Too many male mods here and no woman section

Tell us how you think the forum can be improved. We will listen.

Re: Too many male mods here and no woman section

Postby Cittasanto » Tue Jan 15, 2013 8:53 pm

Mr Man wrote:I think it is worth remembering the context that originally brought this thread about. If a member of some length of time who has made a fair contribution, feels uncomfortable or as if they feel they have been treated without sensitivity or whatever, I think we should reflect on the situation and see if there is a need or possibility for change.

I would also note that there were two interrelated monastic orders created not one combined order. And although I haven't really looked at the nuns rule, as I understand that there are some rules that are gender specific and rules that were put in place to protect women from men.

This involved two long standing members with only a week between them joining the site.
The monastic set up wasn't intended for laypeople, but that is a simple and correct assessment, although the only rules I can think of involve requisites.
This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!
With Metta
Upāsaka Cittasanto
Blog, - Some Suttas Translated, Ajahn Chah.
"Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."
User avatar
Cittasanto
 
Posts: 5751
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin

Re: Too many male mods here and no woman section

Postby beeblebrox » Wed Jan 16, 2013 4:48 pm

alan... wrote:all differences are delusion.


Hi Alan, I think that we should take care that we don't live in clouds.

Retro posted something about not grasping self-identity... I'm not sure how he reads it, but I don't think it means that everyone suddenly becomes similar like oatmeal, and that their needs also become similar. That's absurd. I think it just means that we don't paste an identity over an experience, anymore.

What does the experience tell us? Does it tell us that everything (or everyone) is the same? Is everyone treated in the same way? Do you actually see this in real life, even at a Buddhist temple or monastery? What about all of the different ways of looking at the practice in between traditions, or even within the same tradition?

You don't see the separation in between the monks and nuns, and the different ways that they handle their affairs? Are you familiar with the way that nuns are required to act around the monks? Are there any agreement about whether the bhikkhuni lineage are valid in Theravada, even when we look at the way it's practiced only in Western? Not to burst your bubble, there are even some western bhikkhus who don't think that there should be bhikkhunis.

I think that when something is said (such as the Buddha Dhamma having one taste), and it isn't shown to be the case, then it's mere idealism, wishful thinking, or even hypocrisy. We should be careful with these in our dhamma practice.

We should always look at the reality the way it is... learn how to live within it skillfully, and with peace, without any greed, aversion (especially to the differences), and delusion (especially with the idea that everything should be seen as the same... as if they're all the one body of Brahma, or some nonsense like that).

Of course, I'm not trying to argue that there should be a women's only section... but I think it's overreaction to say that these would draw all the women away from us, and that they wouldn't be interested in participate with all of us anymore. Let's not worry like that, Alan.

:anjali:
User avatar
beeblebrox
 
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: Too many male mods here and no woman section

Postby BubbaBuddhist » Wed Jan 16, 2013 5:48 pm

retrofuturist wrote::goodpost:

There's certain topics I won't touch with a bargepole. You know the kind I mean - the ones that no matter what you say, someone is going to project their dissatisfaction with the world onto you.

One bitten, twice shy.

Metta,
Retro. :)


You have achieved enlightenment, Paul. Why didn't you tell me? :tongue:

BuB
Author of Redneck Buddhism: or Will You Reincarnate as Your Own Cousin?
User avatar
BubbaBuddhist
 
Posts: 640
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 5:55 am
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee

Re: Too many male mods here and no woman section

Postby alan... » Wed Jan 16, 2013 8:21 pm

beeblebrox wrote:
alan... wrote:all differences are delusion.


Hi Alan, I think that we should take care that we don't live in clouds.

Retro posted something about not grasping self-identity... I'm not sure how he reads it, but I don't think it means that everyone suddenly becomes similar like oatmeal, and that their needs also become similar. That's absurd. I think it just means that we don't paste an identity over an experience, anymore.

What does the experience tell us? Does it tell us that everything (or everyone) is the same? Is everyone treated in the same way? Do you actually see this in real life, even at a Buddhist temple or monastery? What about all of the different ways of looking at the practice in between traditions, or even within the same tradition?

You don't see the separation in between the monks and nuns, and the different ways that they handle their affairs? Are you familiar with the way that nuns are required to act around the monks? Are there any agreement about whether the bhikkhuni lineage are valid in Theravada, even when we look at the way it's practiced only in Western? Not to burst your bubble, there are even some western bhikkhus who don't think that there should be bhikkhunis.

I think that when something is said (such as the Buddha Dhamma having one taste), and it isn't shown to be the case, then it's mere idealism, wishful thinking, or even hypocrisy. We should be careful with these in our dhamma practice.

