I wondered why so few women participate, here, at Kinfonet?

This slot is open to all (men and women) to explore this question...

Feel free to say anything and see where this leads.
It is my hope that more women will participate.

Regards, Katy

I don't know either !

This post was last updated by Katy 7 (account deleted) Tue, 26 Oct 2010.

I also suggest and request Madam Patricia to start an inspiring topic.
gb

We are watching, not waiting, not expecting anything to happen but watching without end. JK

ganesan balachandran wrote:
I also suggest and request Madam Patricia to start an inspiring topic. gb

Yes, I do too, Ganesan. Thankyou, Sir :-)

I don't know either !

Katy 7 wrote:
I wondered why so few women participate, here, at Kinfonet?

Because women believe in talking in spite of writing.:)

They don't like more gap between thinking and expressing the thinking:)

Don't need K or any, do yourself

Soham netti wrote:
They don't like more gap between thinking and expressing the thinking:)

Do you think this is a universal phenomenon, Soham?

I don't know either !

Soham netti wrote:
Because women believe in talking in spite of writing.:)

I know that you are being humorous but 'many a true word is said in jest', Sir; is this your belief or a fact?

I don't know either !

This post was last updated by Katy 7 (account deleted) Tue, 26 Oct 2010.

Katy 7 wrote:
Do you think this is a universal phenomenon, Soham?

I am just joking.

Actually there are many factors behind of the less participation.

Women in every activity have less participation.How many women won Noble prize?:)

Don't need K or any, do yourself

Soham netti wrote:
Women in every activity have less participation.How many women won Noble prize?:)

Good point, Soham. Also there might be something about the teachings, themselves, which holds little or no appeal. What this might be is on my 'blind side'(?).

I don't know either !

Katy 7 wrote:
Also there might be something about the teachings, themselves, which holds little or no appeal.

Teachings are like me, without any appeal, so no women being attracted:)

Don't need K or any, do yourself

Soham netti wrote:
Teachings are like me, without any appeal, so no women being attracted:)

:-)

I don't know either !

This post was last updated by Katy 7 (account deleted) Wed, 27 Oct 2010.

There is a women-only slot which (so far) no one has contributed towards under the topic title: 'Is Kinfonet a Patriarchy'

I don't know either !

very few are interested in K, and very fewer women

Don't need K or any, do yourself

Soham netti wrote:
very few are interested in K, and very fewer women

Yes, and alot of people join Kinfonet (men and women) but don't say anything at all...
I thought it important to raise this point, anyway.
Thanks, Katy

I don't know either !

Katy 7 wrote:
I wondered why so few women participate, here, at Kinfonet?

Dear Katy,

Less women participate here simply because they are more practical and less conceptual in their outlook towards life and discussion here is mostly based on concepts. They prefer to speak from the heart and usually do not have ego that wants to dominate everywhere at all cost.

Another reason may be that it is not in their nature to be abusive, sarcastic and hurting or be part of such a group. When such language is directed towards them, they will get discouraged easily and stop participation.

They also have less spare time as they have to fulfill their duties both in the office and at home.

In the end I also hope and wish that more women will participate for balance and enrichment of these discussions.

Regards.

FLOW WITH LIFE!

Dr.sudhir sharma wrote:
In the end I also hope and wish that more women will participate for balance and enrichment of these discussions.

Yes, indeed. Thankyou, Dr. Sudhir, for your considered reply (#14).

Regards, Katy

I don't know either !

Probably because women are already enlightened.
The male of the species is always looney.

Ken B wrote:
Probably because women are already enlightened. The male of the species is always looney.

Yes, perhaps, you are right, Ken...wish I'd been let in on the secret!:-)

Regards, Katy

I don't know either !

This post was last updated by Katy 7 (account deleted) Tue, 26 Oct 2010.

Dr.sudhir sharma wrote:
They prefer to speak from the heart and usually do not have ego that wants to dominate everywhere at all cost.

A woman poses a question and a man steps forward with the answer. It never occurs to him to ponder the question with her. Better to prove the correctness of his answer by demonstrating his "ego that wants to dominate everywhere at all costs".

nick carter wrote:
A woman poses a question and a man steps forward with the answer. It never occurs to him to ponder the question with her. Better to prove the correctness of his answer by demonstrating his "ego that wants to dominate everywhere at all costs".

However, this has occurred to you, Nick. (Thanks).

I might never hear from other women members what is actually deterring 'them' from participating. I see, too, how the direct nature of the question itself might put people on the spot(!)

I do appreciate everyone's comments on this; where there is no 'me'/ego operating there are, surely, no apparent divisions including that of gender.

Dr.sudhir sharma wrote:
Another reason may be that it is not in their nature to be abusive, sarcastic and hurting or be part of such a group. When such language is directed towards them, they will get discouraged easily and stop participation.

