Bras and Breast Cancer

[Guest guest]

Why so defensive? The choices were pure soul with no desires or lesbian because you said that women don't want men. Simple.

[Guest guest]

I never criticized anyone for defensivness. Though it would not bother me if anyone were. We have some idea no one should ever 'defend' thier position. I have no problem with anyone defending what they believe in.

 

Srila Prabhupada instructed sex for procreation, not recreation. He instructed no sex unless we chant 50 rounds and only if we want a baby. Srila Prabhupada said the householder is brahmacari or celibate. For women that would including remaining brahmacarini. Then there are the vows all take.

 

Please do not misunderstand, I am not coming down on anyone. My point simply is that the minute "breasts" are mentioned in a post, even though its medical, so many men either get giddy like 13 year olds boys making goofy jokes, or they get replused, making "sleep with eyes wide open" comments and taking no responsibility for the lust as theirs, or offensive, even sleezy comments. (Not saying you did any of this.)

 

Too often, when we think of marriage we think of sex. We have lowered our standard to such a degree from the begining of the movement where now, no one thinks much about the high standarnd Prabhuapda set for us. Its almost an automatic anymore, that we think sex and marriage go hand in hand. I guess I dont understand why. We need to remember that when devotee women marry, they do not marry for sex (and I now this first hand as well as from countless godsisters), but to remain celibate and so they can do better service for Krishna. We also need to remember that devotee women should not be viewed as their body or a place to receive pleasure from. These are too often forgotten. We are all here to serve Krishna and we can't get off the bodily cocept if we can't at least try to give up sex. Those are the vows we took at initiation. Le'ts not sit idly by and allow the lowered standarnd to become the norm. This post is not about the uninitiated.

[Guest guest]

P.S. Now please dont get mad, but lesbian accusations (not just from you but many men like to go this route) just makes women think the reason men accuse sincere, staunch brahmacarini's of being a lesbian is because they want to have sex with her and can't, and that no men can, not even his friends, so her vow of celibacy has left them feeling thwarted, she's off the playing fieled, or he even feels insulted by her celibacy. I am only explaining how this sounds to women. It doesnt work, it disgusts us that men would even think such thoughts, and just makes women think such men must be really frustrated to insult them in such a way. What to speak of its a false accustion in 99% of the cases, so to falsly accuse someone of soemthing like this should be taken seriously. Its an offense to Vaisnavi's of the Lord, so lets put a stop to it. It was Srila Prabhupada who instructed all women to become celibate.

[Avinash 0]

One guest wrote,

"If you ask me, it is easy to hide the true facts. Hence the wisdom of realising the fact that HE is always sleeping with OPEN eyes..!!"

 

Another guest wrote,

"What the heck does THAT mean? Women are not sleeping with open eyes?"

 

To the second guest: -

 

I may be wrong, but I feel that when the first guest used the word "He", he was not using this as a pronoun for man. Rather he was using it for God. Perhaps, he is trying to say that even though God may appear to be sleeping, He is, in reality, wide awake (what we call as yoganidra).

 

I repeat that this is what I could understand from his post. May be he really meant what you understood. Or, may be that he meant something neither of us understood.

[Avinash 0]

To the guest who wrote the post titled "No more lesbian katha":-

 

Is it you who wrote the post titled "Ahhhhh such men"? You are saying that you were talking about Vaisnavis. But it was not clear from your post "Ahhhhh such men". It seemed as if you were talking about women in general and men in general.

 

If you were talking only about the women who have become "staunch rahmacarinis", then I agree with you that it is wrong on the part of some men to accuse them of being lesbians. But I would not say that these men make such accusations because they want to have sex with her and they can't. May be this is the reason. Or, may be there is some other reason. Whatever be the reason, I agree that they are not justified in making these accusations.

[Guest guest]

Yes, it is me who made that post, and its perfectly clear from a women's perspective, though maybe it is not clear from a mans. So to clarify, I was never putting men down or saying there should not be marriage, I was only saying the marriage should be based on Krishna consciuosness and not on sex enjoyment. (I would seldom talk of men in general or women in general, but only of devotees.)