We should always look at the reality the way it is... learn how to live within it skillfully, and with peace, without any greed, aversion (especially to the differences), and delusion (especially with the idea that everything should be seen as the same... as if they're all the one body of Brahma, or some nonsense like that).

Of course, I'm not trying to argue that there should be a women's only section... but I think it's overreaction to say that these would draw all the women away from us, and that they wouldn't be interested in participate with all of us anymore. Let's not worry like that, Alan.

:anjali:



we are on a forum chief. not in a temple. on a forum all differences are utterly imagined. if a woman posts and never openly says "i'm a woman" or otherwise implies it, no one would know. the same goes for guys obviously, if you don't say or imply your gender, it remains ambiguous and irrelevant. separating people by gender on a forum is absurd. in real life there is a lot of conflict about it, the pali canon talks about it and some temples today go by those rules and others don't even let women ordain. that's life for you. no bubbles burst. in reality though, men and women can follow the same path to reach enlightenment. separation may be a good idea in temples so that there is no urge for people to start fraternizing in ways that are not conducive to dhamma and lead to lust. for example in the zen temple i go to the men and women are separated by housing but they share the temple and grounds. this way everything is fair and equal but they're not sharing a roof which could promote inappropriate behavior. but other than situations like that separation is very backwards. women should not have to follow the rules in the vinaya about how they act around male venerables and all that. those rules were only created so the buddha and his sangha wouldn't be washed away in a flood of outrage for having allowed women to ordain. today he wouldn't have made those rules but back then women were considered lesser than men and allowing them to ordain was a huge deal, he created those rules just to keep the peace. even so, he was still showing major compassion and was super progressive for 500 BC.

as far as your order: "Let's not worry like that, Alan". some posts of the women on here would end up in the womens only forum and would not be seen by me. this is a fact. not all of them but this would create threads not visible to me or depending on how it works, threads that i wouldn't be able to share in the discussion. and surely, as much as on the regular forum, some would be fantastic and i would be missing out by not being able to see them or be involved in them, as well as the rest of the men. this would be a shame as i want to be able to hear what everyone has to say. and it is something to worry about. so i reject your order and retain my freedom to worry how i please.
Last edited by alan... on Wed Jan 16, 2013 8:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
alan...
 
Posts: 824
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2012 9:37 pm

Re: Too many male mods here and no woman section

Postby Mawkish1983 » Wed Jan 16, 2013 8:34 pm

alan... wrote:those rules were only created so the buddha and his sangha wouldn't be washed away in a flood of outrage for having allowed women to ordain. today he wouldn't have made those rules but back then women were considered lesser than men and allowing them to ordain was a huge deal, he created those rules just to keep the peace. even so, he was still showing major compassion and was super progressive for 500 BC.
Off topic, I know, but I'm interested about this idea that the Buddha wouldn't have set the same vinaya rules now as he did then, and the reasons put forward to explain why. Could anyone point me at some relevant reading about this idea?
Mawkish1983
 
Posts: 1175
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:46 am
Location: Essex, UK

Re: Too many male mods here and no woman section

Postby alan... » Wed Jan 16, 2013 8:36 pm

Mawkish1983 wrote:
alan... wrote:those rules were only created so the buddha and his sangha wouldn't be washed away in a flood of outrage for having allowed women to ordain. today he wouldn't have made those rules but back then women were considered lesser than men and allowing them to ordain was a huge deal, he created those rules just to keep the peace. even so, he was still showing major compassion and was super progressive for 500 BC.
Off topic, I know, but I'm interested about this idea that the Buddha wouldn't have set the same vinaya rules now as he did then, and the reasons put forward to explain why. Could anyone point me at some relevant reading about this idea?


"life of the buddha according to the pali canon" by bhikkhu nanamoli. most of the rules are covered in there in a section called "formation of the order of nuns."
alan...
 
Posts: 824
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2012 9:37 pm

Re: Too many male mods here and no woman section

Postby Mawkish1983 » Wed Jan 16, 2013 8:38 pm

alan... wrote:
Mawkish1983 wrote:
alan... wrote:those rules were only created so the buddha and his sangha wouldn't be washed away in a flood of outrage for having allowed women to ordain. today he wouldn't have made those rules but back then women were considered lesser than men and allowing them to ordain was a huge deal, he created those rules just to keep the peace. even so, he was still showing major compassion and was super progressive for 500 BC.
Off topic, I know, but I'm interested about this idea that the Buddha wouldn't have set the same vinaya rules now as he did then, and the reasons put forward to explain why. Could anyone point me at some relevant reading about this idea?


