Posts by casualtiger2

It’s an oldie but a goodie—not too long-winded, either—for anyone looking to dive deep into Kundalini.

The Primal Power in man or The kundalini Shakti - Swami Narayananand

Sandra Murphy33 said:Maybe you would have been better off skipping the Theosophy crowd altogether, just like Steiner did....

So, you think I'd be better off just studying Martinus on my own?
Why's that?

Gurdjieff is probably onto something here.
If we didn't have all these layers—physical, astral, mental, causal, and even the atmic body (look, I get it, these concepts are exhausting)
,
this whole "nightmare scenario" wouldn't even be possible. We’d all just be wide awake and living in paradise.
:blame kundalini:
The only thing I can't figure out is whether this is the influence of the Holy Spirit🤔 or just
Kundalini.
Exorcising demons via the internet

Everything you ever wanted to know about demons but were too afraid to ask your parents—how they operate, how to spot them, how to kick them out, and how to stay protected.
"...when you look closely at arthritis, you see the devil at work..."

It'll be easy enough for me—but what's he going to do about all those demons rattling around in his head, and the Sire too?

Good grief, it’s wild how much nonsense religion can force down people's throats.
It’s actually hard to believe. 😢

Does "being good" mean you can't be smart? Or maybe it means you can't actually pull off a good intention the right way—like being able to say "no," refusing to let bad things win, or just being clear and decisive when it counts...

Joseph Bailey41 said:I’d actually take a completely different approach here. To me, a perfect society isn't one that happens to contain great people; it’s a society dedicated to helping people *become* those individuals. None of us were born this way. For example, if my five-year-old neighbor comes over and starts showing off her collection of toy chickens, ducks, or even her little plastic tractor, I find it adorable because it’s just a normal stage of growing up. But if a fifty-year-old started acting like that, I’d be seriously concerned about their mental state. I love seeing a twelve-year-old beam with pride over a good grade or a soccer goal, but when adults get that wrapped up in their own egos, it feels a bit off. I also remember watching this one TV show where high schoolers had these intense, passionate debates about everything under the sun, and it felt so much more meaningful than the modern trend of people spending money to watch two old guys argue on an internet stream—or worse, seeing an adult think they've found purpose by tearing someone down on a message board.

I get it, though. Most of us have a little glitch in our programming that makes us waste precious time on these kinds of nonsense activities (which are really just various ways of feeding the ego) instead of focusing on something creative, spiritual, or educational that benefits everyone, including ourselves. We aren't perfect, and honestly, we probably never will be. We don't agree on everything, and frankly, we shouldn't. If we did, we wouldn't have the friction needed to push one another to grow, improve, or collaborate. Without that drive, there would be no reason to rely on anyone else, let alone live together in a community.

I've been wrestling with a bit of a dilemma lately, which ties back into this theme... Is it even moral to strive for transcendence when most of humanity hasn't even reached basic self-actualization yet? It’s not just about individual flaws; it’s that as a society, we seem to value all the wrong things. We fight over them as if they're finite resources—as if having more money, success, or freedom somehow means there's less left for everyone else. Is it right to rise above all that and leave everyone else behind in the dust? Or should we reach back and pull them up with us? And how do you do that without losing your own footing? 😬

Chasing transcendence isn't some selfish detour away from helping the world—it’s actually the opposite.
Every time we fix up our own backyard, we’re fixing a little piece of the world—no matter how small that patch of dirt actually is.
Plus, that just naturally ends up being a win for our local community.
The more individuals and small groups that challenge the "Kingdom of Heaven," the better—but honestly, progress is always going to be a slow grind.

