lucky_lab_rat a dit:
This argument assumes that the world we have created is the right path. Technology and industrilzation removes certain hardships, and allows us to perpetuate a world out of step with the natural world. It is by no means necessarry to our survival, but to the survival of our particular paradigm.
I am reminded of a spiel by a man who works with one of the Ayahuasca tribes in south america- he brought some of the elders to a conference in the states. When they got off the plane they looked around at the sprawling urban scene and one said (paraphrasing poorly) "At home- the men hunt, cut wood, and clear land- and we will continue to do this even when there is no need. The women cook, farm, and tend the children. They are the ones that stop us when we continue out of control. So tell me- what is the matter with your women here?"
There is a gem of truth here- in many indigenous societies it is men that are destructive, and women who are nurturing and keep the men in check (where was it?- somewhere in Africa where the women stopped a brutal war by simply withholding sex).
The third rail in environmentalism is population. It has become unsustainable- and yet no one ever speaks of it :? Don't remember who said it but: "growth for the sake of growth is the logic of a cancer cell"
***********************************************************
"It is by no means necessarry to our survival, but to the survival of our particular paradigm".....Yes, but who sets the parameters of the paradigm?
How is it done?
You want some real psychonaut questions, there are a couple.
***********************************************************
"They (women) are the ones that stop us when we continue out of control. So tell me- what is the matter with your women here?
They are enamored of technology. They have lost their authority, and their grounding in reality, when they were severed from the earth by mass technological applications. Much of their menial work has been alleviated by advancement in household machinery and electronics, and they have lost sight of the fact that we men don't really know what we're doing.
When the traditional roles in a culture are altered, things get weird.
(most) Women want to transcend their traditional roles, and to be able to do whatever they want, be it smoke, vote, marry other women, or what-have-you....nothing wrong with smoking, voting, or marrying other women.....but
a lot of women today like guns, and are pro-war and pro-industry actually are functioning as men on a mental level. These 'envious' women, the ones who emulate men because they want the percieved freedom that these men have,
are examples of a straying from the roots of traditional roles in Western culture.....tradition is usually bad, if it is held to long enough...
As an example of what is wrong with a lot of women in todays world, turn on FOX news and watch these women that work on this channel.....listen to some of their stream-of-thought as they talk on-air.
Greedy, masculine (with cleavage and skirts, though) viper-like Republican bitches with I.Q. scores in single digits.....
WHAT KIND OF MEN DO YOU THINK THESE WITCHES WILL RAISE?
Anyway, I think what I am saying is that we have lost a lot of our compass as a tribe (in the sense of the Ayahuasca men) when the roles begin to shapeshift.
" and women who are nurturing and keep the men in check (where was it?- somewhere in Africa where the women stopped a brutal war by simply withholding sex). "
Actually, it was Lysistrata-
Lysistrata (Attic Greek: ??????
