Sexual obsession can derive from a spiritual thirst?
M Winther
into the terms of infantile sexuality; but if the doctor does so too,
then where do we get?
But what does the focusing on sexuality really mean? In the second
half of below article (see below link) I point out that sexuality can
be interpreted religiously, too. See, for instance, "The Sacred Fire -
The Story of Sex in Religion" by B. Z. Goldberg.
The 'primal scene' can also be viewed as the 'hieros gamos' (divine
marriage), and, conceivably, certain expressions of cultic religion
can be interpreted as as a return to blissful 'primary narcissism'. By
example, in their sexual cult, the Gnostic Adamites tried to emulate
the Paradise before the Fall.
Arguably, neurotic sexual obsession can derive from a spiritual
thirst, too. Modern man is tired of his fallen state, where his soul
is divided. Much like the Adamites, he longs to return to the
wholeness of the paradisiacal condition.
What if sexual phantasy, in the analytic setting, can partly be
understood in spiritual terms, on lines the Manicheans, et al.? It
could have a therapeutic effect to highlight this aspect, i.e.
sexuality as the underlying driving force toward spiritual
realization. The fundamental drive, then, is sexual-spiritual, and at
the primordial level, sexuality and spirituality unite in the 'hieros
gamos'.
Read the article here:
http://home7.swipnet.se/~w-73784/sphinx.htm
Mats Winther
Day Brown
over the course of the last 10,000 years. In these small gene pools,
monogamy would've aggravated inbreeding, and 'fertility rites' would
have maximized genetic diversity. The instincts thus created are still
with us. Note also that 'rite' imply a spiritual aspect, ie Tantra.
But today, with the diversity of pathogens, which can be spread by any
kind of close personal contact, not just sex, suggests a need to
re-establish the kind of self imposed quarantine our immune systems
expected.
One other point, which I see young women are picking up on, is that the
witches in charge of these rituals didnt worship an alpha male tyrant
concept of god, but the Great Earth Mother, to whom sex was sacred, not
evil or profane.
While I've not taken part in the 'hieros gamos', I have practiced ritual
with young women who put their bodies where their faith is, and shared
the resulting spiritual insights. Given that young men so rarely now
make enuf money to offer the security needed to raise a family, we can
expect to see young women return to their Aryan heritage, and the
village, not the husband, as the source of emotional and fiscal security
needed to properly support the development of kids.
M Winther
"Day Brown" <dayh...@gmail.com> skrev i meddelandet news:4b708e8d$0$5917$ec3e...@news.usenetmonster.com...
The reason why sexuality, in our culture, has always been "hush-hush" is
because it is connected with an archaic and pagan conception of the divine.
Had it been otherwise, i.e. if sexuality had been like an everyday activity,
like eating food, then it wouldn't be unconsciously sacred. So sexuality's
sacredness (albeit archaic and repressed) is connected with the way in
which we beat about the bush and refrain from living it out unabashedly.
Today, sexuality is not prophanized, it is repressed. Pornography is the
modern form of 'hieros gamos'.
The argument that sexuality is "not evil" does not hold water. It will always
remain a moral problem. We will always condemn sexuality between adults
and children, between teacher and pupil, between a married person and
his/her lover, etc. There are many cases where sexuality is an extremely
dangerous and destructive force. William James said: "The world is all the
richer for having a devil in it, so long as we keep our foot upon his neck."
Mats Winther
Day Brown
> The reason why sexuality, in our culture, has always been "hush-hush" is
> because it is connected with an archaic and pagan conception of the divine.
> Had it been otherwise, i.e. if sexuality had been like an everyday activity,
> like eating food, then it wouldn't be unconsciously sacred. So sexuality's
> sacredness (albeit archaic and repressed) is connected with the way in
> which we beat about the bush and refrain from living it out unabashedly.
> Today, sexuality is not prophanized, it is repressed. Pornography is the
> modern form of 'hieros gamos'.
>
> The argument that sexuality is "not evil" does not hold water. It will always
> remain a moral problem. We will always condemn sexuality between adults
> and children, between teacher and pupil, between a married person and
> his/her lover, etc. There are many cases where sexuality is an extremely
> dangerous and destructive force. William James said: "The world is all the
> richer for having a devil in it, so long as we keep our foot upon his neck."
commit all the severe violence, but also protect the group. Their
instinct to dominate results in violence, and they try to control the
females, which the betas dont. Scripture was invented to justify this
instinctive effort to dominate. Which is why it has an alpha male tyrant
of the divine. When the concept is the Great Earth Mother, then sex is
used as positive re-inforcement to motivate the males to cooperate
rather than threats and violence with alpha male gods.
