Re: [ET2] Damage

Well, this is really interesting. I didn't recognise this subject line as one I was involved in and as the unread total in my inbox currently stands at 138(!!) I didn't pick it up when scanning new emails. So, it's odd now I've been drawn to check it out to find that I am in fact involved - a weird feeling to have been discussed in my electronic absence, as it were :-)) Odd also that I was drawn to check it out. Not at the intellect level, that bit of prompting.

Now for my own input - this is really quite an intriguing and thought provoking issue. You see first of all I have to assert that, part of humanity or not, the sisterhood is way different to the manhood bunch. (Hands up all those girls who agree). Also my love to all was 'to all' with only a special mention to the sisterhood who etc. In that respect I do not see how I have excluded anyone in my 'love to'. It's just the same as saying - especially to Doc for sharing etc. Surely there's no difference in having an 'especially' for a target group than for an individual and that's done all the time on these lists.
Thank you Silvia for stating on my behalf that no distinction was intended. You are absolutely correct. However having said that I may detect in myself a smidgen of female exclusiveness in my views on sexual fuck-ups. I am a little taken aback at the full frontal-ness of Doc Housten's comments ( I thought this was such a nice group :-o)
- wonder what the energy testing will come up with on that comment!
- but I think there could be a little fire here behind the smoke. I don't have time right now to go into my recent Sanctuary and ET experiences with Adam as mentioned in my recent PS post, (I will post to PS eventually) but the current result of that was that I realise that I have never actually loved! Where, in the past, I thought I was in love my actions and behaviours and feelings were those of someone who was trying to attract love and liked being loved. Now this is a whole lot different to actually loving. This is rather metaphysical, of course, and bearing in mind ideas that only love is real and all the rest is illusion, I may find out that, in fact, I have loved just like anyone else but I'm not there yet. At present I have no connection with a state of loving that is unconditional. I actually had a moment with a previous partner where I realised the thing I liked most about him was that he loved me! I'm only speaking about partners here, not other family members or friends. The high spots that I re
member where I felt 'in love' were all moments where I felt validated in some way, made special by attention or comment. They were in fact about me not about the other person.
So, I have made a commitment to myself and the universe to find out how to love. And it's not easy. In fact, I am finding it elusive even trying to like unconditionally where my ex-husband is concerned and i don't mean we are battling anything out - quite the contrary - we are very close and good friends. What I mean is, I have many personal agendas that feel threatened by him. I get (or not, as the case may be) my validation from him. I don't plan to but in honesty that's how it works. We have been together for almost 30 years and our stuff is well and truly tangled.
So, when Doc blasts in and holds up for inspection my alignment with the sisterhood I am prepared to take it as a response from the universe in my quest to change my experience of loving. I think it's possible that I have some feelings that female emotional suffering is somehow different in a competiton way than it is for the male. I was not consciously aware of this, you understand, but it certainly could be so. My husband has always asserted that the females in my family are well into man-hating as indicated by our attitude and the jokes against men that we enjoy. He could be right. I think he's right about my mother and my sister and there were only 3 females in our family - so t'other one is me!!! Would I have escaped from such subtle programming? Not likely really.

I'm not sure where I go from here. I have nothing I could give a SUDS rating to and I feel no disturbance in my body. I am inclined to try a brain storming beginning with -
I think men are.......... or just - Men are........
Then I may find some SUDS !
I'm happy to hear anyone else's input on my way forward.

Blessings TO ALL ( LOL)
Linda
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: docresults
  To: emotrance2_at_yahoogroups.com
  Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 4:30 PM
  Subject: Re: [ET2] Damage

  This is a response that I wrote to Silvia privately and in her response she
  asked why I didn't send it to the group for she felt there were some good
  points in here. So I am posting this to the group in hopes that she will
  send her response which is extremely spot on, with the belief frame I have
  chosen to operate from.

  At 02:59 PM 5/27/2003 +0100, docresults wrote:

> Your love to all seems to discount the men when you
> attach especially the
> sisterhood in... As if men don't experience the same
> experiences.

  I'm sure Linda doesn't need me to calmly state on her behalf that
  of course no distinction between human energy systems was intended
  on any level.

  And of course Silvia I calmly state that obviously you did not model her
  energy field before your nice rebuke to me. I did and it energy tested out
  that she did make a distinction on at least two levels. That is the reason
  I wrote it is a Human Experience. If there was no distinction why the word
  - especially (a word that makes a specific distinction)

  If she or people (Added) don't intend to make distinctions why did we?

  That's like me saying, Love to all... especially the brotherhood in our
  wandering through women saying we can't do anything right.

  Although one might try for enlightenment, I should think there is
  all the merit there can be in holding firmly in reality that we're
  all still at least 85% muppet and only 15% human as a work in
  progress.

  And your point is?
  IF one is trying for enlightenment there is no merit in anything. It's a
  change of perspective and you seem to be saying don't change this one
  particular perspective. What then is the value of enlightenment or even
  trying for it?

  And, of course, resultingly, GIVE OURSELVES A BREAK and have some
  patience with each other.

  I'm curious:
  Are you saying that allowing someone to maintain their illusion (head
  reality, not actuality) is giving ourselves a break or showing patience? or
  Are you saying pointing out map clashes, especially ones that aren't
  perceived, is less than useful and being patience and giving ourselves a
  break is to ignore blocks in someone's energy field? or
  Or is it the way I phrased it that caused you to defend?

  Including patience with the "men" who may also have such emotions
  but as they don't talk about them, might appear to not be striken
  to the same extent as the sisterhood.

  Statistics example: Public mails on 2 lists from 5 females
  expressing similar processes being in action, from males none.

  My experience (my map with clients) women talk about emotions and hold on
  to them more before releasing them. Men don't talk about emotions, often
  suppress them and yet when given tools to handle/release them they use the
  tools and still don't talk about them.

  In Family counseling sometimes men have to be instructed that many times
  women aren't telling you something because they want you to fix it even
  though it seems broken. They just want you to listen and not do anything
  about it. (Sometimes difficult for men)

  Which is exactly why I am so very keen to have the suffering
  competitions STOP and focus on practical, simple systemics.

  Great idea. That's why I thought you would have been the 1st to point out
  it's not female/male but human. But I take your rebuke and am dismayed at
  your prespective. As I ET all this it makes me laugh! Thanks for the
  experience.

  Sisterhood, brotherhood, - muppethood!

  This is ET2. On this list we're working on trying to figure out
  how to be human.

  Thanks for finally pointing it out. My mind-read is that Linda doesn't see
  where what she wrote is any different from what you just wrote. And I'm
  sure Linda agrees that is why humanhood was included in her Love to all,
  but her qualification cut out part of it. Maybe, I'm wrong, energy test it,
  go inside and find out for yourself.

  You're right it does have to do with a change of "heart" which is the
  change of perspective.

  Which includes having a laugh about the advertisement for the man
  who wants to earn money and the woman who wants to loose weight.

  Many of my clients aren't seeking enlightenment or even how to be more
  human they just want what they want.

  ;->

  SF

  Need Nothing, Desire Everything, Choose What Shows Up,
  Enjoy Life-It's ALL Information, Utilize It ALL,
  Doc Houston

  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
       
       

  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
  emotrance2-unsubscribe_at_yahoogroups.com

  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

           
Received on Thu May 29 2003 - 10:11:20 BST