"life of the buddha according to the pali canon" by bhikkhu nanamoli. most of the rules are covered in there in a section called "formation of the order of nuns."

Great, thank you
Mawkish1983
 
Posts: 1175
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:46 am
Location: Essex, UK

Re: Too many male mods here and no woman section

Postby beeblebrox » Wed Jan 16, 2013 9:37 pm

alan... wrote:as far as your order: "Let's not worry like that, Alan". some posts of the women on here would end up in the womens only forum and would not be seen by me. this is a fact. not all of them but this would create threads not visible to me or depending on how it works, threads that i wouldn't be able to share in the discussion. and surely, as much as on the regular forum, some would be fantastic and i would be missing out by not being able to see them or be involved in them, as well as the rest of the men. this would be a shame as i want to be able to hear what everyone has to say. and it is something to worry about. so i reject your order and retain my freedom to worry how i please.


I'm sorry if I thought that the scenario that you've made was quite implausible... and not only that, you even went as far as calling it a fact. You don't see anything wrong with this?
User avatar
beeblebrox
 
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: Too many male mods here and no woman section

Postby alan... » Wed Jan 16, 2013 9:51 pm

beeblebrox wrote:
alan... wrote:as far as your order: "Let's not worry like that, Alan". some posts of the women on here would end up in the womens only forum and would not be seen by me. this is a fact. not all of them but this would create threads not visible to me or depending on how it works, threads that i wouldn't be able to share in the discussion. and surely, as much as on the regular forum, some would be fantastic and i would be missing out by not being able to see them or be involved in them, as well as the rest of the men. this would be a shame as i want to be able to hear what everyone has to say. and it is something to worry about. so i reject your order and retain my freedom to worry how i please.


I'm sorry if I thought that the scenario that you've made up here was quite implausible... and not only that, you even went as far as calling it a fact. You don't see anything wrong with this?


if there is a woman only section, some women will use it. perhaps not an absolute fact but close to it. what are the odds that no women would use it???

okay so 99.9999% chance that there will be at least one thread in the womens only section and i won't be able to see/interact with it and that's lame. happy now?

in all actuality it would be used frequently and there would be plenty of threads and i wouldn't be happy about not being able to see/interact with them. why are you making this so difficult? do you really think that this idea is totally outlandish? if there is the creation of a womens only forum do you think it would be totally unused? or perhaps you are implying that there wouldn't be any threads worth reading or interacting with?

i'm at a loss as to what you're trying to prove. especially with all your talk about the separation of men and women in real life and how it's happening and is bursting my bubble or whatever, which seemed to imply that my statement that differences between men and women are delusion is untrue.

alan... wrote:all differences are delusion


beeblebrox wrote:Hi Alan, I think that we should take care that we don't live in clouds.


i was saying i think men and women are the same and you seem to be implying otherwise. how do you feel about it? is this kind of thing good? should bhikkhunis be more or less subordinate to bhikkhus? i obviously think this idea is abhorrent but i'm wondering where you're coming from since you don't seem to like my stance on the situation(s).
Last edited by alan... on Wed Jan 16, 2013 9:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
alan...
 
Posts: 824
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2012 9:37 pm

Re: Too many male mods here and no woman section

Postby beeblebrox » Wed Jan 16, 2013 9:53 pm

So, you think that you won't be able to see these threads, and that you won't be able to participate in them? You know this for a fact, how?
User avatar
beeblebrox
 
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: Too many male mods here and no woman section

Postby Cittasanto » Wed Jan 16, 2013 10:05 pm

Hi Alan,
just to point something out, the suggestion was not for an invisible area rather for "an area where female members cnas share some women issues in an atmosphere that we decide, perhaps we self-moderate sisterly, an area where men and male mods are heartily invited guests, to read and participate, but not welcome to domineer any discussions, as it is can happen now"
This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!
With Metta
Upāsaka Cittasanto
Blog, - Some Suttas Translated, Ajahn Chah.
"Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."
User avatar
Cittasanto
 
Posts: 5751
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin

Re: Too many male mods here and no woman section

Postby retrofuturist » Wed Jan 16, 2013 10:06 pm

Greetings,

I think this particular suggestion has now run its course...

Some good points and have been made throughout the topic and I think we can leave it there.

Thank you everyone for your participation, thoughts and suggestions.

May all beings be happy ~ regardless of the conventional divisions we may allow to come between us.

Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14674
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Previous

Return to Suggestion box

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests