Tag Archives: Desteni

Nothing has changed, everything has changed – a personal tribute to Bernard Poolman

Bernie_smile

Bernard Poolman in the recent years before his death

It still seems unreal to me, when just weeks ago I was talking to Bernard Poolman at the farm where I was visiting for three weeks – and now Bernard is dead. He passed away on August 11th from the impact of a heart attack. I remember it was dark already, an early winter evening in South Africa, when I first met him in person, as he had just returned from a city trip dealing with some legal administration. He stepped onto the veranda and called my name making long rolling sounds with this mischievous twinkle in his eyes that I was to see more than once throughout my stay. It was as if he was saying to me “and so it is, we meet again”, but of course, this is just my interpretation. Bernard was like a mirror to each of us, he reflected our own perceptions back to us, and he understood very well what was happening inside of us in that moment, so that he tailored his words as a point of support, to help us see what we were doing to ourselves, the things we wanted to see in the world that weren’t there. Interactions with Bernard were a real-time opportunity for self-change.

He then proceeded to give me a hug and we sat down at the table and started talking. There were moments were he was visibly in pain because of the work that he had taken on using his physical body. He was preparing our world for a rebirth into equality and oneness but how many of us have an understanding of what that means on a physical level? Bernard did not care much about the pain, for him this was the byproduct of an extraordinary task that had to be done to sort out this world – a world that is in reverse.

A world in reverse starts with our pursuit for pleasure, for well-being, for fitness, beauty, comfort, and health. Bernard showed us by example of his life the difference between existing as a picture and existing as life. Becoming life is to stop catering to the picture, it is a process that requires us to step out from behind the smoke screen and become the real thing – passed the pain, passed the resistances – a self-willed entity, and to see the web of relations we have created within every aspect of this world.  ‘Fractalising’ our existence, ourselves, and every living thing on planet earth into an endless array of divisions, restrictions, and segmentations. This is what we do as a default, we are  “naturals” at this and call it “human nature”, we submit ourselves to our minds and we don’t stop ourselves from getting sucked up. With each ‘mind sucker’ a new concepts is created that enhances the divisions, restrictions, and segmentations. Fractals are infinite repetitions that create our world over, look at the branches of the tree or the tiny veins in your hand. We have copied these cycles of repetition only we allow ourselves to default into the separation instead of coalescing the world into equality, where the principle of equality repeats in all aspects of worldly affairs and LIFE succeeds SURVIVAL. Once and for all.

Piecing ourselves back together is accepting that the world must be straightened out without concessions. We must move from negligence and convenience to absolute and unlimited caring for the place called earth. First, however, we must understand how we, each for themselves, have actually reached our current point. Bernard was there to facilitate this understanding because he had taken a machete to the thickest of mind and emotions and cut himself loose – all by himself.

After this initial meeting, I spent whatever time was available visiting Bernard in the main room. Unlike any other stranger I have met before, there was this instant connection, a clear link of communication between us – it was so clear that there was no room for anything else, awkwardness, anxiety, insecurity or any other emotion that typically interferes with our communication signals. Bernard’s uncompromising stance was available to me in every moment of interaction, to centre myself within it. I saw the potential of communication, not in a SciFi “beam me up Scotty” kind of way – this was not about transmitting thoughts, or having a perfect understanding of what was being said between us. Rather a point of communication where I actually got to see myself, where the veil comes off, and where I see what lies behind the words I use, the way I use them, and how I have applied myself over the years in the same mind tracks, like a train forging groves on wheels of words in which I move myself along – struggling, stumbling – a layer so impervious to myself where only glimpses reach my awareness after an intense session of self-forgiveness. Through my conversations with Bernard I realised the true level of carelessness I bring to the world, practically, in every word I speak.

Whenever I entered the room and saw Bernard’s head peek out from behind the computer, he was approachable in the same way, today, as the day before, as tomorrow. There was never a shift or a change and within him that I experienced and because of his absolute stability, our conversations where always only about me. Bernard was self-complete. Let me clarify, selflessness is a “program”, it is what it says: a missing self. It feeds our urge to exist in the denial about who we really are by filling ourselves up with others, with tasks, objects, and services that are apparently needed in the world – selflessness is another escape mechanism. I say ‘apparent needs’, because unlike self-completeness, selflessness cannot respond to what is really needed which is what is best for all in each situation, in each moment, because the person is preoccupied by the reasons he/she wants to escape from. Because Bernard is complete as a self – as is – he was able to respond to what I needed to see and hear at the time. He no longer operated from desire, preference or judgement, the fluctuating emotions that move us like a puppet on a string and that make us blind to our acceptances and allowances in the world, so that we create a world dominated by suffering.  Because Bernard is self-complete (and he still is even when he is no longer in physical form) he could utilise his ‘self’ as a tool for support – for social engineering – one person at the time, to bring about a world that is best for all, beyond his own physical existence.

