SarathW wrote:As Buddhist we all understand the meaning of the fetter “Mana”. Thought that someone is higher , lower, or equal is due to not understanding Anatta. We all are different aggregates. So we can’t compare each other. Even two atoms are not identical. As far as we understand that we all are different, there is no problem. We should not promote any suggestions to separate, based on creed, color, sex, ethnic back ground religion or any of those discriminations.Buddha Dhamma has only one taste - the taste of freedom. Thats all we talk, nothing else.
SDC wrote:We shouldn't make any changes that perpetuate our differences.
Our differences don't mean anything, and shouldn't mean anything.
Let's all agree on this - certain topics are touchy. No matter how clever you think you're being, no matter how righteous your intention, it is likely your words may not be accepted by all involved. Be ready for the consequences or, dare I say, DON'T POST.
Aloka wrote:Annapurna wrote:
How about having more female mods here?
Right now, women are underrepresented...
And how about getting a protected area for women here, like in E Sangha, however small, 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?
Sensitive topics would certainly benefit.
As a woman myself I'm wondering why women would need a "protected area" ? If women have to have a special area why not have similar areas for lesbian, gay and transgendered members as well ----and also for teenagers and....perhaps for vegetarians?
I think women can be just as domineering in discussions as men if they want to be - and personally its no problem for me to interact with others on a forum whatever their sexuality happens to be.
Just a personal opinion though.
Kim O'Hara wrote:pilgrim wrote:How about one for Asian Buddhists? and one for Youths? Unless it serves a clearly identifiable purpose, I don't see good reason to divide and subdivide ourselves.
I will go a step further: if something can't be said to everyone, it is possibly (probably?) not Right Speech.pilgrim wrote:When posting here, I don't even notice the gender behind the monikers used.
Notice? A lot of the time you can't even know unless the member has mentioned it.
Just quickly - no checking or anything - can you tell me the gender of skydancer, catmoon, Ayu, songhill, Astus, Chris, seekeroftruth, termite, jrh001, pink_trike, fig tree? They are all good DW usernames.
My own username is gender-ambiguous and some of you may remember that I posted regularly to e-Sangha for a year before anyone knew my gender. I suggest that means it can't be terribly important.
Finally, even when the member gives the information, you (sadly) can't be sure they are telling the truth - and a rule or policy that can't be monitored or policed is a waste of time and energy, IMHO.
AN 5.200 wrote:"Furthermore, there is the case where the mind of a monk, when attending to self-identity, doesn't leap up at self-identity, doesn't grow confident, steadfast, or released in self-identity. But when attending to the cessation of self-identity, his mind leaps up at the cessation of self-identity, grows confident, steadfast, & released in the cessation of self-identity. When his mind is rightly-gone, rightly developed, has rightly risen above, gained release, and become disjoined from self-identity, then whatever fermentations, torments, & fevers there are that arise in dependence on self-identity, he is released from them. He does not experience that feeling. This is expounded as the escape from self-identity.
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.
Dan74 wrote:I think while it's definitely worthwhile to examine how we form identity around gender and cling to it (a lifelong pursuit?) in the meantime, some measures may help make a place comfortable for both genders. So encouraging female members and having more female mods may be some of them. .
Aloka wrote:Dan74 wrote:I think while it's definitely worthwhile to examine how we form identity around gender and cling to it (a lifelong pursuit?) in the meantime, some measures may help make a place comfortable for both genders. So encouraging female members and having more female mods may be some of them. .
As a female member myself, I haven't noticed women generally being discouraged here, so I don't really understand why they need to be encouraged any more than men are. I also think that if a woman is able to take part in a robust debate she doesn't need to be treated differently, or like fluffy pink candy-floss just because she's female ! .
Regarding mods, my personal opinion is that they should be chosen not for their gender but for their calm and reasoned communication skills, ability to take a neutral rather than an emotional stance in disputes - and also have a good knowledge of the Dhamma.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 5 guests