Conference hydra::dejavu

    I am thought of by my colleagues as being possesed of a large
    quantity of experience and education concerning the technical
    issues they call upon me to troubleshoot.  In fact I have had
    to stop giving answers before the questions were asked because
    it seems to spook some people.  I believe that all of the cases
    where I know the fix before the failure occurs have resulted from
    deep immersion in the subject, the fact that I cannot always describe
    the mental analysis process does not sit well with managment people
    especially.  However, they keep coming back for more.  And I have
    to keep reminding myself to appear to have the talents which are
    salable commodities on this physical plane.  'Sensitivity', however
    scientifically derived, is not one of them.  So show up, you might
    meet others of this ilk.  Let me pose a trivia question.  If women
    are so different, why can't I think of a single female head of state
    in written history who was not involved in a major armed conflict?
    Aggression is not purely a male attribute, merely easier for a male
    to assume, as 'Sensitivity' is not purely a female attribute...MWR
    

    
    I personally know many men who are extremely psychic, yet they are
    still very "male".  Everyone has Yin (female) and Yang (male)
    attributes/energy.  The big trick is to maintain a balance between the
    two.  You choose to be either male or female physically in a lifetime
    so that you can undergo the karmic tests you need to undergo to
    master the karmic cycle. (Karmic tests could be related to how society
    views men/women and what society expects of you as a man/woman which
    might enable you to work out some karma.)
    
    Here's a possible theory on male/female (yin/yang) development of humans:

    If one is to apply the theory of soul-mates, which I fully believe
    in, (i.e. Just prior to the time of the INITIAL incarnation of a soul,
    it became polarized (unbalanced, or in disharmony) so that at the time
    of initial incarnation the soul split into 2 separate souls - No, I
    don't know the mechanics involved, I just know the theory), it would be
    possible that the human race was suppose to be androgenous!  This
    polarization and separation of the soul into 2 distinct entities could
    actually be initially one yin and one yang entity, and over the period
    of many incarnations the 2 entities must strive to get the perfect
    balance of yin/yang within themselves so that eventually, after both
    souls have "mastered" this earth plane, they could, if they so desired,
    return again to 1 entity.  Maintaining the yin/yang balance within
    themselves and ALSO in their relationship with each other would enable
    them to master.  If you can master a relationship, you can master
    the life/death cycle.
    
    Linda

    
    
    RE: .3
    
    Awhile back I started reading a book by Rudolf Steiner called
    "Cosmic Memory", in which he discusses the idea of our androgeny.
    I don't remember a whole lot about it, other than that at one
    time we were androgenous beings here on earth.  I've been meaning
    to get back to this book - thanks for the reminder!
    
    Carole
    

    Re .3 (Carole):
    
    He probably lifted that from Plato's _Symposium_.  In it, the comic
    dramatist, Aristophenes, recited a legend that one time there were
    double-men, double-women, and men-women.  These beings were so powerful
    that the gods tore them in two, making men and women.  The mating
    urge was supposed to be a desire for the "pieces" to get back together
    again.
    
    Also, androgeny has a high symbolic role in various alchemical
    processes.
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

    re .5
    
�        He probably lifted that from Plato's _Symposium_.  In it, the comic
 
    Steve, are you suggesting that Steiner's work is invalid
    because Plato wrote of a similar idea?
    
    /bruce

    Re .6 (Bruce):
    
    No, not invalid.  But a little something in me likes to set records
    somewhat straight as far as origination goes, such as:
    
    "Everybody talks about the weather but nobody does anything about
    it," was said _not_ by Mark Twain, but by Charles Dudley Warner.
    
    Robert Fulton didn't invent the steamboat; indeed, he bought _his_
    from John Fitch.
    
    "Any man who hates dogs and little children," was _not_ said by
    W. C. Fields, but by Leo Rosten _about_ W. C. Fields.
    
    Henry Ford didn't invent mass production; Eli Whitney (of cotton
    gin fame) did.  
    
