Some of you have recently asked the question whether there are moral and spiritual differences between men and women.
From a strictly physical, physiological and biological point of view, the differences exist, as the man has a different anatomy from that of the woman. The hormone secretions, relative to the sex glands or gonads, are different - I think you all know that one produces testosterone, and the other progesterone - and these secretions perform different activities in the sexual sphere: however the other hormonal secretions , and the very functioning of the other glands are identical in man and woman.
And up to this point I think you all agree. Yes, there are some small differences on a physiological level (heart rate, blood pressure, type of breathing) but not such as to justify a clear difference in behavior between men and women. [...]
The woman, unfairly called the "weaker sex", is much stronger and more resilient than any of you can imagine. On the other hand, the gestation period proves it: which being she would be able to adapt to a situation like that of pregnancy if not a strong, resistant and healthy creature?
Therefore the female, outside the gestational period, has the same abilities and possibilities as the male, and is able to comply and carry out all the activities that are currently still the prerogative of the "stronger sex"; this for what concerns a strictly physical point of view of the problem.
If we then look at the problem from a different perspective, then it is even more absurd that there can be differences. In fact, there is no intellectual diversification, and this, especially for you who follow a certain spiritual teaching, should be easy to understand.
If the level of an individual is given by the interaction of the mental plane with the physical structure of the brain, if, therefore, the main impulse comes from the mental plane, then you understand for yourself how intelligence cannot be linked to something physical but , precisely being linked to mental matter, it is totally free and outside of what is the "sexual component". In fact, the mental body (seat of intellectual activity) has no difference in relation to two individuals who, in the physical world, live one as a man and the other as a woman.
There are, then, differences of a moral nature ... or maybe yes ... but these are certainly in favor of the female creature. It is well known, in fact, that the female enjoys a greater sensitivity (I am referring, of course, to normal cases without psychological implications of rejection of a certain role and things like that) thanks to the wonderful phenomenon of motherhood of which she is the protagonist.
Now this greater sensitivity with respect to the male, even if limited to his own children, is experienced as a symptom of "weakness" and "fragility", while it should be considered as one of the goals of the individual's evolutionary path.
In fact, sensitivity is that inner feeling that helps to overcome one's selfishness and to acquire greater humility, as well as to achieve greater self-confidence. In particular, then, this type of sensitivity towards one's children is, for example, a symptom of a good evolutionary point reached, so much so that one of the main goals of the evolutionary path of individuals is to be able to have the same sensitivity with all children, even when these are not their children: the real mother (and so it should also be for a real father) should be able to be "sensitive" to all children even when they are not hers.
And it is above all for this reason that the male should learn to look at this sensitivity not as a characteristic of the female sex, in some cases, to be “endured”, but as something that should also belong to him.
Remember, however, that in doing this man can find himself facing considerable difficulties: in fact, he unconsciously asks the woman for "sensitivity" or "fragility", since centuries of conditioning have led him to feel the most " strong ", or the one who protects, and having to accept that the woman not only does not need to be protected by him but, on the contrary, should be a subject to imitate, it does not suit his need to prove himself to be strong , and therefore to have someone to protect.
So much so that in many cases the female, given her sensitivity, in order to satisfy this male need, to help the male in overcoming these impediments, pretends to be weak and in need of protection.
Thinking about the theory of evolution, it is clear that the succession of female and male incarnations makes individualities the same: the only differences that can be found are those on a physical level and those we mentioned at the beginning of our discussion.
Returning, instead, to observe the problem from a moral point of view - and in the light of the theory ofevolution - one could conclude by saying that the woman, precisely because of that sensitivity that makes her receptive to the problems and needs of her child, could be considered - at least for this aspect - more evolved than man.
This receptivity is, at the beginning of the evolutionary path, instinctive, and is closely linked to reproduction, to motherhood.
As evolution increases, the fact is no longer instinctive, but is integrated into the "feel”Of that individuality. Thus, the alternation of existences - now as a male, now as a female - means that all individuals (at least those who have a good number of existences behind them) have the same potential for "sensitivity" and, absurdly , it may happen that an individual who has integrated into his "feeling" that great gift that is receptivity towards the problems of others, once embodied in a male body, denies that sensitivity through conditioning, through education, through stereotypy, and then pays with the pain the consequences of this foolish attitude of his.
To conclude, therefore, and give an answer to what has been asked, io I say: there are no differences between man and woman, except those mentioned and the differences that, instead, are noticed are imposed by education, by tradition, and exist only on a mental level; indeed, if one were to make a calculation of the moral qualities between man and woman, certainly, in principle, the feminine ones would be greater, since the phallocratic society in which you still live stimulates the female to practice in achieving some virtues, some important gifts such as humility, knowing how to put oneself aside to let those who deserve go on, which are typical of an evolved individual.
So not only does male supremacy not exist but even, on closer inspection among the various facets that reality presents to you, the woman has a certain superiority over the male; I don't want the boys for this!
But, on the other hand, when they are able to go among others without discrimination, with less selfishness, with simplicity, humility and feminine sensitivity, then one can really hope for a better future for everyone. Vito
Readings for the interior: every day, a short spiritual reading of the Ifior Circle and of the Florence 77 Circle, on Whatsapp.
(Read only, cannot comment) To subscribe
Aphorisms of the Ifior Circle, on Wednesday on Facebook
Privacy policy of this site to consult before commenting, or subscribing to feeds.
On a moral level, I have the impression that women are more inclined to loyalty to the family. I believe that the maternity bond is generally far superior to that of paternity.
I share, because I do not feel the differences between male and female on a spiritual level.
The post is very clear. but in society there is still a long way to go if we think about how much violence too many women still suffer from their own companions.
Yes, there are no differences between male and female but only an atavistic conditioning that we still carry with us and that "forces" women to have to prove their worth.
In reality there is nothing to prove ...