of this great book where she talks about healing herself after all she’s been through in the NIH lab, with the men, and being unfairly excluded from the Lasker Award because she’s a woman.  She says,

I realized that I had been angry for years, harboring deep resentments that went all the way back to Sol and the Lasker, perhaps even further back… (more details)In the Lasker days, when I began comparing what happened to me to the losses inflicted on Rosalind Franklin. I had only intuited that suppressing my emotions was dangerous and might lead to cancer, but now I had amassed enough hard scientific data to convince me that I needed to heal my emotions if I wanted to pull through this difficult time-alive and healthy” –pg. 236

Rosalind Elsie Franklin (25 July 1920 – 16 April 1958) was an English chemist and X-ray crystallographer who made contributions to the understanding of the molecular structures of DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid), RNA (ribonucleic acid), viruses, coal, and graphite so her comparison was apt given her work and success. Born in 1920 in London, England, Rosalind Franklin earned a Ph.D. in physical chemistry from Cambridge University. She learned crystallography and X-ray diffraction, techniques that she applied to DNA fibers. One of her photographs provided key insights into DNA structure. Other scientists used it as evidence to support their DNA model and took credit for the discovery. Franklin died of ovarian cancer in 1958, at age 37.

This is what women do to themselves because there is so much negativity reflected back to us regarding having power, intelligence, and self-esteem from other women, men, and religion.  Dr. Pert says,

There was no doubt I had a reputation for being a spitfire, someone who was so hellbent on her own path that other people often felt the best thing they could do was simply stay out of my way. For the first time, I seriously considered; Was I the problem? If I’d behaved differently, been a good girl, and played the game according to the rules, would Peptide T have made it to the market, saving the lives of people who were now dead because it wasn’t available sooner?

I wrote “No” all over the margins. We’re not called to be saviors of the world or co-dependent. The short of it is, she found some spiritual healing for herself, was about to understand the true nature of forgiveness and forgave Sol, her old boss. She began to accept herself and found a quiet mental state where she didn’t feel the need “to perform” or achieve so much anymore.  I can totally relate to that as many women can.  She says,

I also started to become aware of synchronicity, to see connections between events and people happening simultaneously and then to act on this awareness instead of out of the more familiar linear cause-and-effect model”-pg. 242

Here is where intuition really kicks in and she says,

It appealed to me intuitively. The mind-body network is so taxed by unprocessed sensory input in the form of suppressed trauma or undigested emotions that it has become bogged down and cannot flow freely, sometimes even working against itself, at cross-purposes…When stress prevents the molecules of emotion from flowing freely where needed, the largely autonomic processes that are regulated by peptide flow, such as breathing, blood flow, immunity, digestion, and elimination, collapse down to a few simple feedback loops and upset the normal healing response.”

As a professional bodyworker and reiki practitioner, I see this every day and align it every day with my patients.  They can feel it and I stay busy!

“My colleagues were doing research on how trauma and blockage of emotional and physical information can be stored indefinitely at the cellular level.“-pg.243

So there you have it. And does our health care system understand and act on this in their treatment before they charge you $10,000/year for health insurance? No. Do they cover treatments by practitioners that really empower and help people get well?  No way! They are mired in materialism and greed most of the time and their treatments don’t work unless the placebo effect kicks in. It’s your belief in their pill that makes you feel better, not the pill itself. That’s an expensive magic show and sometimes they make it worse. It’s a crap shoot they play with our body and most people let them.