    None of t hat is very paranormal, but ....                                         
             
    Steve Kallis, Jr

    re: .0 
    Don't worry Larry. There will be lots of macho guys there_:-)

    
    
    I wish I had finished Steiner's book!  Well, anyway, there's
    really no need to set things straight here Steve.  As I said
    in .4, Steiner *discusses* the idea of androgeny, not originated
    the idea.  I have no idea who may have been the originator.  For
    all we know, Plato may have taken it from someplace else!
    
    Carole
    

    
    
    	I had the pleasure to meet and talk with Barbara Walker who
    is an author of many books dealing with feminism and the old ways.
    When A friend of mine asked her what the males role in a Feministic
    (? sounds ok) society her reply was "Thats your problem". Now  it
    is rather easy to see how some men can get defensive about this
    but I guess it would seem rather silly for someone else to define
    my roll. It is something I must  discover and no one has the right
    to take away my right to discover it by myself.
    
    	What is working out very well with my wife and Is pretty wacky
    and is getting interestingly peacful results is I let her take 
    control with her healing Goddess type natures and I take on the
    roll of Pan, more or less protecting the environment in which we
    live. I provide the safety for her too feel comfortable and safe
    and able to let her natural self work. I keep the  house and three
    cats safe from harmful influence. Does this make sense?
    
    	If we get tired or start forgetting the rolls next month she
    can wear the sword. 
    
    	It is just a ruff type of concept at this point but it is 
    working tricks. As long as we both maintain the peace and contentment
    overall I cant see any better way.
    

    
    
    Re: .10
    
    I think that what you and your wife are discovering (and creating)
    is actually just allowing a natural part of yourselves to be.  It
    sounds like you are both creating a safe environment for each other
    in which you can grow.  The means you use to do this are as unique
    for you as everyone elses process is.  It doesn't sound wacky to
    me at all, in fact it sounds quite powerful.
    
    Carole
    

    re: .10
    
    It makes perfect sense to me too.  We do the same thing.  I'm a
    fairly liberated woman but I'm more comfortable cooking, crocheting
    etc and he is more comfortable working on the house/car.  I agree
    with Carole that creating a safe environment for each other seems
    like a natural way to live.
    
    Mary

    re: .0
      
        Larry, I understand what you are saying and yet, even if I were
    to agree from a "practical" point of view, I would want to disagree
    using a different rationale.  Note number 550 is an attempt to bring
    out the differences/similarities between men and women.  It doesn't
    do too bad a job of it (except that you will notice that women stayed
    away from that one in droves...I wonder why?  :-) )  Perhaps you
    happen to have watched the tv show "L.A. Law" a couple of weeks
    ago when a woman was fired from her job for being too fat.  The
    outcome (she won) was preceded by the admonishment of (to paraphrase:)
    "even though society has those values, someone has to *begin* the
    process of changing them..."  In other words, it may be "true" that
    more women than men are intuitively attuned.  That does not make it
    "right" for men to avoid the psychic side of themselves anymore
    than for women to be "wrong" to develop those aspects of themselves
    which are "normally--by consensus reality" attributed to men.  As
    several respondants to this and other notes have pointed out, men
    are not necessarily deficient anymore than women are.  Perhaps via
    our societal "trainings" we have "gravitated" towards sexisms of
    one type or another.  NOW (pun intended) what?  It is time now to
    stand up for your beliefs...to take responsibility first for yourself
    and then others (ultimately, as a goal at least, the world.)  As
    you do it, so will others.  As you do it, you will increase your
    own self-confidence and will undoubtably inspire that of others
    (or at least their respect for you.)  Would I go into a room full
    of women?  Yes...I admit it could be a bit intimidating...remember,
    though, that at least in this case it is DEJAVU women, who, in my
    view, are more understanding and perhaps even more enlightened than
    most of their consensus reality sisters.  Hopefully they would treat
    me as a "brother" (spiritually, anyway) and act as adults (as we
    men should, too.)   :-)  :-)
         Anyway, this whole point is probably moot since it is clear
    that there will be other men there as well.  While much of the 
    metaphysics field is predominantly women, as a man you can take
    a certain acknowledgement (this is my opinion, people) towards
    yourself that you are simply a forerunner of the man of the future...
    in other words, a leader of a new thinking that promotes true 
    equality among all peoples, whatever sex, etc.  As in the tv
    example above, it needs to start somewhere.  In any case, it has
    already started and we are simply a part of a massive wave.  There
    is a great deal that can be learned from these women who have 
    readily accepted the intuitive parts of themselves...many men
    have similar acceptance, though our consensus would tell us that
    the percentages are smaller.  So, while women have their own
    issues to resolve, so do we men.  Karmically, it all fits (as some
    other noters have pointed out.)  So, my advice, if warranted, is
    to jump in with both feet!  If I could go to this particular gathering
    I would be thrilled.  Go and enjoy the company of these like
    spirits, men and women both!
      