On the flip side—since you've managed to turn the whole argument on its head—I actually agree that how a society treats its people matters immensely. That’s exactly why I brought up politics. Back when I was younger, living in the old US, I had a massive aversion to the whole political scene—but honestly? It’s a necessary lever. It's one of the few ways things can actually be changed.
Progress moves slow around here too—we’re just individuals, after all, and I know we can't expect to move the needle overnight. Still, I honestly feel like some level of political engagement is a duty for everyone—especially for those of us who care about spiritual values.
In a world where some tiny little number on a Wall Street ticker can decide the fate of millions, we really need to find a way to make sure that number actually reflects what most people need. While the masses are busy getting swept up in various ideologies—and let's be honest, it happens—that small group at the top is busy making sure their own material interests stay perfectly intact.
That’s why this whole struggle over who has the "right" perspective or worldview actually matters—it can be pretty useful, honestly. Even a heated debate on a forum like this helps people sharpen their own views and finally see things clearly.

Not sure if I’m making enough sense here—I feel like I should probably write a whole novel to actually explain this properly, but honestly? I just can't be bothered to type that much.

For those of us sitting pretty—not exactly struggling, but doing alright—that pull toward something transcendental might actually be our most defining trait. It’s an existential necessity, really. But at the same time, we have this responsibility—this constant fight in other arenas—to make sure more people can actually reach that kind of stability.

Joseph Bailey41 said:Spirituality really boils down to compassion—simple as that. It’s about actually grasping why someone acts the way they do. Most bad behavior stems from one single root: that person is suffering in some way. The goal is to help ease that pain, though—obviously—not at my own expense, because then I haven't actually helped anyone. Sometimes you can help someone reach a moment of clarity; other times, the healthiest thing is just to offer compassion from a distance. And yeah, there are those days when you just need to hit the block button on social media and call it a day.

👍

PS
Just one more thought on that idea about how "we" as a society value all the wrong things...
It’s really just the classic chicken or the egg scenario.
I mean, look—society obviously exerts massive influence over the individual through its lack of progress, the state of the economy, constant advertising, and all that political or religious propaganda. On the flip side, you have the individual—with their own desires and needs (which might seem trivial to someone else, but feel pretty real to them)—shaping what that society becomes in the first place.

What would actually happen if nobody had an urge for drugs? Or violence, theft, or fraud?

Justin Garcia7 said:We live in an era that supposedly champions liberalism and free speech, yet somehow, people have never been more easily offended by differing opinions.

Even self-proclaimed classical liberals—those who preach maximum freedom and tolerance—often act like tyrants toward anyone they disagree with. You see it all over social media: people blocking anyone with a different view, claiming that silencing dissent is somehow "liberal."

There are even plenty of high-profile CEOs and successful professionals who waste their precious time bickering with anonymous trolls online, simply because they don't share the same ideology.

It seems everyone is only "liberal" when it suits them; everyone thinks they're right and can't stand someone challenging their worldview.

Usually, religious fanatics are the first to come to mind, but fanaticism isn't just about faith. It exists everywhere. In reality, we’re all fanatics for our own beliefs, each trying to push our own specific agenda.

So, what’s the fix? How do we actually achieve true tolerance? Or is it impossible because we're all too busy viewing everything through our own narrow lens?

You can't escape a diversity of thought. It's human nature—people are obsessed with their favorite tool, the intellect, and being naturally ego-driven, they insist their view of the world is the only correct one.
From a spiritual angle, the answer is simple: more love, and moving your sense of identity away from just your emotions and thoughts.

But practically speaking, the real issue is how we solve this at a societal level—politically.
That would mean giving (almost) every viewpoint and worldview a seat at the table in shaping society. Of course, that leads to an endless series of compromises where no single group gets everything they want
(not even the wealthiest among us), but everyone walks away with something—kind of like how direct democracy works.

One mistake we make, both individually and as a nation, is treating tolerance as an absolute principle. Just like freedom doesn't mean you can do whatever you want, tolerance shouldn't be a free pass for intolerant views, beliefs, or actions.

Philosophy loves to ask, "What would a perfect society look like?"
The answer is easy: just find enough perfect people—free, tolerant, smart, and kind-hearted... 😍

Casey Allen said:It looks like they’ve confused having an honest opinion with actually stating the objective truth.