 

I respect your opinion that this is not the reason men make accusations about lesbianism. I also believe it is not always the reason they do this, but far too many have said such offesnive things, so us women can't help but suspect their reasoning (and not yours) is based on their own frustrations due to our choice to not indulge with them but to select celibacy instead.

[Guest guest]

Avinash,

 

Thank you. This is why its good to have more than one or two people talking, to hear others ways of viewing it. I had never thought of it that way, though it did not appear that way to me at all, but its something to consider. I still dont' think so to be honest. I still am inclined to think it had to do with him blaming the lust of all men on woman (and not that all men are saying like this), but I will give your point more consideration now.

[Guest guest]

Last post was in reply to this:

 

 

One guest wrote,

"If you ask me, it is easy to hide the true facts. Hence the wisdom of realising the fact that HE is always sleeping with OPEN eyes..!!"

 

Another guest wrote,

"What the heck does THAT mean? Women are not sleeping with open eyes?"

 

To the second guest: -

 

I may be wrong, but I feel that when the first guest used the word "He", he was not using this as a pronoun for man. Rather he was using it for God. Perhaps, he is trying to say that even though God may appear to be sleeping, He is, in reality, wide awake (what we call as yoganidra).

 

I repeat that this is what I could understand from his post. May be he really meant what you understood. Or, may be that he meant something neither of us understood.

 

 

[Avinash 0]

Here is why I made that interpretation:-

 

His post was,

"If you ask me, it is easy to hide the true facts. Hence the wisdom of realising the fact that HE is always sleeping with OPEN eyes..!!"

 

What is the connection between hiding the true facts and sleeping with OPEN eyes? I can guess that aince somebody is sleeping with OPEN eyes, one can not hide true facts from him. Even though people do not sleep with eyes completely shut (may be there are some), we can not say that they are aware of what is going on around them. Even though their eyes are partially open, they can not notice if you try to hide true facts from them. This is a very common knowledge, so this must be known to the guest also. Therefore I do not think that he was using the word "HE" as a pronoun to an ordinary male mortal when he tried to make a connection between hiding the true facts and sleeping with eyes OPEN. The only one who sleeps with eyes OPEN is, as per Puranas, Visnu. He is mentioned to be sleeping using his yoga-nidra. It is mentioned that even though He appears to be sleeping, He knows all the things that are going on in the universe. Many people who participate in this forum have some knowledge of Puranas. So, it is very much possible that the guest was also aware of Visnu appearing to be sleeping but completely aware.

___

 

Well this is just an interpretation. I think I have done enough advocacy, even though I am not an advocate by profession. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Guest guest]

I don't know. Puranas, Vishnu and yoga-nidra may be wishful thinking, tho humble and innocent. What I understand is, there is no need for God to sleep with His eyes open. Not important at all. God always sees everything, eyes open or eyes shut.

 

What to speak of emphasize as HIS eyes open (caps), as if someone would get Him 'unless' He did kept on his toes.

 

'True facts' indicated that mortal man had to keep his eyes open to get the true facts that woman would sneak up on him in the middle of the night and cause his lust, therefore not taking responsibilty for it himself. Though also his struggle becomes aparent.

 

Therefore this did not sound like a reference to God to me, but you have a right to your understanding.

[Guest guest]

To Bhaktavasya in good spirit:

 

Many women are afraid of their first mammogram, but there’s no need to worry. By taking a few minutes each day for a week preceding the exam, and doing the following practice exercises, you will be totally prepared. And you can do this right in your own home!

 

 

 

Exercise 1

 

Open your refrigerator door and insert one breast between the door and the main box. Have one of your strongest friends slam the door shut and lean on the door for good measure. Hold that position for five seconds (while you hold your breath). Repeat again, in case the first time wasn’t effective enough.

 

 

 

Exercise 2

 

Visit your garage at 3 am when the temperature of the cement floor is just perfect. Take off your clothes and lie comfortably on the floor with one breast wedged under the rear tire of the car. Ask a friend to slowly back the car up until your breast is sufficiently flattened and chilled. Turn over and repeat for the other breast.