Part of the problem today is that many women were forced to have sex and
so are in the gene pool without any libido; ie frigid. Of course,
history, being written by scribes in the pay of alpha male warrior
elites consistently describe sex negatively in part because it distracts
the warrior from attending to the elites. The history of matriarchy that
used sex as positive reinforcement rather than negative threats and
violence is so obscure you dont know it ever existed, even tho an
example can still be seen among the Musou of SE China to this day.
M Winther
"Day Brown" <dayh...@gmail.com> skrev i meddelandet news:4b739ac0$0$5902$ec3e...@news.usenetmonster.com...
The cult of Magna Mater involved self-castration on part of the male
devotees. In order to be taken up in the circle of the Mother they had
to emasculate themselves ritually. The tradition of wearing women's
robes, among the officiants of most religions, including the Christian
clergy, derives from this archaic conception. A Catholic priest
marries the Mother church. That's why he emasculates himself in
celibacy. The foremost alpha male of all, namely Heracles, did service
for the Mother goddess during an extended period. During this time he
donned women's clothes, without grumble.
The ascendancy of the Mother goddess leads to the emasculation of
the male. Such a process, of course, brings men closer to the women, but
the sexual tension is toned down, because these are not real men. They
are almost as frigid as the women. One can see that this process is
ongoing now in the Western world. Matriarchy is on the rise again.
This means that sex will become less problematic, but also less
enticing. Tell people in a house that they can enter any room, but they
may not enter "this" particular room. This will create a desire to enter
that very room. Or tell them that they can eat from any tree in the
garden, but not from "this" particular tree. On that day God instilled a
passion for knowledge in mankind. So one instills a passion for
sexuality if one says that this particular fruit is sacred and mustn't be
eaten.
So what is "positive reinforcement" of sex? Is it to forbid it or to
let it loose, like in the Summer of Love in 67? There is really no such
thing as "free sex", because when you unleash it, it dissipates. Society
evolves a Mother-society where men spend hours before the mirror, and
go strutting about on the town streets, peacocky, like on ancient
Crete. On the other hand, if sexuality is repressed, it creates a neurosis.
You can't repress it and you can't unleash it.
Mats Winther
http://home7.swipnet.se/~w-73784/
Day Brown
up to hominid evolution. DNA says native Europeans evolved in agrarian
villages of 150-300. Monogamy would've produced too much inbreeding. but
even in the Roman era there were reports of village witches hosting
'fertility rites' where the men from all the surrounding villages were
invited to come get fucked. Maximizing genetic diversity in the era
before transnational trade delivered STDs.
The Christian notion of monogamy made sense in the cities, but the
'pagans' didnt have the disease exposure problem, but did have the
inbreeding problem, as still seen in inbred hillbilly clans.
"Mother society" may have worked like you say in the cities, but not in
the countryside; there was way too much work to be done for farmers who
didnt have slaves, like city boys did to take up the slack for them.
That has to do with why Gimbutas, in the 20th century, could still find
pagan traditions intact in rural parts of the Baltic nations. They did
not have slavery either. Course, they didnt have a cosmology that
promised to reward the slave in heaven for all his earthly labor, so
they didnt get the pleasure of self righteousness.
The reason clergy dont wear pants but fancy gowns, lace, jewelry, et al
is because the original Aryan clergy were all female. Scythians had a
transitional phase where they used a potion made from pregnant mare's
piss that was so loaded with estrogen they lost their beards and
developed what gays call 'puppy tits'. This is still somewhat seen in
India with the cross dressing 'priestesses' of Kali.
I grant there were some pagan cults that castrated, but they were widely
regarded as nut cases. which are still with us. Sexuality is expressed,
or repressed in all kinds of neurotic ways. Which does not mean there is
not a more rational, healthier, way to deal with it.
There are, and always have been two ways to control men: sex or
violence. Pick one. The latter has resulted in WMD and nukes so that
even the warrior elites cant protect themselves, much less the rest of
us. So, if we cant use the negative reinforcements of fear and violence,
then we can still try the positive reinforcements of sexual pleasure.
There are no safe weapons, but there is safe sex. Which was not had with
the Hippy summer of love. Nor did the Hippies ever handle sex well. Back
when the witches had control over both the birth rate and STDs, stable
populations and peaceful trade worked sustainably. Women will figure
that out again now that personal weapons nullify the advantage men have
had from being bigger and stronger.