What's the point of being honest if there isn't any actual truth behind it?

Casey Allen said:I’ve been feeling pretty much the same way for about twenty years now. It’s not that I’m suicidal, per se, but there’s this recurring wish when I lay down at night that I just wouldn't wake up. Honestly, I just don't see the point in putting in any effort when you're surrounded by such a selfish environment that refuses to give you any credit, especially since time eventually wipes everything away anyway. Whatever you manage to achieve today, you’re right back at square one tomorrow—just maintaining these superficial work connections, shallow family ties, and hollow romantic relationships. We live in a society that is so comfortable, so self-absorbed, and so incredibly satiated that human connection has dwindled down to nothing more than a tool for feeding one's own ego. A lot of people don't even need other humans anymore; they just go out and get some primitive four-legged "friends" instead. It feels like living in this twisted, narcissistic, sociopathic culture where everyone is just looking out for their own skin, treating everyone else as mere instruments for their own advancement or survival. I was raised to be helpful, to be a team player, and I’ve always strived to be that person, but over time it’s become painfully clear to me that "teamwork" is an abstract concept to the vast majority of people. I struggle to find purpose in working hard when that effort yields absolutely nothing unless I am directly stroking someone's ego. I can't bring myself to live just for myself, yet I can't live for others either because people are, frankly, repulsive and can't see past the tip of their own noses. I wish I could just be apathetic toward everything, but I wasn't wired to ignore all the bullshit happening around me; I was wired to act so there would be less of it... even though, as time goes on, there seems to be more and more. It’s as if my entire reality is upside down. I can't control the world, and I certainly can't rewire the synapses in my long-adult, plastic brain. Even though on paper I have everything—family, a social circle, education, a career, money, looks, intelligence—I feel like I have nothing at all. I just feel completely empty and useless.

What "truth" are you actually hiding behind all that honesty here?

My guru is Makaj.
Unfortunately, I’m one of those subpar students—
so I don't even really know how much he actually means to me.

hiddenpuma75, we’re good.
You aren't some conspiracy theorist.
My point still stands—a lot of what gets peddled as "alternative" is actually dangerous.
Treating cancer with herbal tea and German Medicine, using religious icons for radiation protection, staring at the Sun for too long, "light diets," and endless other variations—not to mention just waiting around for some theological apocalypse to hit.

You didn't really answer my questions either.

casualtiger2; 04/11/2020. said:@ omen, sizif, hiddenpuma75
Is there a specific death toll from this virus that would actually change your mind?
A million, two million... or is that irrelevant to you?

As of tonight, we're looking at 110,000 deaths (and that doesn't even count people dying at home who aren't being tracked). By April 15th, it’ll be over 130,000.
How many more would have died if we hadn't taken the measures we did?

Just how many extra lives would be worth sacrificing to save the economy?
Here’s something else you might have missed.

casualtiger2 said:The Truth is pretty simple.
It’s always something different than what the mainstream media, top politicians, and scientists put out.
Everything else is just a matter of creativity—and whatever your current life situation happens to be.

The world looks very different when you're making $100,000 a year with plenty in the bank, versus living on $1,000 a month with nothing under the mattress.
It depends on whether you went to college or can't read. Whether you live in Sweden or Eritrea. Whether you had a great experience with your doctor or a terrible one...
Whether your kid lost their job because of the "pandemic hysteria," or landed a gig as a software engineer because of it...

People naturally look for meaning in what they see and experience. It's why we see faces in the patterns of a rug.
A lot of things happening in the world aren't good or pretty—they never have been—it's just that now we have the internet.
And, of course, someone has to be to blame.
God set everything up perfectly, but then the devil showed up and ruined it all.
People into these conspiracy theories can always say—illness is from the devil, immorality is the devil, poverty, war, the Theory of Evolution, science in general... it's all the devil.
And then there's the hope—that the Messiah will arrive soon to end our suffering.

Or, being acutely aware of economic inequality, we can blame the wealthy—or the system that produced them—as the devil, and once again, we have an easy explanation.
Except it can't just be about selfish interests (which exist in everyone); it has to be some secret, intelligent cabal of elites, backed by an even more secretive group—Illuminati, Jews, aliens... whatever fits your taste.

Or, because of the unequal distribution of knowledge (scientific knowledge, specifically), instead of doing the hard work of studying, it’s easier to label scientists as followers of Mammon, whether spiritually or financially—and we know how he works on the soul.

Most people spreading these conspiracies get nothing out of it besides the psychological high of knowing the "Truth."
A tiny handful profits financially.
But what all these theories have in common is their inability to actually move people toward real societal change; they just cloud the real issues.
It’s never just about concrete matters resulting from basic human impulses—like corporate greed, environmental destruction, or labor exploitation—or even political power players they collaborate with (which makes it possible for an idiot to become President of the US and be worshipped by a certain number of cultists).
Military strikes and intelligence agency ops aren't some mystical New Age ritual or some shadowy New World Order plot—it’s just cold, hard interests from specific groups of people.
...

Bottom line: most Swiss people and I are pretty happy with how the government here has handled things—both on the health front and the economy.
Maybe the situation over in America is a different story entirely.

PS
Look, I have nothing against you (you’re actually kind of likable in your own way), it's just that reading your posts is such an uphill battle that I don't even bother anymore.
It feels like you're trying to link together ideas that just don't connect, but hey, I'm not going to argue about it.
If it makes you feel better, just consider yourself the winner of this debate (and all future ones)—and sorry if I stepped on your toes at any point.

What am I even supposed to say to you, hiddenpuma75? Honestly, I’m just speechless in the face of all that wisdom.
Every time those death tolls start getting me down—we're looking at 63,000 dead now (when I messaged you five days ago, it was only 35,000)
, I hop on here for my daily dose of hiddenpuma75, omenixa, and sizifitisa. I read through your posts and suddenly, things feel a little lighter.
I realize the whole thing is just a massive farce—pure public manipulation—and that once you stop living in fear, everything settles down.
If only more scientists would ditch the status quo, embrace faith, and start digging into quantum atman and deep philosophy like you do, we might actually get somewhere.

Alright, your turn. You can talk about Komaj, or 1st, 2nd... up to 20th—just make sure you **bold** the important stuff so I don't miss any of your brilliance... 😢

staying on topic:

So, someone actually went and asked one of those "primitive" folks to define good versus evil.

He says: "Loss is when a neighboring tribe raids our village—slaughtering the men, taking the women, and making off with the livestock and the food supply."

So, what's actually good?

"Once we hit their village—wipe out the men, grab the women, and take all the livestock and food..."

Enough with all this psychoanalysis junk—all that "life as a duo" nonsense. Honestly, you could probably make sense of most of it if you just looked at it through the lens of Transactional Analysis.

The thesis? Basically: "I'm the good guy, everyone else is just evil."
Audience: folks on the forum, neighbors...
Supporting roles: man, I feel you—it’s tough out there. Honestly, I’m right there with you. The world is just a grim place... at least if you’ve got a more sensitive radar than everyone else.
It’s always the same old variations—my husband is this way, my partner is that way, it’s the fault of those shady foreigners, our parents, the government, the leftists, the ultra-wealthy, atheists, science, or just "evil modern times." Same excuses, different day.
Listen, give me a little attention here—everyone else is driving me crazy.

The Antithesis: what’s the other side saying, what do the actual facts show—and why don't you just do something to make things better?

hiddenpuma75 said:...WHEN doctor Željko Markić gets humiliated, then Tomić and Klauški and casualtiger2 and Joseph Bailey41 all go silent.

Never heard of this Markicka person in my life—so I can't really weigh in.
Idiots are everywhere; honestly, we could use a few more changes there. I'm guessing you don't react to the endless nonsense pushed by right-wing outlets regarding other people, either.