In Bernard’s presence I experienced myself like a child again. I am talking about a specific aspect of being a child, the innocence that children bring to the world, an unspoiled receptiveness that has not been caught up in all kinds of filters, the ulterior motives we usually place in front of ourselves when we come to speak with others, in how we attempt to protect our vulnerability. I was free of this pre-programmed prompter that supports my survival and I could relax into a part of me that was once my starting point to grasping the world around me. Only now I was grasping myself. Bernard’s self-complete being created an unflinching point of reference in which I could expand my awareness. A reversal of what we usually experience when interacting with others where we suppress and limit ourselves.

Answering my questions was only a part of our communication, he volunteered much of what he saw about me, even when he had to scream it into my ears. He could never scare me though, not for a moment I perceived his expressive way of talking, loud voice and beastly face, as scary. I realised what I had originally considered as scary in my online communications with him, when I first joined the group, was the purity and stableness of his interactions that cut through all the pretences. The fact was that Bernard, the man who died on August 11th, lived entirely without fear. We never encounter a being that does not exist on and in fear – with Bernard fear as a basis to each breath had become life at the basis of each breath. This cannot be easily grasped by the mind because there is no entry point to attach one’s programs – his words, his movements, his actions are not marked by fear, and the mind is at a loss for parity in pre-progammed settings that simply are not there. This can threaten the mind if we allow it.  The main points that Bernard told me about myself where wrapped up in questions inside of me, dinosaur questions, that I had actively pursued years ago. I had all the pieces to the puzzle but I was unable to put them together in the way that they would make sense to me and give me direction. Bernard resurrected these questions and put the puzzle pieces for me in order so that I could leave the farm with more of myself than when I came.

My encounter with Bernard has given my self-realisation process detailed direction, it has sharpened my focus. What I have seen and realised about myself cannot be undone. It has changed everything for me because the more we see about who we are and what we have created, the greater the stakes of responsibility to give everything all of the time, 100% of a no-return investment. Bernard’s death can only be understood from that perspective, he gave everything all of the time and each moment of giving he was aware of the no-return policy – he even told us so many times.

There is an uncanny parallel between Bernard and Jesus, which we can revisit 2000 years from now. It’s not the obvious one that both men lived the principles of equality and that both men gave up their lives as the living principle of responsibility. It’s the parallel that emphasises US – those who have committed themselves to equality as the principle of life. Jesus’s death brought no merit to this world, his words were distorted and his principles misinterpreted, 2000 years later we have a world of abuse, poverty, corruption and war. What the world will be in 4013 is entirely up to us. Jesus and Bernard opened the doors to a new world order using everything available to them, and once again we are left with an opportunity to step out from our pre-programmed designs and become living beings.

I cannot deny that I will miss the man, and that tears cannot do justice of the profound loss we have all witnessed these past few days. As Cerise said, the world is poorer for it, now that Bernard no longer walks the earth. It is however, not a question, that we will continue walking our process. Hearing of his death, much of the shock we experienced are the voices of selfishness –  entitlement to convenience in our processes –  regardless of what Bernard has done for all of us, how much he suffered through the physical pain, we insist on him being here for us, so that we can fall back on our crutches. I speak for myself here and all those who have relied on getting Bernard’s perspective, his encouragement, living vicariously through his commitment. As a group, it’s the moment of realisation that we are always alone in making the decision to stay here breathing and nail our awareness to the ground, or to drift into the illusion of the mind. In that sense, nothing has changed, though everything changes from now on – we walk for real. The time has come.

Bernie_hotshot

Bernard Poolman in 2005 – picture by Rozelle de Lange

Advertisements

6 Comments

Filed under All

Who would we be if we stopped comparing ourselves?

30333050897

As a child, when I experienced sadness, I often wondered how the world could be if it was not so harsh. Growing up was a tough job and with every year I grew older I saw the struggles in my world getting bigger. Today I realise that my struggles augmented as I perceived the need to compete with others.