 

 

 

Exercise 3

 

Freeze two metal bookends overnight. Strip to the waist. Invite a stranger into the room. Press the bookends against one of your breasts. Smash the bookends together as hard as you can. Set an appointment with the stranger to meet next week and do it again!!

 

 

 

CONGRATULATIONS! Now you have nothing at all to worry about when you go for your mammogram!

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Avinash 0]

To Dr Jayanth G Paraki,

You have written that it is illogical to draw any correlation between wearing of brassiere and breast cancer.

 

How do you explain the statistical findings reported in the first post of this thread?

 

Thank you.

 

[Guest guest]

I would like to see the statistics explained too.

 

Hope I can help men to understand that devotee women are not wearing bra's to perk up fat and water, attracting male devotees to look at them there. Nondevotee women hate it when a man looks there instead of their face, what to speak of devotee women.

 

One additional point worth making is breasts can become such a serious medical problem (and please, no more jokes, lets stay on topic as "medical") in ways you may not be aware of. I know of a young women, 19 or 20 years old, approximately. She had surgery to get her breast size REDUCED. They were causing her a LOT of PAIN. She had a knife put to them, this is how bad it was to carry them around all day. Now, she is much happier because her breasts are SMALLER. So while men may think its all about attracting them, (or subconsciously wishing so), we're really just trying to be practical and healthy. If anything, we're trying to get breasts out of our way, and reduce body consciousness. If that means wearing a bra, not wearing a bra but instead a choli, if it means reduction surgery, anything, we will generally do it.

[theist 1]

I believe you. I think you describe the exception to the rule though.

[Guest guest]

If you mean the girl who had reduction surgery is the exception to the rule, yes, I agree.

 

If you mean the entire post was the exception to the rule, no, its not.

 

Thanks. No offense intended.

[theist 1]

Well at least in America women are seen flaunting their breasts all over the place. Certainly devotee women are trying to rise above this tendancy, but old conditioning dies hard.

 

It is not just women. Bramacaris in the front of the arati service often look back to see if they are being noticed by the women in the back. Women adopt shy mannerisms to attract men. Many preachers preach to ganner respect from the opposite sex and others.

 

I am not fooled by all the religious garb and habits. Few there are that break free and transcend this game at any one time.

 

This is the world of pretense afterall.

 

Women attracting men by playing off the man's attraction to breasts is as old as the human form. Denial of this obvious fact is not the same as transcending it.

 

It is actually the perverted relection of Krsna drawing dolphins on Radha's breasts.

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Not necessarily flaunting all over the place but they just happen to be noticeable.

[theist 1]

Noticeable yes, but flaunting is pretty common.

[Guest guest]

Mr Cook has to check his mail.

[Guest guest]

Again, I am only speaking of devotee women, though being Americanized is suppose to take away from that somehow. Men want pure devotee women while the men have anartha's. We can remember, men too are Americanized.

 

Moving on, having lived in a brahmacarini ashrama I highly doubt women are flaunting their breasts. I have heard of more than one brahmacarini get chastized by some male authority for dancing because, while she was dancing, he, or his godbrother, looked UNDER her saree and saw her tight choli. You know, the ones that are suppose to be so tight so we don't have to wear bras (as the original post was about)? He became sexually aggitated but she got the blame. When her mind was on the arati, he was going out of his way to look up her saree. This is no tale, I've seen it in action more than once.

 

Old habits don't die hard when you have had good training. Unless brahmacarini's are no longer getting good training, I don't know. When I was in the ashrama you would have your head handed to on a silver platter if you flaunted your breasts! Besides, we didn't want to. We moved into the tempple to develop love of Krishna, not all this other nonsense.

 

Yes, NONdevotee women have been flaunting their breasts to attract men since the beginning of time. But for the devotee woman it is an embarassment.

 

Many nondevotee women don't like to do that either. Its not because someone is a woman and a nondevotee, that they are no good. There are pious "karmi" women out there too. Now, if only we can get a book to them.