Regarding the historical global oppression of women—I've laid out about ten arguments now, and I don't recall you giving me a single coherent response, other than clinging to the old-school patriarchal order—man hunts, woman stays home.

hiddenpuma75 said:

Do you have any vision for a better world involving the right-wingers, conservatives, and believers?

Well, I actually do, and I base it on Ken Wilber’s philosophy.
Since nobody is quite foolish enough to be 100% wrong, nor wise enough to be 100% right, the only way forward is the INTEGRAL PATH. That means walking a razor's edge, balancing the tension between what holds true for the right and what holds true for the left.

Essentially, the right advocates for eternal, unchanging, classic values—which is perfectly fine. On the flip side, the left pushes for change and progress, which is also perfectly fine.

True wisdom lies in knowing when something is timeless and shouldn't be touched, but it also means recognizing when we shouldn't force change just for the sake of being "progressive" or to satisfy some thirst for provocation.

The approach you're taking isn't really an "integral" one; in fact, your question already contains its own answer.
You’ve framed this as if being a conservative, a right-winger, or a believer is somehow regressive or "incorrect." It seems our friend casualtiger2 assumes it's common knowledge that the only valid path is to be a leftist.

It’s almost as if you’re implying—and it’s pretty obvious from how you phrased this—that while it's perfectly acceptable to follow a secular progressive ideology, being a Catholic is somehow backwards and unprogressive.

Personally, I disagree. I think it's perfectly okay to be a Catholic (or a Buddhist, or a Muslim), and it's just as okay to be a staunch secular progressive.

This is such naive ideology, even if it looks like a "middle ground" at first glance.
Every society has various groups with numerous—often conflicting—interests.
The wealthy, the poor, farmers, laborers, civil servants, intellectuals, the elderly, the youth, women, men, parents, retirees, professionals... you name it.
The bipolar power split we see in most countries is, in my opinion, schizophrenic and broken. There's always a massive chunk of the population—maybe 20, 30, 40, or even 49% (and probably even more considering voter turnout)—that isn't actually represented in decision-making.
One party steers the ship in one direction for four years, then the opposition takes over and yanks it in the opposite direction.
What would be realistic—much like direct democracy in Switzerland—is having at least 4 or 5 major parties (and maybe 2 or 3 smaller ones) collaborating to share power, finding the best possible compromise for the widest number of citizens. Sure, you can't satisfy everyone at once, but that's the absolute ceiling of what you can expect from democratic politics (though looking at your posts, I get the sense you aren't exactly a fan of democracy either).
So, what's your vision for a happy society?
Maybe something like this exemplary conservative Republican and man of faith— Rick Snyder
Rick Snyder (born August 19, 1958) is an American politician, business executive, venture capitalist, lawyer, and accountant who served as the 48th governor of Michigan from 2011 to 2019. He is a member of the Republican Party.

Flint water crisisFlint water crisis[/url]
Between 6,000 and 12,000 children were exposed to drinking water with high levels of lead.[2] The water supply change was also the cause of an outbreak of Legionnaires' disease in the county that killed 12 people and affected another 87.

hiddenpuma75 said:Down in downtown San Francisco, right near the Joker, there’s a huge dumpster I pass every single day that has

JERRY MARK'S HOUSE written on it.

If it had the name of any other famous public ( 😁 ) woman in America, it would be all over the news as blatant misogyny, and the authorities would have scrubbed it off in a heartbeat.

But since ideology matters more to the leftists than shaming a woman who isn't one of their own, we end up in this situation where it’s just ignored. It seems like for "progressives," the most important thing is clearly

IDEOLOGY, and then gender comes second.😉

As if ideology isn't the biggest thing for the right wing?!
Look, here in the US, the Democratic Party has been a major political player for decades, and I don't see the country falling apart.
What's with this constant obsession with mentioning the left, progressives, and atheists?
Do you have some kind of utopian vision in mind involving conservatives and religious folks?