We are raised to compete in a world of scarcity and individualism. Scarcity comes with the system we have created: there is not enough affordable education, not enough jobs, not enough food – and so forth. At the same time we have been brainwashed into thinking that we are true individuals, that we are unique by default and through this uniqueness we deserve to have all the things we desire and want, irrespective of everyone else’ needs.

The predisposition of a system of scarcity and the need and desire to stand out and fulfil one’s desires  requires us to compare ourselves and judge who we are in relation to others. In this way we limit our potential because the point of comparison is personal and seen from the perspective of ownership. “This person has something that I don’t have but want”.

However, there is another perspective to look at this scenario: We can learn from each other.

When we encounter others who have obtained a particular skill that interests us or that we struggle with to get better at, we must first recognise that we are reacting emotionally to what we are perceiving. This emotional charge becomes the driving force which leads us to self-judgements and self-limitations. Thoughts like, “I can never be like that” or “I am not good enough to do that” are the typical self-talk that keeps us locked in where we are – we defeat ourselves.

How do we empower ourselves?

We release our current perception of the situation by letting go of the emotional charges. We do that by taking a moment in self-honesty and writing out our experience from the point of self-forgiveness, followed by self-corrective statements. Self-forgiveness and self-corrective statements are self-help tools that can be learned online at no cost.

Once the emotions have been discharged and we are clear that we are expanding ourselves by learning from the other, we focus on the relationship the person has with the skill/action/object. By re-focussing on the relationship between the person and the skill/action/object, we defocus the personal parts which enables us to see into the essence of this relationship. Observing this essence is the learning point, which is where we get the take-home message that becomes useful for our personal expansion.

In a second step, once we have grasped the essence of the relationship the person has with an aspect of the world, e.g. a skill, or a way of going about something, we can use the take-home message and apply it in our own daily lives. This is an important step, because in the process of applying it to our own life and seeing how it can strengthen us, we are not coping or imitating but we are expanding on ourselves by adding a new perspective to our own life through a dedicated process of application.

When we have learned from others in this way, what remains is the our unique expression, which then in turn sparks someone else somewhere to learn from us. Hence, we stand united in our uniqueness and bring about a world where everyone can express who they are because they no longer limit themselves through self-judgement and no longer separate themselves from others through comparison and competition.

The FREE DIP LITE  Course is available to All, simply sign up and start.  This is a powerful free introduction to real self-exploration, and self realisation using the Desteni tools with online support. It’s an opportunity of a life time.

FIND OUT WHAT DESTENI STANDS FOR

Leave a comment

Filed under All

Border-crossing – the mental divide of real space and illusion

Ancient Map of Telnor

Whenever we travel outside of our habitual or cultural environment, we cross borders – mostly in the confines of an airport. In spite of our ability to instantly travel between countries and continents on the internet, where we call this digital ‘nearness’ the global village,  the physical reality reflects the reverse situation.  The core of physical border crossing is identity control.  The individual crossing the border must obtain permission to do so. Since the beginning of recorded history, the acquiring of territory and maintaining of borders has been the primary source of war, conflict and abuse, and this situation has not changed up until today.  Yet, there is no reality to the idea of borders and border-crossing because it is a conceptualisation of the mind that is imposed in a top-down manner onto physical space. Borders are an accepted illusion, there is no tangible equivalent from which borders spring forth and manifest in the world.  In other words, borders are not real, they shift and change depending on who is in charge and has the power to rule over others in form of states, nations, and countries.

When travelling between claimed territory by plane, airport border controls are laced with a thick procedure of security checks that encompass the inspection of luggage and physical bodies with the aim to minimise potential security risks for the country that is opening its gates for us. In my experience, all border crossing check points look the same with only one changing variable, which is the language spoken because it changes from border to border.  The agents in charge of checking travellers wear uniforms, they sit behind computers, scanning devices, and other machines which process information about each person who crosses the border.  Fascinatingly enough, the border-crossing personnel assesses each person not as the physical person that stands right in front of them. No, the assessment is done based on a proxy, the conceptualised idea about a person which is displayed in form of an image on a computer screen. We, the travellers, are not privy to this information, we can assume that a part of it contains our personal details such as name and address, yet the remainder, of what lurks on these screens and refers to us, is shrouded in mystery.