M Winther
"Day Brown" <dayh...@gmail.com> skrev i meddelandet news:4b79d3ee$0$31591$ec3e...@news.usenetmonster.com...
On Tahiti they feared inbreeding, so when the Europeans arrived, the
women were urged, by the men and the mothers, to paddle stark naked
out to the sailing ship, as reported by de Bougainville. They made
sexual gestures and invited the sailors to sexual intercourse. Of
course, if it's neccesary for the survival of the population, they
have no other choice.
But, generally, the reason why monogamy is preferable in the human
population is due to humanity's long childhood. The children need
support and protection during a long time, so it is best for a woman
to bond with one man. There is also an important genetic reason why
monogamy is the ideal. The genetic variance is heightened this way.
Otherwise women would only beget children with pop stars, actors,
gold-diggers, and drones. So there would be no more engineer children,
or carpenter children. Only extraverted, narcissistic, amphetamine
addicts would populate the earth. Mankind would go under. So we have a
strong genetic determination toward monogamy, as does many bird
species.
However, mankind also has a spiritual drive which time and again makes
him renounce worldly pleasures, the most prominent of which is
sexuality. Should one live in a Tahitian paradise surrounded by
promiscuous beautiful women, then this spiritual longing would tend to
be forgotten. Sooner or later this would create a backlash. Hell
preachers would appear, teaching moralistic sexual control. This is
the backside of the spiritual aspect of our nature. if free rein is
given to lust, then the spirit is going to produce its own monster to
blockade it.
So, in the long run, the polygamous sexual paradise doesn't work. The
spirit must have its due effect in human life. People need to know
about the spirit, the "other" passion. Otherwise, this dichotomy will
appear: "church-going moralism" vs. "promiscuity and moral debility".
These two monsters can fight each other interminably, and people will
tend to go back and forth between the camps, changing allegiances. It
is tedious and neurotic situation. Should the spirit be acknowledged
in the individual's live (not collective spirit, as the church), then
this split would heal. This is Gospel of Thomas, logion 8:
8. And Jesus said, "The person is like a wise fisherman who cast his
net into the sea and drew it up from the sea full of little fish.
Among them the wise fisherman discovered a fine large fish. He threw
all the little fish back into the sea, and easily chose the large
fish. Anyone here with two good ears had better listen!"
Here Jesus is speaking about the spirit, and how much more valuable
this find is, compared with all the profane "foods" that capture
people's attention. The consequence is that he who has found the true
spiritual fish, will throw back all the little worldly passions into
the sea. In this particular case. We can be certain that Thomas is
much more veracious than is Matthew in his rendition of the same
saying (13:47-50). By the way, I analyzed a modern person's dream
about the spirit-fish here:
http://home7.swipnet.se/~w-73784/spiritfish.htm
Mats Winther
Day Brown
only lived to be 30. The death rate was so high, especially among
aggressive hunting tribes, that women were commonly taken into harems of
the survivors.
Furthermore, women knew their survival depended on the cooperation of
the hunters defending the territory and bringing back game. Especially
in the era of megafuana, the likelihood of a single man taking one down
was remote, and then after butchering, would've taken several men
dragging the sled to bring a ton of meat home.
The Forest People by Wallace is indicative. He found 1/3 found someone
at puberty they mated with for life. 1/3 were always promiscuous, and
the remainder engaged in what we now call 'serial monogamy' or changed
in/out of promiscuity. In any case, whatever your mode was, it was your
business. Monogamy was not an ideal everyone was expected to seek.
Moreover, the witches and shamen did what we now call case management
and raised the kids of the incompetent- who mite nevertheless have the
DNA markers for resistance to disease. Likewise, the flint knapper
sitting in the corner mite be ugly and unsociable, but they needed his
skill to remain in the gene pool.
M Winther
"Day Brown" <dayh...@gmail.com> skrev i meddelandet news:4b7b1a07$0$18951$ec3e...@news.usenetmonster.com...