I'm staying out of the commentary on American politics since I only know it superficially—but if it's anything like what we see in Mexico, then talking about leftists or socialists is just absurd.

Strange—I’ve been around the block a few times, yet I haven't run into a single person like that.

Flying; 12/02/2019 said:Just circling back to my question... what are the actual similarities between Christian meditation and "Eastern" styles?

Zachary Cox69 said:Funny name, haha.

Zachary Cox69; 11/24/2019 said:Only an incredibly stupid person jumps to conclusions without actually digging into the topic—looking at both sides of the argument.

😂
Zachary, why even start a thread if you clearly have no clue what you're talking about?
It's pretty obvious there's no real desire to learn here—you seem totally closed off to any new perspective. You know what they say: there's no shame in not knowing something, but there's definitely shame in being too stubborn to find out.

This is actually pretty significant stuff—after all, every single one of us carries a mix of both masculine and feminine hormones, along with certain "masculine" and "feminine" traits.
Given how men have historically dominated women in various ways, it’s left a mark on everyone—both men and women—on a subconscious level, even today.
By trying to belittle or control women, men essentially ended up diminishing themselves too, while women were stripped of the chance to truly reach their potential.
That’s why, if we want to actually feel like whole human beings, we need to acknowledge and understand both the masculine and feminine aspects within ourselves. We need to develop them, embrace them, and let that understanding guide how we act in the "real world."

There’s zero reason why people should be treated unequally based on gender, despite how things have functioned up until now.
Sure, having a bit more testosterone or a stronger physical build isn't a valid excuse for men to rule over women, but that’s basically how it all started—the "I'm stronger, so I decide" mentality. That logic eventually got baked into tradition and then cemented by social structures, government laws, and some pretty mindless religious dogmas as the supposed "natural order of things."

At its core, it’s just a very specific way to feed the ego—the "I'm a man, so no matter how weak, stupid, or cruel I am, I'm still superior to a woman" mindset. It's just one of many ways the ego protects itself.

It’s really only since the state—specifically a secular government—took over the role of being the "stronger" authority that things have started to improve for everyone. Now, whether you're a man or a woman, there's finally a path toward becoming mature individuals, especially if you actually care about any kind of spiritual growth.

PS
Don't get me wrong, women have their own version of "ego support" through the "I'm a woman and..." trope, but historically, that version has always been a lot less damaging than the male equivalent.

hiddenpuma75 said:

I find it unacceptable because you're obstructing the facts just to protect your initial premise—that throughout history, and even now, men have mostly oppressed women.

I wasn't even disputing that, so your attempt to debunk my statistics doesn't really make any sense.

The data I provided is meant to show that this world isn't some paradise for men, nor is it, heaven forbid, a paradise for women; both genders mostly suffer from the flawed design of this life's "holodeck," rather than fighting a gender war.

a) Regarding the homelessness issue, let me show you where your nitpicking leads us. If we keep arguing like we're at a flea market—where I supposedly defend men by shifting blame onto women, just as you do—we'll end up in an endless regression. It turns into that classic, circular argument you see in bad relationships or on political forums.😁

Basically, we'd just be descending into mindless whataboutism and finger-pointing. 🎉

1) If women were truly all sunshine, butterflies, and pure kindness,🙂 they wouldn't allow there to be so many homeless men; they would have ensured they had access to Safe House 2 facilities.😉

2) The fact that 78% of suicides are men means life is harder for men than it is for women. OH, REALLY? WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT!

3) That 92% of workplace injuries involve men means men take on the tougher, riskier jobs, while women stay home painting their nails🙂 and avoiding anything dirty, heavy, or unglamorous.😁
I find it unacceptable because you're obstructing the facts just to protect your initial premise—that throughout history, and even now, men have mostly oppressed women.

I wasn't even disputing that, so your attempt to debunk my statistics doesn't really make any sense.