 

I agree that shyness is too often a manipulative game. There is true shyness also. However, since iskcon preached shyness as one of the few qualities women were allowed to have that was "good," and all to often we were told what dogs we were, or if women were a bold (as in preacher), or strong and knowledgeable woman, these things were looked down on. Therefore some women tried very hard to be shy but it was not "them." It was false for some. But to fit in the mold they were told they must fit, they put on a pretense of shyness in hopes it would one day "take." However, the more manipulatives women did not fake shyness only to control men but to control everyone. If only they had been taught it was ok to be themselves.

 

However, there are some very sincere, nice, lovely women who are shy. They should not be lumped in or assumed to be manipulative. Until you meet a person and get to know them, don't assume the worst ahead of time.

 

I suspect many of the real problems and misunderstandings men are pointing out here have deeper roots in broken hearts or damaged relationships.

 

[Guest guest]

 

Not necessarily flaunting all over the place but they just happen to be noticeable.

 

 

Good start in trying to be understanding. Men are also noticeable when they wear those see-through type of dhotis with T-shirts instead of a long kirta that would cover them properly.

 

Or when they are unconscious about the pleat in the front of their dhoti and it opens for all to see. I am not speaking of accidents. We are all adults and should not loose it when such an accident occurs. I am speaking of unconsciousness. Though in this case I wonder if its because men think women have to pay attention to chastity but they don't have to think about it. Not so. Everyone should be considerate in these ways.

[theist 1]

I was speaking of basic human nature and not wanting to get into some gender war. What goes on in these temple situations is not my concern really.

 

For myself, I am not blaming anyone for anything. It's a mutually agreed upon dance.I just refuse to believe that someone has left the dance floor because of their wearing robes, sari's or shaving their heads.

[Guest guest]

No gener wars intended, just pointing out facts that go unrecognized.

 

I understand not having much concern over what goes on in temples. Can't say I am so fond of it myself. But if the temples had not been started, we would not know about Krishna consciousness or if we did somehow get the basic idea, we would have had no place to go for training or worship. The temples are important, although they could use a face lift internally.

 

I agree that a shaved head or robes/saree does not automatically make one qualified spiritually. But saw that as another topic. If not, simply put, got to get to know each person, male or female, before we know if they are qualified to wear robes. I would hate to be an automatic skeptic right off the bat.

[Guest guest]

Hare Krsna!

Krsna explains to Arjuna that lust is the all-devouring sinful enemy of man. It resides within the body, mind and intelligence. With yoga, Krsna recommends that we slay this demon. Prabhupada has allowed for our temples to have both men and women, both single and married. That is because in the western countries, he found that the sexes were allready mixing so freely. What he gave us was the formula for controlling our senses. He also said that 99% of his disciples would end up getting married. There is nothing wrong with a KC marriage; it is much better than false renunciation. Actually, having children in KC is great preaching! Let us not blame the opposite sex for our tendency toward lusty desires. Although everyone should dress appropriately and act properly, it is not someone else's fault if you are feeling lusty. Take some responsibility for yourself, please! Pesonally, I would like to see a mature effort made to create a devotee-matching website. There are so many faithful and wonderful boys and girls who are wanting to serve their guru by becoming householders. Better we fully support this ashram with dignity than have such nice devotees either meet in an unauthorized way or go outside to non-devotees for marriage.

Hoping you are immersed in spreading the Holy Name around...

 

Sincerely,

 

Mahashakti dasa

mahashaktidasa@krsnaconsciousness.org

ACBSP/AGTSP

[theist 1]

Guest you misunderstand. I am not making a statment against temples, sari's or shaved heads. I simply know that the false ego games get transfered to that context. Some want to appear very renounced. Why? Well renounciation is one of Krsna's opulences that attracts. So artifical renounciation on display is simply subtle sex desire on display as I see it.

 

Or the modest mataji who knows she is pretty acting real shy while wearing ankle bells announcing her presence everywhere she walks.

 

We cannot so easily escape our initial mistaken mentality of wanting to be the most attractive person.

 

Temple life is very good as it is structured in such a way as to give full facility of attaining actual krsna consciousness. I am just stating the obvious that there is a difference in attaining temple life and attaining full Krsna consciousness.

 

Myself I have lived in temples briefly. I found it too austere. My present lifestyle is certainly far below regulated temple life.