Human males are determined toward monogamy in different degree. A
section of the gene called RS3 334 is linked to how men bond with
their partners. Men can have none, one or two copies of the RS3 334
section, and the higher the number of copies, the worse men score on a
measure of pair bonding: http://tinyurl.com/63s9b5
In Europe we know that many teenagers bond strongly, i.e. they fall in love
(and not only the teenagers). This phenomenon ensures that youngsters
are faithful to each other. This hormonal bonding actually works. Even if
the relationship ends in 6 months, it has a great impact. Otherwise
venereal disease would have been much greater in Europe. Black
Africans lack this capacity of falling in love, so they are much more
promiscuous, with dire consequences. Obviously, if teenagers have this
strong tendency of falling in love, being very romantic, and hence faithful,
it proves that monogamy is imprinted in the European gene pool.
Anyway, I am also discussing monogamy as an ideal as it appears in
practically all cultures. It is regarded as the model conduct. A
promiscuous attitude is never fully accepted, particularly not if the
women adopt this way of life. A man instinctually wants to ensure that
he is the father of the child. So he tries to prevent that the woman
has other sexual partners.
This is a great problem among immigrants to Sweden. It is not easy to
control women in a modern society, compared with the backward
societies from which they originate. For instance, an Arab man can
measure how long time it takes for his woman to go to the supermarket.
If she is 5 minutes late, he could accuse her of having had a sexual
meeting with another man, and give her a thorough beating.
Control of women among immigrant groups, is a notorious problem in
Swedish society. To argue that monogamy is not a general ideal does
not hold water. Cultural mores play an enormous part in human affairs.
Monogamic marriage remains the ideal all over the earth. People also
have romantic ideals, and women read Harlequin novels. I am sceptical
of the notion of a historical society where men tolerate that women have
many sexual partners.
Mats Winther
Day Brown
Even if hypocritically practiced, especially by the men.
But au contraire, before the Roman Empire, the rate of trade was so low,
and travel so arduous, that anyone with an STD prolly died before they
got very far. Then too, the strain of syphilis then didnt have the
severe effects now seen, nor did it in America. Its the hybrid line that
causes all the problems.
With gonorrhea, travel was so slow that a man got over it by the time he
got home and didnt infect anyone else. The other thing to bear in mind
is that how isolated the agrarian villages were before the Roman road
system and how 'fertility rites' were used to increase diversity. Not
that people did not have pair bonds, but sexuality was not always the
token of attachment any more than it was with the later affection that
emerged between Christian monks and nuns.
The "Lord's Court" records I read from an obscure 13th century English
midlands village showed people still "jumped the broom", and then split
their profits after a year and a day. This village had been donated to
an abby by an heiress noble, so the "Lord" was the abbot. Who
nonetheless recognized these pagan contracts... so long as he got to
collect the taxes, his cut on the contracts.
We also wont discuss the sexual services the Miller's widow paid the
workmen who helped her run the business. Marriage was certainly the
standard for the aristocracy in order to regulate inheritance. But
nobody paid any attention to what the peasants were doing.
For that, you need to watch for the innumerable reports of urban
literate men pleased with the wantonness of peasant girls. Who were no
doubt also interested in genetic diversity.
M Winther
"Day Brown" <dayh...@gmail.com> skrev i meddelandet news:4b7c766b$0$18943$ec3e...@news.usenetmonster.com...
Remember, genetic diversification is not always of the good. There is
a phenomenon called "outbreeding", which is the opposite of
inbreeding. In this multicultural era people never talk about this
danger, but it is well-known among biologists. A chaffinch female will
not mate with a chaffinch arriving from northern Sweden. She
identifies him as a stranger by characteristics of the song. She
instinctually fears that the offspring will inherit characteristics
not suitable for the southern Sweden habitat. This phenomenon is
called outbreeding.
A recent research in Sweden, mentioned yesterday in media, has shown
that women are strongly inclined to marry men of very similar ethnic
background, whereas Swedish men, statistically, find it much more
acceptable to import women, especially from south-east Asia. It could
be the same as the chaffinch phenomenon. In the Swedish "habitat"
immigrants are doing badly. The ailments typical of old age begin to
appear ten years earlier than among ethnic Swedes. Especially among
Somalians, the kids develop very severe psychoneural diseases. The
rate of autism is at least 4 times higher. Researchers suspect the
lack of sunlight on our latitude. But it could also be expressed in
the politically incorrect way, namely as a genetic sensitivity. An
ethnic Swedish woman, then, who marries a Somalian man, would suffer
greater risk of having a child with diverse problems. And then we
haven't even begun to discuss psychosocial qualities and matters of IQ.
Is an ethnically oriented monogamy merely the effect of cultural
indoctrination and hypocritical morals? It would mean that people
would sow their wild oats as soon as they get a chance. Obviously,
it's not that simple. Too much of genetic diversity could be damaging.