The data I provided is meant to show that this world isn't some paradise for men, nor is it, heaven forbid, a paradise for women; both genders mostly suffer from the flawed design of this life's "holodeck," rather than fighting a gender war.

a) Regarding the homelessness issue, let me show you where your nitpicking leads us. If we keep arguing like we're at a flea market—where I supposedly defend men by shifting blame onto women, just as you do—we'll end up in an endless regression. It turns into that classic, circular argument you see in bad relationships or on political forums.😁

Basically, we'd just be descending into mindless whataboutism and finger-pointing. 🎉

1) If women were truly all sunshine, butterflies, and pure kindness,🙂 they wouldn't allow there to be so many homeless men; they would have ensured they had access to Safe House 2 facilities.😉

2) The fact that 78% of suicides are men means life is harder for men than it is for women. OH, REALLY? WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT!

3) That 92% of workplace injuries involve men means men take on the tougher, riskier jobs, while women stay home painting their nails🙂 and avoiding anything dirty, heavy, or unglamorous.😁
So, what exactly is it you're trying to talk about here?

hiddenpuma75 said:First off:

You're missing the point entirely—here's what she actually means:

Let's be honest: life is tough for every man and woman out there. It’s just one of those inescapable realities of being alive.

It’s true—life isn't exactly an even playing field, and some people definitely deal with a heavier load than others. But at the end of the day, every man and woman faces their own unique set of trials, both those tied to gender and those that have nothing to do with it.

Complaining to women that they are too pale. 🙄 To claim that men in positions of power are inherently to blame for everything—or that life is simply easier for guys and harder for women—is a massive oversimplification. In most real-world scenarios, that kind of sweeping generalization just doesn't hold up.

Everything is so deeply interconnected, and there are just so many unknowns, that it feels almost reductive to paint men as the perpetual instigators of war while casting women merely as the creators of flowers and butterflies. 🙂 🎉 🙂 We're looking at this from the perspective of elementary school students and kids up to about 13 years old.

Your attempt to pin the blame for wars on those terrible men is just as ridiculous as it would be if I tried to argue that mothers are the ones responsible for wars because they raised those men. 🙄 Honestly, if they had truly embraced their roles as mothers and women, they wouldn't have raised such flawed men—the very same men their own daughters are now calling out for being so problematic. 🙄

By the way, conflict is just a natural, unavoidable part of being human. It’s really at the root of so many things.

It’s pretty obvious that some problems just can't be solved any other way than through pure, unadulterated struggle. Sometimes, you're fighting for your very life. That’s just the reality of things—it was true back in the days of America, it's true across the globe today, and it'll be true long after we're gone.

Of course, just because someone wins doesn't mean they're automatically "right." But hey, at least they proved they were the better fighter. To me, that’s still a step up from endless, empty chatter or just settling for the status quo.

So, to bring it back to the main topic—I'll wrap this up by saying you missed the point with every single one of your posts.
We have the Global Gender Gap Report
. What are we actually talking about here? A few examples:

1. Practically throughout history, women have mostly been treated as property belonging to men.
Which means a man could do whatever he wanted with a woman's body and soul (with religions giving him full permission, of course).
He could abuse her or beat her in marriage as much as he wanted, control all the assets, and decide what happened to the kids.

2. Women didn't have the right to vote until very recently—and many still don't. Women's suffrage

3. Until recently (and for many still today), women were denied access to schools by men. Why?
Timeline of women's education

4. Countless women were forced into prostitution by men. Prostitution

5. Countless women have been killed based on certain "male" traditions (like Sati in India), or brutally mutilated (like FGM in Africa), or murdered for the sake of "family honor."

Countless women have been killed by men just because they were labeled "witches"—it’s a grim history. Witch-hunt

Countless fetuses have been aborted in China—and honestly, it happens elsewhere too—simply because they were female. It’s left them with a massive deficit of over 100 million women. There are just too many men around.

