Neo-Tantra is a practical, very earthly theory that has a clear purpose:
To marry the person with his opposite.
To bring inner peace between the contradictory desires of the soul.
From war, that there is no peace.
The man is drawn to the woman and afraid of her. The woman is attracted to a man and so on.
Sex is war.
See your cute puppy coming back scratched from a night outside where he cuddled with five other males around some of the asses in heat. Hear a cat scream when the male's jagged penis came inside of her.
True, sex and pain always went together. To this day there are those who yearn for the days of ancient man (sprout in the head and drag her into the cave). To this day the 'reward' for soldiers in tribal wars in Africa is the authorization to rape the women of the other tribe. Why else should a man go to battle? Why should he endanger himself?
The answer is clear:
When the masculine essence is to spread your seed, you are in constant war against other men on the woman's uterus. That is, in the most natural, basic and instinctive sense - sex is war.
We are in a lose-lose situation. On the one hand, if we do not give it expression, if we close off and suppress this aggressiveness, we deny it the natural element that exists in it. The people will feel a void. After all, a woman somewhere deep wants her man to be strong, conqueror, and an animal in some ways. On the other hand, submission to this pattern in which only the man initiates intercourse, man controls him, directs him, leads his pace is giving up the shadow of what is holistic in sex. There is no pleasure in surrender and release.
This is the sad truth. The main victim in the eyes of the sex war is the man who fears weakness and softness. The one for which the mother, the feminine, is the "other". The one who can not identify with her and therefore makes him the victim of the constant search for his male self. In practice, he always feels that he has failed in his mission to resemble the masculine ideal, because unlike the mother who is the concrete earthly, the father is always metaphorical, airy, an uncracked ideal for eternity.
After all, the father did not find himself (like a grandfather before him) and did not know what a man was, so he had no way to bring answers and points of support that would support his children's search. That is why in reality (and this I hear from many men) the search for authorizations for our masculinity never ends.
Femininity is the whole nature
If so, we can summarize so far: the male is a male by virtue of his actions. He creates himself in constant search for permits. A female is a female by virtue of its essence. The physical separation from the mother is not traumatic and is not interrupted, but she continues to become psychologically identified: the girl participates in the activities of her mother, takes care of the dolls and even the two of them love the same man. Her essence is more solid than that of the son, her element is deeply rooted in her soul, and this everyone knows: in the end, the woman is stronger than the man. and basically less confused than him.
How does a keep himself from getting lost in the great feminine?
Until now the man's answer was - I will control it. I will bend its hand, analyze it because it is a tool, so I will turn it into an object. I will put on a veil, a wig, cut her clitoris, tie her legs, and finish on her face.
Manhood cannot deal with femininity and therefore wants to humiliate it. Every time a man disrespects a woman (hears a joke about blondes, curses a female driver on the road,
sees how her ass is being spanked in a porn movie), he gets a small, low sexual stimulus, because for a moment he touches this place, the war which he almost always loses.
"In a relationship with a woman, a man's punishment for his physical failure to serve as the goddess of love is her emotional tyranny," writes Barry Long, the Australian teacher who passed away two years ago. "No matter how much he will love her, one day she will shock and destroy him by exposing Lilith, the feminine field Of sentimentality "
As long as the woman is not valued as one of the elements of nature that Barry Long says, the man can not accept his lost authority. So if couples do not learn to make love and move it up, then sex in its most basic form, there will be room to release aggression. The man is in constant sexual excitement higher than the woman. He is more excited about her than she is of him, so he ejaculates quickly or experiences impotence. His own observation and disappointment always lead to sexual frustration and emotional aggression, whereas in the woman, the dissatisfaction of the encounter causes her to plunge again and again into a world of fantasies that will never exist.
About the male's fear of the women
Men want a little woman. Why? Because they are confused. A big woman reduces them. And who was the first big woman? Where did it start for us? At the Mother.
We accept the stupid war of the species so naturally because its roots lie so deep in the unconscious that we have no memory of the time we had been in our mother's womb without a struggle.
