It's probably because I experience the boundary between external and internal stimuli as fluid and it sometimes drives me crazy that I can't see a razor-sharp line here. But that's a whole other topic :)
HaHa, fitting the ocean into a cup gives a good example!
Here, you may find that interesting, it touches what I wanted to express to you:
I'll have to watch this another time when I have more to use. Thank you for sharing.
One syntax I learned a long time ago for what you describe is our perception is based on a sliding focus that was referred to as the assemblage point. Reason is a high calibration of it being rigidly placed on one spot. Which obviously has its advantages. However, there are many positions and possibilities of experience and perception that can be had from even the minutest shift in that focal point.
Other cultures would often refer to those who could make these shifts and stop them with precision medicine men and such.
It was noted in the syntax I discuss here that journeys in dreaming take place when this shifting happens, and that women are more natural dreamers than men. Which accounts for why women seem often unreasonable to men and not so reasonable. Because there is much more fluidity in the shifting, but often not so much the ability to stop and focus it at will on specific spots.
This is in no way a judgement on what is better (although my preference is for an ability to focus down on a position for clarity and cohesion). It has occurred to me long ago after being exposed to these principles that the locked in position we know as reason serves in its own way as a prison as well as a tool.
It is the rare person I suspect that can master both stalking (the precision of the stopping of that assemblage point) and the dreamer who takes wild journeys through their perception yet shift so much they often have trouble being able to create a neat categorization. There couldn't be one for those shifting in such ways. All categorizations are made based on falsely created reference points pretending the area of focus is the entire structure and not just a little space within a vast spectrum.
I wish to qualify this with one thing. I find it amazing that you are able to see this within yourself, and is probably the strongest attribute you have that has drawn me to you. You have an amazing ability as a stalker/hunter despite as a woman naturally being a dreamer. Yet your natural dreamer attributes still shine through.
It is fascinating watching you explore with abandon as you do, yet with a precision that normally doesn't accompany such exploration. I suspect in another time and place you would have been taught to be a medicine woman here in the native american cultures. It's a rare person who is adept at both stalking and dreaming.
I would say that there are clear differences between men and women and I fully accept these unspoken.
But as soon as you start talking about these differences, it quickly becomes a matter of "I'm better than you", as stereotypical attributions of characteristics, which I mostly find superfluous, because they are often more due to one's own inferiority or superiority complex than to the "real characteristics" of a person. But since the "real qualities" of a person ultimately remain untraceable "in general" because they are situational in nature, one can get caught up in endless debates here. Women can be as rigid as men and men can be as indecisive as women. It depends on the realm of profession and knowledge, the very domain where one is highly experienced at.
That's why I don't think much of the current trend of choosing one's gender as if one were going to shop for clothes in a boutique. In my view, this is an expression of confusion or misunderstanding of a lifestyle sold as freedom.
I value your level of self-knowledge as much as you value mine.