Most women were essentially forced into financial dependency on men—back in 1985, for instance, you couldn't even open a bank account or land a job without a husband's permission (as Flyer pointed out). Their work at home was never valued, let alone paid. Even in modern society, we’re still dealing with the wage gap—women often get paid less for the exact same job, even when they're more qualified or simply perform better. And yeah, I know people love to bring up the "pregnancy risk" argument to justify it, but that's just a tired excuse for systemic inequality.

In most companies, women just don't get a seat at the table when it comes to those inner management circles—and that goes for major political roles too. It's basically a closed door.

In most major religions, women aren't even considered fit to be priests—it's just how things are.

Alright, your turn. 😍

hiddenpuma75 said:Oh, come on, give me a break!

Men commit 78% of suicides.

Men make up 68% of the homeless population.

80% of murder victims are men.

98% of military casualties are men.

92% of workplace injuries involve men.

Maybe we should actually define what we're even talking about here.
It started like this:

kavala said:

Flyer said:... We're done with the mansplaining, done being second-class, done with gods who are just projections of individual and collective egos. It's over—enough./quote]Sounds like militant feminism to me—because behind the scenes of the reality we actually live in, there's an actual gender war fueled by extreme ego spikes that some individuals have built up in their environments (and failed to control). And when those levels get high, things get brutal—and right now, it's devastating for the most promising segment of the male population.

Women have absolutely succeeded because they’ve tapped into an innate predisposition—not to express love, but to concentrate power. The whole thing was aided by the old concept of virginity, which has lost all its meaning. Today’s woman can visualize whatever she wants in her head, and now we have a public space full of people who, in their own truth of how they function, are actually innocent, but are ultimately incapable of realizing themselves as women in an extreme sense. In this context, you also find the foothold of homosexuality, which is actually a deviation of sexuality, stemming from the "modern woman's ego," where love used to originate.

The problem is massive, and it’s only going to get worse unless we find the guts to face it (it’s really just a matter of time). We're facing one of the biggest revolutions—a revolution in the minds of the majority... triggered by a realization of who we truly are, which is the real driver of progress in consciousness.

Flyer basically summarized my view in a single sentence, and my reaction was aimed at kavala's chauvinistic remarks, which actually end up proving Flyer's point.
So, if you want, we can debate this thesis instead: throughout most of human history, one half of humanity has oppressed the other, more or less, based solely on gender.
What men have done to each other—how much, why, etc.—can be a topic for another conversation, but not this one, because it's logically flawed.
The subject is tied to our main theme, "Ego and Spirituality," but we can get to that later (by the way, I’d love to hear your counter-argument, especially from a spiritual angle, since you've spent all these years preaching the necessity of believing in God and the importance of religion).

"78% of suicides are men" — women didn't kill them.
"68% of the homeless are men" — women didn't take their houses away just because they're men.
"80% of homicide victims are men" — most weren't killed by women, and certainly not because they're men.
"98% of military casualties are men" — women aren't the ones sending them to war or killing them there.
"92% of workplace injuries happen to men" — women aren't the ones injuring them.

Is that "acceptable" enough for you?

Since you're such a fan of statistics, here are some actual serious topics (unfortunately, you can't fit these into some YouTube comedian's punchlines)—
The Global Gender Gap Report just dropped.
Let’s be real right out of the gate—we have to acknowledge that these numbers are looking at the recent past. The status of women in certain societies (the ones still lagging behind, anyway) has actually improved a ton over the last 40 or 50 years. Plus, we can't exactly ignore the previous few thousand years of history, either.
[A quick tangent—it’s often possible to stay silent from...]Highly educated, well-off women—mostly in modern societies.Honestly, all this talk about equality feels pretty redundant—just like how some Black Americans in similar positions might claim discrimination doesn't even exist. It completely ignores the vast majority of women and Black people who actually feel that inequality on their skin every single day. We’re talking about centuries of oppression against women and Indigenous peoples—and we shouldn't overlook the massive struggle led by brave people who actually fought to bring about any kind of progress at all.