Healing inter-generational, inter-'gender' rifts - or, 'The Theory of Everything'.

Beliefs that interfere

with needs getting met.


Limiting beliefs.
Warrior
Monkeys share
bananas :-)

monkeys fight (or at least get angry, resentful and petulant, which can *lead* to fighting)
when one monkey gets more than another.

I’ve witnessed this in myself and other humans so often that I am going to posit that we all possess an inherent sense of ‘fairness’, and when that sense is violated? we get angry.

So when someone hoards? there is, or may be? an instinct in the rest of the tribe to balance the scales, to even things out. To make things FAIR, once again, equal. Or equal enough so that it *feels* right to everybody.

Is this the root of war, and hence, warriors?

Is the failure of empathy a holdout from a race of beings that didn’t *possess* a frontal lobe, and therefore could not process and/or did not resonate to, the feelings, needs and emotions of others?

A la Clan of the Cave Bear, I would contend that *this* evolutionary adaption – the ability to feel what others feel (ooh, ooh – connection – Eve and apple? knowledge of the *other’s* thoughts, hence, an awareness of ‘nakedness’? or, exposure of what was once hidden, i.e., ‘what the other person is thinking/feeling?)

The frontal lobes are the brain’s spin doctor. They’re the part that tells us what to say to smooth things over, to unruffle the feathers – they’re our empathetic connectors, our *feelers*, that allow us to *feel* what another person is feelings. See also: Mirror neurons, another ‘new’ concept I read about recently (really, it’s just ‘science’ finally catching up with what we’ve ‘known’ all along – kind of like the new kid in town, the pre-frontal lobes, take a while to be convinced that the old brainstem knows anything. Teaching its metaphorical grandma to ‘suck eggs’ – pre-front is the ‘teenager’ of the human brain, in terms of development.)

***
So. Gathering together the threads:

Warrior: Became so in response to nascent, emerging sense of ‘unfairness’.

This could have gone one of two ways: Toward heightened cooperation; or, toward battling one another.

Perhaps the trend toward the latter came about during a time (or perhaps many times?) of scarcity – one tribe moved into the harsh northern wastelands, and a people that evolved in the softer climes of the Mediterranean (perhaps?) suddenly found their easy ways inadequate to the challenges of this terrain and climate.

They adapted, as humans do, but in the process forfeited much of what had made H. Upright so ‘successful’ as a species up to now: The ability to cooperate.

But with hoarding came other rewards – the ability to survive a long winter.

So the tradeoff became fixed in humanity’s collective recollection – bloody wars were fought in the name of survival, but because a *part* of us still resonates to the pain of the other? an entire fiction was created to ‘spin’ the ‘reason’ for our brutality, our inhumanity to other humans: Religion.

Religion began, and ends, as a justification for (unimaginative?) humans to do what they *think* they must do.

But perhaps, as mentioned above, this is a remnant of ‘faulty’, or, ‘poorly adapted’ genetic structure?

In other words, maybe the genetic mix still contains some of the ‘old’ ‘thinking’, the pre-primate, lizard-brain, reactive, non-feeling kind of approach.

Getting tired.

***
Thus evolved the warrior. And along with religion, or possibly preceding religion, forerunner? came *ritual* - the rites and passages needed to convert a thinking, feeling human being into a – what – war machine? to strip *away* his essential humanity . People began to see other humans as *tools* to meet their own selfish ends (capitalism, anyone?)

It all hooks together. I hope I’ve caught enough here to remember it later.

And with the warrior training, ‘feeling’ became shameful, and thus any beings who maintained any sense of empathy were – lesser, weaker, a detriment to the *perceived* survival needs of the tribe.

So women and children came to be seen as ‘excess’, unnecessary, surplus to requirements, rather than an essential part of the continuation of the race.

Thus began the Othering process – woman was Other, for, by definition, she retained all the ‘weaker’ attributes.

And which races survived? Well, perhaps the Amazons died out because, in the process of adopting the ‘male’ ways, their progeny did not survive? The warring instinct is, perhaps, so directly counter to the instinct for nurture that Amazon babies simply did not make it? Humans, after all, adapted to an exceedingly *long* stretch of ‘childhood’ and infancy compared to any other species. Part and parcel, I suspect? of the whole ‘brain development’ path that humanity happened to take.

So the races/tribes that survived? were the ones where the women *kept* their ‘softness’, their ‘femininity’ – where they *sacrificed* who *they* were for ‘the good of the tribe’.

But so did men! Only men can’t see that any more.

And in fact, there *is* a certain – selection? – process that appears to go on – men select for this ‘survival’ trait in women to complement(?) their ‘need’ to ‘be in charge’, or, dominate.

I contend that the *need to dominate* and the urge to love are – mutually exclusive? and cannot co-exist.

And now there is a great healing trying to take place – to overcome the ‘habits’ of many, many lifetimes, and take advantage of a relative ‘age of plenty’ to return to our original, peaceful ways.

But people are – hard-wired? – to repeat that which their ancestors did? That is, the *pain* is hardwired. Or, perhaps it is that, each new generation, soaked in the brine of unresolved hurts from *previous* generations, absorbs that ‘pain’ directly, and is never fully able to escape it, despite their *own* life experiences being quite different, quite comfortable? (e.g.: Me and *my* parents, for one tiny little example.)

***
Q.E.D. moment:

Belief systems evolve out of lived experience. We ‘modify’ (which suggests a *conscious* process, and *I* don’t think it is, conscious, that is, at least, not for most people) our belief systems to match our experience.

So, posit: To have a change of ‘belief’ (or, perhaps, crisis of ‘faith’?) one MUST HAVE a DIFFERENT EXPERIENCE.

Feed that little human plant, WATER him EVERY SINGLE DAY, and he will come to know, with every fiber of his being, that he is LOVED and LOVABLE.

And, hence, his ‘outmoded’ belief system will fall away, scales from the eyes, chrysalis from the moth?

(side note: Belief systems tend to be particularly adapted to the regions from which they spring – hence the fire-brand, hell-and-damnation matches the miserable, impoverished state/mindset? of so many middle-staters? posit.)



universal field theory (of love)