The question "who am I" comes hand in hand with the discovery of the child (at about the age of 3) that there is a penis swinging between his legs, his restlessness does not end until the day he dies in a hospital. On his deathbed, he will try to look at the nurses. The question "Who am I?" Would not lead to such confusion in the man, if not at the age of three he discovers that he has a penis and his mother has a vagina.
Seemingly an important stage in becoming a man, in practice - the beginning of the male psyche. Because when he realizes that he has no vagina, he is actually forced to deny the place from which he came. He rejects the relationship with the most important figure he had at the beginning of his life and starts looking out for answers. The negation of the mother leaves him with a hole that he must fill; what am I? Who am I? This is the question that men follow all life later: What is it to be a man, how do I justify my masculinity, and the first answer that the boy accepts is negative: a boy is not a girl.
These are the roots of the tenderness rejection. The negation of the emotion that turns the man into a soldier in the war of the sexes. Because in his soft, childlike consciousness, a pattern has been created that, in order to create the positive, must turn everything that is "no", the femininity, into a negative. My son, who is 6, is most insulted when I tell him that he looks or behaves like a girl. We can wrestle, hurt each other, call terrible names but I must not tell him he's in some way like a girl because then he will start to cry.
Over the years, this insult changes its form but remains the same.
Thus, feminine values, such as tenderness, containment, affect, become in the male consciousness undesirable, dangerous, weak values. On the other hand, the society that needs soldiers, policemen and other protectors reinforce us in the opposite place, planting an opinion that men are brave, wrought, hard, not emotional.
Unfortunately, this is not the truth and this is an unbalanced picture of reality, that creates emotionally disabled men who are incapable of in-depth contact, who are afraid to be needy (ie submissive, that is, not masculine). Countless men roam around their world carrying heavy loads on their shoulders, unable to ask for help, unable to go to therapy.
Unfortunately, the tragedy of the boys who have managed to disengage from the mother without rejecting the feminine and going into the world without the obligation to justify their existence is that even if they manage to maintain the qualities of tenderness, emotional and mental containment after the age of 3, the school will remove it from them.
Children win or lose by their ability to succeed in the environment of their peers. So the sensitive boys, unless they develop the classic features of the boys (competitive, loud, sporty) will become victims of their friends, will be called transsexuals and will not be invited to the guys until they adopt proper codes. In the circles of men I edit, there is always someone who talks about the way he learned about masculinity only after being boycotted or called a daughter. This is the basis for male oppression in the hands of the few men who manage to get out of it.
Femininity as an object
Thus, it can be said that apart from exceptional men who have succeeded in finding good male models that release them from the need to disqualify femininity, the rest are afraid of the image of a large woman and therefore choose a small woman. We are more comfortable with young women. You can see it in the media. What is the perfect female figure as portrayed in advertisements? In telenovelas? Someone sweet, with a small nose but with big tits and perfect lips, more like a baby than a woman. A little girl who makes you want to protect her. That helps you feel masculine and powerful even if you are not. Round, wrinkled, and mature women are considered not to be aesthetic because they are too much like our mother and mothers, as you know, do not need guards, but on the contrary, if we need them, they will protect us.
Designers, photographers, newspaper editors, etc. Most of them are males with an undeveloped male perspective that fear powerful women and therefore (like any consumer product) shape an impossible woman figure that most women can never meet. Thus, the fear of a man from a big woman is passed through the fashion agents to 13-year-old girls who, with a little tendency to obesity and social insecurity, commit diets and eventually suffer from anorexia - direct victims of the war of sexes.
Another interesting (appealing and repulsive) reflection of the war of the sexes is pornographic films that reveal the male perspective without any refinement and are proving this point from another angle. For porn, as a product consumed in billions of dollars, was supposed to be part of the social discourse, especially in view of the great influence it has on its consumers, but, to be very astonishing, its talk is negligible. Porn is the black hole of our society. Why? Because it proves that when it comes to the bottom line, the consumer does not want to see sex as lovemaking but to see them fuck aggressively.
For several years now, I have been fiercely opposed to Porn.