There is a sense of togetherness when going through the long haul of border-crossing and security check points.  Frequently a conversation pops up between fellow passengers. At the end of the conversation everyone participating is reassured that we are united in this ‘humiliating situation’, when we are stripped of shoes, belts, jackets and hats because our potential is perceived as threat to the world. Even when queuing with a more reserved crowd that not easily engages conversationally, the sight of a little child or an elderly person having to submit to the procedures will prompt us to verbally point out the ridiculousness of these controls. But how ridiculous are they really when we bring the point home to self and see what it is that we don’t want to see about who we are? We unite in complaining about check-point procedures because we don’t want to see beyond, what underlies this situation and how it unanimously implicates each one of us.

 When we realise that what is happening in real-time is equal to the inner reality that we carry around in our minds, we can start to investigate and step beyond the accepted self-victimisation.  We stop to believe that submitting to a ‘humiliating situation’ is engineered by an evil government that blindly enforces its laws and we realise that the powerlessness we experience is the perception of the mind as we allow and accept it.  We are the borders, the territory, the security checks, and we victimise ourselves daily.  Our own borders are just as imaginary as the borders we create in physical space to divide the world into countries and nations.  Our claim to territory is to prevent us from self-change.  What we defend are our limitations and how we have programmed ourselves in separation and division from others at every opportunity where our self-interest is threatened.  We use self-talk to validate the behaviors we enact to keep our borders intact. But here it is not about others being admitted inside, it is about us preventing ourselves from stepping outside our habitual territory so that we move ourselves into a new space where we can decide freely who we want to be in this moment, in this context, with these people.

This self-talk is our security check point, it is powerful beyond recognition. It contains every justification we launch in our minds to remain where we are – trapped and limited.  On an individual level, we deploy a personal arsenal of justifications that we can tailor to each situation. These mental security measures are extremely well-placed and they make so much sense that when we are in a given situation, where we have the opportunity to trespass our limitations, we are unable to recognise what we are doing to ourselves. We may have a glimpse in hindsight of what could have been, who we could have been, but the situation is gone and we will have to wait until next time…

In the meantime, there are reassuring conversation with fellow minds to be had – somewhere – on the internet, in the streets, at the airport,  where we reassure ourselves that change seems so impossible with the ultimate justification: because we are a victim of human nature.

Don’t wait till next time, dismantle your mental security check-point and walk out of your justifications.

Join us, and set yourself free

2 Comments

Filed under All

The truth about predictive programming

Let’s end the misconceptions about predictive programming and realise what it is in truth. For most people predictive programming has been associated with conspiracy theorists, and the events that have taken place in the public arena that are exemplified in atrocities such as the attack and destruction of the World Trade Center and the recent Sandy Hook shooting. Even the “labelling” of these events as predictive programming IS predictive programming in and of itself.

If we look at the situation from the perspective of those who are advocating the existence of predictive programming then there are two fronts, the “executioner” and the “receivers”. The “executioners” are those people who are extremely influential by the virtue of their large amounts of money and the power that comes with it. The “receivers” are the public, the victims, and the ones at which these atrocities are directed to.

Recall that all of these events do not just magically fall from the sky but where orchestrated by a number of individuals that help with the logistics. Even those who are individually blamed for instrumenting the massacres such as Sandy Hook or the Batman shooting are considered part of the public before the event happens. Therefore, is everyone a potential pawn in the predictive programming scheme of the high-ups?

Let’s look at our individuals lives for a moment. How many things would you change in your life? Are there any behaviours that you would change if you could?  How does your behaviours shape your life in predictable ways – in the decisions you make? In the way you react to others? In what you like and dislike. Why is that so, if you are a free and self-determining entity in this world?

There can only be one answer to all of these questions: all your behaviour is predictable because you have programmed yourself in this manner and you use your belief system to keep yourself from seeing it.

Belief No.1. I am an individual, I am free, and I can determine my life.

If this belief were a reality and not a belief, why is that we are not creating our lives in such a way that we don’t harm others? Typically, a person’s answer to this statement is that they are not the ones that are harming others, it’s the others that are doing it. Consequentially, is all starvation and poverty in this world done by others? Of course not. Each one participates in this world every day, goes to the voting polls, sends their kids to school, goes to work and goes shopping. Each one of us is an abuser of life in the same vain as anyone who participated in the events mentioned above. Because the slow accumulation of abuse (for example in the deaths of starved people and the extinction and abuse of animals) cannot be quantified in the same way as the “big bang” events, such as the September 11 attack or the Sandy Hook shooting, does not make it any less abusive. We are abusers on equal footing through our blindness in the belief that we are free and that all that is unacceptable and bad in this world is always someone else.