Dear Nick and Dr. Sudhir,

This is certainly true of my own 'nature', which, elucidates another huge question about where the line is drawn between what is definable as 'nature' and what is 'conditioning'? Some women feel free to be abusive, sarcastic and so on.

Is that which is 'natural' also that which is spontaneous? I am alluding to what part(s) of spontaneous human nature are, perhaps, 'sacred' in essence. I mean where 'sacred' has no opposite just like nature - above criticism.

Is there a feminine:masculine principle which will always polarise?
Or is this an idea produced by thought/conditioning?

Thinking about/noticing one's conditioning too much could lead a person up the garden path and/or prevent a person from being spontaneous...ie. being 'at one with nature'.

However, without being fully aware of it (conditioning), as Nick pointed out, one becomes its victim.

Regards, Katy

I don't know either !

This post was last updated by Katy 7 (account deleted) Wed, 27 Oct 2010.

I, for one, would like to hear what other women say on this.

Katy, thanks for opening the subject and making it open for both genders, which I guess is within the Kinfonet gudelines.

But let the men be a little more sensitive and not rush to advise or conclude.

What are you waiting for?

I wonder if both genders avoid truth at all costs? I have women and men friends interested in Krishnamurt and do not think it is a gender issue after going into this with them. There are only a few who are willing to push deeper when personal beliefs are challenged and what this quality is intrigues me.

Averil

averil harrison wrote:
There are only a few who are willing to push deeper when personal beliefs are challenged and what this quality is intrigues me.

Thanks, Averil...

Yes, hence my not very well put questions to Nick and Dr. Sudhir!:-) There is, perhaps, a 'sacred' part devoid of beliefs, as such, which simply cannot consider this/'push deeper'?

I see the truth in all the above replies. I suppose the answer is in the topic's title. Kinfonet's structure cannot, perhaps, be anything but patriarchical - reflecting that of society?

Regards, Katy

I don't know either !

This post was last updated by Katy 7 (account deleted) Wed, 27 Oct 2010.

Maybe they have more sense!

After all, who would want to step into the hornets nest :-)

Paul Davidson wrote:
Katy, thanks for opening the subject and making it open for both genders, which I guess is within the Kinfonet gudelines.

I didn't consult any 'guidelines' Paul!:-)

I don't know either !

Neil Z wrote:
Maybe they have more sense!
After all, who would want to step into the hornets nest :-)

Thanks, Neil :-)

I don't know either !

nick carter wrote:
A woman poses a question and a man steps forward with the answer. It never occurs to him to ponder the question with her. Better to prove the correctness of his answer by demonstrating his "ego that wants to dominate everywhere at all costs".

Nick, I am the fourth reader who has recommended your post sincerely hoping that it was not a reaction but an understanding that you live !

FLOW WITH LIFE!

Dr.sudhir sharma wrote:
Nick, I am the fourth reader who has recommended your post sincerely hoping that it was not a reaction but an understanding that you live !

WellSudhir, you can live in hope.

I was not one of those 'recommendees.' I thought it was a stereotypical response that defined gender in fixed ways.

"A woman poses a question and a man steps forward with the answer . . . "

I know many men who pose questions and many women who instantly answer.

Kinfonet seems to me no more patriarchal than it may be called racist or any other 'ist,' just because most postees are white, male, class-biased, or ageist etc etc.

Take P for example. Several times I opened up discussion on K's earlier writings and she blasted in with her instant conclusions and her intolerant tone. And what about the Indian Jungian, M, or our good friend from Paris?

Is this to be treated as a gender issue or as a human one - such as we may be human?

And, where are all the young people? Who excluded them?

And who excluded Rick?

What are you waiting for?

averil harrison wrote:
There are only a few who are willing to push deeper when personal beliefs are challenged and what this quality is intrigues me.

I feel a mind that understands the significance and importance of observing/looking and questioning issues of life without any compulsion/urge to find an answer/solutions is a must.

FLOW WITH LIFE!

Katy 7 wrote:
This is certainly true of my own 'nature', which, elucidates another huge question about where the line is drawn between what is definable as 'nature' and what is 'conditioning'?

Katy, self interest/concern/pressures/compulsions etc. decide the reactions of the mind. Such a mind is 'conditioned' and now has the power to supress or
overrule 'nature' which is determined by physiology, biology or genes.

FLOW WITH LIFE!

This post was last updated by Dr.sudhir sharma Wed, 27 Oct 2010.

Paul Davidson wrote:
And who excluded Rick?

The last time this question was posed, Dev replied that Rick left voluntarily. If you'd like to talk to Rick, try the KFA ning site. If you find him, bingo!