Not to the essence of "photographing people making love" - which could have been very beautiful and even artistic, but to the blunt graphic form that is being displayed today in the world. There is very little quality porn in which the penetration and ejaculation are not the main things, there is no objectification of the woman body and can be seen as a connection and intimacy between the couple. Why the hell are they not kissing? Why don’t they look in the eye? To give some illusion of intimacy ... unless porn is meant to give men the fantasy that a woman is only a hole (one or two or three) and that he has to come on her face.
Who will explain to me the logic of this? Why come her on the eye and not on her stomach? Why don't people get up and say I stop consuming a product that humiliates my female friends? my daughter? When you consume it, you encourage it, you strengthen yourself in a bad war.
A man and a woman are sitting opposite me, they are in couples therapy.
At best it's about a wedding ceremony they want me to do for them, and at worst they are in crisis and need help. In any case, it will not be a quarter of an hour before one of them makes the following statement: "... which is very difficult because in certain things we are perfect opposites ..." and his partner will nod vigorously to reinforce the feeling that they are a very special couple. "For example," she complains, "he does not talk anymore and I do not know what he feels". Then he answers: "and she keeps entertaining friends." A closer examination of the beginnings of their relationship during the first days of courtship shows that he has always been so silent, but then she saw it as a sign of masculinity, assertiveness, and power. At that time, he was attracted to her because she was warm, lively and open. Today it's his problem.
Neo-Tantra versus the ancient Tantra
My Tantric work, the Neo-Tantra, is different from the ancient Tantra, which was the domain of monks who had never met a woman at all, by examining the masculine and feminine ways of actually merging them - between the sexes themselves and the sexuality between them.
Ask: "And what other options can be explored by men and women? The answer is that classical, Tibetan, and Hindu Tanta developed in another era (more conservative and traditional) and was therefore very ascetic and masculine.
It sends the practitioners, or monks, to nature to better understand the constant dialogue between the active (masculine) sides and the passive (female) through their reflection in reality - the river cuts the mountain, the snow freezes the grass, the clouds float in the sky, the passive gives an active background - and in fact gives it meaning. Thus sexual abstinence was and still is an inseparable part of this tantric initiation in order to provide the soul with a fertile platform of unsatisfied desire that the resonance is projected onto the entire nature.
The Neo-Tantra (which emanates from a Western society based mostly on the freedom to fall in love) has abolished the principle of abstinence. Neo- tantra says: To achieve the same goal - to study the erotic nature, the balance of the sexual instinct through his reflection in the sublime and the holy - Dive into it! Make friends with him, not alone and metaphorically - but through a spouse. Neo-Tantra takes the principles of classical tantra and applies them in relationships. It believes that through a good relationship (and sometimes a bad one) you can discover all the things that will bring you to balance. Consciously or unconsciously - your partner can be a master.
The demonization of the enemy
In short, neo-tantra is a practical, very earthly theory that has a clear purpose: to marry a man with his opposite. To bring inner peace between the contradictory desires of the soul.
The man is drawn to the woman and afraid of her. The woman is attracted to a man and angry at him. In my opinion, the war of the sexes has not yet surfaced. In addition to the jokes here and there, and in feminist articles, we did not put the great anger between the two sexes on the table.
The reason why the war on the sexes did not surface - only a few attacks by feminists - is because the occupying side still does not recognize that it behaves in a relationship out of fear and not out of freedom. He sits with his guys demonizing the enemy, telling jokes about blondes, watching blue movies and perpetuating the occupation.
You see it in every relationship.
For example, have you noticed that in our society the norm is that women are encouraged to always choose a man who is “more” than her? - in his years a man should be older than his partner in one year at least and must be taller than her .It is very desirable to have higher education, having a career and wages are more rewarding and I want to stop and ask - why? Is there any sort of agreement that women should be less? After all, from a sexual point of view, the woman reaches her peak in her mid-thirties (15 years after the man!). In terms of life expectancy, a woman should marry a man five to five years younger. The only conclusion here is that the advantage of an older man, more educated and higher, serves men in the status quo in the war of the sexes to enable the woman's dependence on her husband.