Belief No.2. The world can’t be changed, it’s human nature.

Obviously this statement is a belief that is in total opposition to belief no.1. We cannot be free and not free at the same time. These two beliefs demonstrate how we are unable to see our own situation. “Human nature” is the excuse to not take responsibility, to not digg out what happened in our childhood what has been passed down over generations, behaviours we have accepted and used to program ourselves. It’s the refusal to look at who we have become, release it and create ourselves as directed human being that stops acting from automated patterns of behaviour. There is plenty of evidence that humans a) are totally malleable, example: feral children and b) and accept their limitations through their emotional states, example: the Stockholm syndrome.

Belief No.3. I have intelligence, feelings and emotions – this makes me human.

Is it therefore that as an intelligence species we create millions of consumer products that we believe we need while systematically destroying our habitat without which we are unable to survive? Is it because we have feelings and emotions we are afraid of each other and create wars, slavery and destruction, and form relationships that are dysfunctional because we don’t want to be alone – and furthermore disguise all this by calling ourselves loving beings? Is it because we have feelings that we let our own species starve to death, while standing by doing nothing about it, and believe that when we say: that’s terrible – that things will magically change as we go about our day? Or, is it that we pray for the hungry and the poor, which we know does not change THEIR conditions, but at least we have calmed down our own conscience of being terrible abusers? The answer to all of these questions is that because of feelings and emotions that we seek out at any price,  we become abusers and enslave ourselves and others.  We have programmed ourselves in self-interest to always seek out the positive emotional state, in however we define “positive” regardless of the reality we live in and is affected by these choices.  We have come to identify ourselves with emotional states and we refuse to see what human life would be if we were acting form the principle of LIFE, and not from a changeable, fluctuating, oscillating emotional states. We are so blinded by our self-definitions of needing feelings and emotions to exist that the idea of letting go of feelings and emotions is seen as a death threat.

Surely, it’s easy to see that predictive programming concerns us all, we are all living programmed lives, hence our actions, decisions, words, likes and dislikes are predictable. Therefore to look at a group of “others” as “executioners” and as ourselves as the “receivers” or victims is part of the predictive programming we have accepted as who we are. A new definition for predictive programming is: the path of a human life without self-honesty.

2 Comments

Filed under All

Market forces, the never-ending problem of complexity

The Problem:

In our current financial system, we are faced with an ever-growing complexity. It is a complexity that is mirrored in all facets of societal life whether that is administrative or enterprising. Many of us are constantly trying to simplify our lives, yet it seems to be a perpetual problem where the sheer complexity of living does not decrease but steadily increases. Those who experienced the transition to the digital age might remember, digital technology was hailed as giving us the global village, everything was supposed to be easier and much more simplified – after all we had the technology to create many more automated systems.

However, these predictions did not fulfill themselves because this complexity is intrinsically set up in our financial and administrative system. Capitalism thrives on rules and regulations that need to be constantly implemented to delineate the rights of corporations, governments, nations, countries vs the individual citizen, the consumer.

We operate from the premise of the free market that gives opportunities to all who are able to engage with it and set up business. Business owners are entrepreneurial and in that they are opportunistic, searching for the missing link between two regulations that will propagate consumer interest.

Two examples from online movies and shopping will illustrate this situation:

You, the consumer has searched online for a particular movie. You have found your movie via Netflix or Hulu. The moment after you have hit the start button a message appears to let you know that you are not able to watch this movie because Netflix is not available in your country. Primarily for money making purposes we are separated into countries even when we are online. You happen to be physically located in Belgium.

If you are willing to spend some money on this problem, then you can be helped. You can get a service, such as Foxy Proxy, that will fictitiously relocate you on the Internet so that you appear to be pressing the button from the US instead of continental Europe.

Next, we go shopping online. Let’s say you want to get something from a store in the States and would like to have it shipped to your country. You can do that but you might be surprised when you get the bill because there will be an extra amount tagged onto it, which could easily be higher than what you paid for the product. This is because the import tax-free amount is quite low, for Belgium it’s about 22 Euro. Everything above that amount you will have to pay import tax on.