    Frederick
    

    
    
    Re:13
    	                        
    	The statement "Jump in with both feet" can be said to go 
    along with the concept of *"Why love life? why not LUST?" a concept
    tempting us to toss cares into the wind and forget dangers.
    	No doubt a GREAT deal can be learned from forgetting fears
    but I believe a great deal more can be learned from realizing
    learning and overcoming fears.
    	I guess what I am saying is that there ARE diferences between
    Male and Female in the Physical, Spiritual, Mental, and whatever.
    These differences cannot be handled the same way universally.
    	Male energy or power is a two edged sword. If ego gets a
    hand in there you can mess others up.(as well as yourself)
    	I might get myself into trouble on this one but i believe
    that pure male energy should not be stressed without female
    energy present to temper and direct it.
    	Male Energy is Horribly  underestimated when left without
    a constructive force to direct it. 
    	Dont Underestimate Pan folks. I personally cannot think of
    a more potent  Satan than man himself. He has caused more damage
    to himself than any deity. Realize the damage you can cause
    or you will end up as a disjointed series of logical statments
    that turn upon themselves in distruction!!!!! 
    	EXAMPLE: see above
    
   *"Why love....." Alister Crowley 
    
    I hope something in there makes sense?!
    
    b.b		
      	
    

    re: -.1
    
         I agree with you.  The cavalier attitude I took in my response
    had more to do with the specific issue of going to this "East Coast
    Dejavu Party" than with life in general.  
         As for your references to "male/female" energy, I agree but
    only if you are talking about energy and NOT confusing that with
    men/women.  Masculine energy is DOING/ACTING energy, whether it
    is a woman or a man who is utilizing it.  Obviously, this is
    purposeless unless there is the IMAGINATION/creativity of feminine
    *energy* that is "useful" in directing it.  For a fuller
    interpretation, please see note 550 and, more specifically, a note that
    I refer to in 550 that is in 358.
          Anyhow, I did not mean to leave the impression that men
    are psychically vacuous and that women are somehow blessed with
    this "condition."  What I was trying to convey is that due to
    the collective consensus reality that beings in my reality
    live in, there is more of a predisposition for women to have
    an accepted development of intuitive expression than for men.
    The truth is supposed to be self-evident...that we ALL have the
    same capacities intellectually, emotionally, intuitively and
    (by stretching it a bit) physically.
                  
    Frederick (who-couldn't-get-to-DEJAVU-yesterday)
    (I tink de network had a code in the node...) :-)

    
    
    
    	I agree! Any comments ect from the female members of this
    
    	conference???????

    
    You fellows are doing a fine job - so please continue!  
    
    There is a really good book out entitled "Men's Liberation" (sorry,
    can't remember the author).  It talks about just these sorts of
    things.  Frederick - you may remember the 'Intuition' chapter I 
    copied from it and put in here a couple of months ago.....can't 
    remember where it is though.
                   
    If you're interested in the author or table of contents, send me
    a note directly and I'll bring the book in to put the information
    here.           
    
    Cindy