Ideally you don’t want to pay any import tax on your purchase and you can do so by spending some money on a service that will give you a US street address which you can use as intermediate address. The service will  then collect all your purchases and send them to you, import tax-free, because it will no longer be coming from a US business address which is tracked for import tax payments.

These are but two examples that illustrate how complexity evolves in our system, and that with every business regulation comes a way to work around it. As we can see the lines are blurred in estimating what is legal and what not. In our examples it seems quite arbitrary. It is difficult to approach the topic with common sense why either of these services is allowed as they cancel out the rules and regulations that have been put in place.  Here it seems that rules and regulations are nothing more than money-making opportunities – in a world where all work from self-interest and are driven by greed, and more over, are self-limited by the belief that human nature cannot be changed.  Simplicity will never exist on this trajectory but an exponential growing complexity is what awaits us.

The solution:

The solution is not far and we can prove to ourselves that we can create a world from a different starting point than the one described above. The Equal Money Capitalism is Capitalism in its purest where the majority rules by the principle “Equality through what is best for all”

In Equal Money Capitalism competition to find a lucrative business loophole that will make big money and feed consumerism will cease to exist. Unemployment will cease to exist and the need to make profit will cease to exist – as profit will be a shared activity to which all have equal rights and responsibilities. Capital will no longer be the resource-to-be-sold, capital will be life itself, and since there is only one life that we all share in our various life forms, it is equal and is treated equally in every way.

This will decrease the levels of complexity of the system to keep everyone fed, sheltered and healthy. Each citizen will be able to have all information pertaining to how the system works and this flat structure will enable all to participate and improve structural underpinnings of the system.

The reward:

Each citizen will have more free time.
No more guessing what is allowed to do and what not
Each citizen has a voice that counts equally regardless of professional background
Each citizen has the opportunity to enhance their life style and that of others through self-organized participation.

2 Comments

Filed under Equal Money

Educating the human – but where is the sex?

Desteni Artist Garbrielle Goodrow

Why would any society, or the world for that matter, who is obsessed with knowledge and information, omit sex from education? The undeniable reality is that sex, one of the fundamental aspects of human life, coequal to the biological requirement of food and elimination of every human, would have second to none appearance in the curriculum of any educational body? Why is it that we believe that calculus or the periodic table is more important than to understand how to approach your sex partner or what it means to have sexual urges? Isn’t it interesting that most of us accept the fact that sex is used to inundate the world with imagery to make us shop till we drop, yet we create so much stigma around the simple sexual act that we do not even want to talk about it to our children. We prefer to conjure up all kinds of emotions, be it fear, anger, shame and guilt regarding our own personal sexual activities. There can be only one answer: money.

Money is the motivator of our current existence in this world and it includes the motivation to institutionalise the physical act of intercourse between two humans. It may not be so apparent at first but when we round up the current literature and documentaries that look at the topic critically, we can see that the gap of sexual non-education has been filled by the porn industry. The porn industry, a billion-dollar industry, is one of the most powerful drivers of the development of internet technologies while its involvement reaches far and deep. Many of the rather unsuspecting tech companies have benefitted from secret earnings through the porn industry. To name a few: Yahoo, Foxnews, and Comcast. That the porn industry is at the forefront of making money with emerging technologies is evident by looking at the porn revenues on handheld devices that are estimated to increase by 75% in 2013, with a closing figure on the $5 billion dollar mark.

The convenience of technology brings porn ever closer to the growing youth. What used to require of a man to seek out bookstores with “under” the counter dealings of porn magazines can now be had at any location with a button click on your latest mobile device. Nowadays, one often has to go out of one’s virtual way not to land accidentally on a porn website. Though porn is not made in China, it has reached levels of consumption that rival any other product staged on the global market of consumer saturation.

The point is that sex education has never been taking seriously in academia because with the money-making potential it puts forth, it has provided a huge turnover in a widely-faceted industry. From websites to franchises, to all kinds of accessories, to sex tourism – the porn industry has thoroughly penetrated society. Let’s not forget that by addressing questions of sex know-how inquired by young men, who are tech-savvy and full of pulsating sex urges, a life-long customer can be had. The effort to get a young boy hooked on the images of copulating men and women is effortless when considering that “ 9 out of 10 children aged between 8 and 16 have viewed pornography on the Internet. In most cases, the sex sites were accessed unintentionally when a child, often in the process of doing homework, used a seemingly innocent sounding word to search for information or pictures.”

What is even more interesting in this educational dilemma illustrated in the above-mentioned quote, which stems from the prestigious London School of Economics, is that academia has no problem looking at porn from a number of objections: Statistical usage through quantitative analysis is one of them; the study of sexual behaviour in society and media; as well as the question of gender equality are among the hot topics in the humanities. It is pathetic that all of academia will exploit the criticism that can be focussed upon the porn industry, as a field of study, but will do nothing in bringing sex closer to the curriculum of an average school day.

So if men get their sex education from the porn industry, how are women-at-large affected by the porn industry through their relationships with men? In other words, what is it that porn teaches women? Here again the answer is straight forward: to sell themselves. Each women on the planet knows that sex appeal will get her what she wants. The better she can sell her appeal to sex when interacting with men, the more likely she will have a good job and make sufficient money. The reason for that is that the world is male-dominated and men not only learn how to “deal” with a women intimately from pornography but they also learn to value a woman on the basis of her sexual attributes. Surely the relationship of a man’s parents will have been eroded and undermined as dominant influence in referencing the social value of women. The power of daily repetition of pornographic imagery is exceptionally well illustrated by those who admit to being porn addicted and those who admit to rape based on their porn addiction.

Although a prostitute or porn star will have to literally sell her body, the average women does it in a more abstract or remote manner through intermediate artefacts that objectify. May that be a nice pair of high heels, or a flattering haircut, maybe it’s that short dress or that breast enlargement surgery. ISAPS Global Survey, apparently the first reliable source for plastic surgery statistics, states that in the last 10 years breast augmentation has been the most popular procedure in the global trend of body modifications. Though the price that women pay for having learned to sell themselves does not end with shaping one’s body to have more sex appeal, it ends in bed. Women’s intimate interactions with men are modelled on what men know from pornography, where communication is typically reduced to assumptions, and aggressive starting points are accepted as valid because that is how the porn industry sells what women like.

If we were to take responsibility for our educational system and decide to take on sex education as one of the main subjects in school, thus debunking pornography in all its manifestations, we could provide the maturing youth with input that places sex into the equality of life. The prerequisite for this is a new economic system where money has lost all its value and operates in servitude of life. Then, all issues of inequality between men and women would fall away and we could restart our existence from a virtually unknown place of physical interactions…
– and this is what will happen when we switch to an Equal Money System.

Investigate!

4 Comments

Filed under Equal Money

Gregg Braden has it backwards – is this a case of the blind leading the blind?

Gregg Braden advocates self-change. He gives advice to others in how to go about changing oneself. Though, is he really qualified to do so? Here I will debunk one of his phrases that are meant as support but are in reality quite misleading.

“Don’t look back, you are not going that way” by Gregg Braden

Let’s look at it. There are two parts to this phrase. The first part is about looking back into one’s past. What must be considered here:

You are creating your future from the past – there is no other way because the accumulation of all your thoughts and “imprints” of behaviours from reactions and ego mechanisms will be there with you – no matter where you go. Actually it isn’t a matter of where you go because you can only go to where your past is leading you unless you stop and become self-directive. Unless you look at the ingredients of your behaviour, thoughts and memories –  whereby the “looking at” is not so much a “looking back”, this is in fact implied by the time line that you have walked thus far – a “looking back” denotes a looking inside of who you are, the acceptances and allowances, through self-honesty.

So then the question arises: if you are conglomeration of all that you have lived thus far, how can you magically not be going the way you came from?
The answer to that is: you can’t. What the author is saying with “you are not going this way” is the ignore the past and stay in denial of what you have created over time through participation in thoughts, and output as memories and manifested experiences. In actuality the opposite is the case, as long as you are not looking into by looking back you are exactly going the way you came because you have suppressed your Self so much that you are unaware of the future that you are creating within every breath and in every step.

As we have seen, taking these types of phrases lightly without investigating what they really mean can be misleading and cause stagnation.
If you are truly interested in change, then the first point of change to consider is oneself. There is a thoroughly investigated and solid approach to self-change which is the DesteniIProcess.

If you have questions there is a forum which will answer any and all your questions – http://forum.desteni.org/

Leave a comment

Filed under self-forgiveness