Among certain animals outbreeding is a more damaging than inbreeding.
Since their characteristics have become so perfected with time,
inbreeding can still create a perfect offspring. Animals have a fear
of losing acquired characteristics that are valuable. This phenomenon
exists also among non-vertebrates. Intrusion of unfamiliar genes is
defended against, by shutting out individuals who try to establish
themselves (this is not the same as xenophobia among humans, which is
psychologically motivated).
Mats Winther
http://home7.swipnet.se/~w-73784/
Day Brown
The problem is the different instinctive behavior patterns of those who
evolved in small agrarian villages from those of hunting, fishing, and
herding cultures where its the rapid response to the appearance of any
resource in contrast to the long term planning needed to manage crops
and a local resource base.
Thus, West Europeans and East Asians, both of which evolved in temperate
zone agrarian systems intermarry with good results, but either of which
who breed with non-agrarian cultures can expect trouble. Nobody expects
a half Aryan, half Chinese kid will be stupid.
But in both cases generations lived and inbred with others who also had
never been outside the county. But now, there is a eugenics program
going on among upscale thirty something white career women, disparing of
ever meeting "Mr. Wright" (who's already married to a sexy hottie, or as
you suggest, a non-white sex slave) and going to fertility clinics to
select from among thousands of the most promising Y chromosome lines.
Those who look into it will see the Nordic lines have the lowest rate of
genetic defect. Then too, given the Vikings were the most widely
traveled men on Earth for over 1000 years, only those with the most
robust immune systems survived to return to the Baltic.
M Winther
"Day Brown" <dayh...@gmail.com> skrev i meddelandet news:4b7f0fe7$0$18927$ec3e...@news.usenetmonster.com...
The biggest problem is within the psychological and psychosocial area.
My own ethnic group is replete with neurotics, but the mental debility
among immigrants is just mind-staggering. The situation is really
fearful, due to the many cases of personality disorders, especially in
the narcissistic spectrum. The number of misfits is growing by the
day. I have observed how some African women feed their babies with
MacDonald hamburgers and French fries. Those babies won't get any food
until they arrive at the restaurant in the morning. Then they go back
by subway and wait for the next social allowance. Of course,
materially, people have all they need, cable TV and all that, but
isn't this really a sordid life, in many ways much worse than their
earlier lives in Africa? It is a meaningless life, the life of a
misfit, and a life out of context.
The reason why traditional cultures, including the African and Arabic,
are lagging behind the European, is due to a lack of psychological
independency and a concomitant lack of creativity. This mentality, I
argue, will more and more take over in an ethnic and cultural
mishmash. Our civilization is on the down-slope, and the situation is
becoming dangerous. If we don't take heed it will result in a state of
dissolution, riots and racial hatred, terrorism and civil war. See my
article "An Intrusion of Matriarchal Consciousness" :
http://home7.swipnet.se/~w-73784/matriarchal.htm
It amazes me, the extent to which people are capable of repressing an
instinctual realization that this is wrong, and that society is going
in the wrong direction. But we know today that the politically
correct people are only repressing their discontent. At Uppsala
university, Sweden, an experiment was set up where people watched
crime scenes on film. Women were much more prone to misjudge the scene
and identify the immigrant as perpetrator. The researcher said that
this was due to the fact that women tend to be much more liberal than
men in matters of immigration. So they repressed their negative
feelings for immigrants, which caused them to point them out as
perpetrators, instead. This is the treacherous way in which the
unconscious works.
Mats Winther
Day Brown
finding anyone with an unbiased view.
But whether we like it or not, Might still makes Right, and in this
case, Smith & Wesson guarantee superior rights to Smart women despite
the fact that men are bigger and stronger. Which formerly mattered.
Appeals to men trying to preserve their prerogatives have not gotten
anywhere, nor will they. In part, this is due to hominid evolution,
which clipped the ends of the bell curve for women to ensure they were
competent enuf to nurture kids. The nutritional deficits you refer to
thus damage the mental development of boys more, so the men they became
are no longer functional enuf to organize any effective opposition to
the rise of matriarchy.
The history is very obscure, but matriarchic Kucha, the pre-eminent Silk
Road city, founded by Aryan Amazons 3000+ years ago at a desert oasis is
instructive. The wells on the road thru the desert to Kucha didnt have
enuf water to supply an army, and without the need for a warrior elite,
power fell into the hands of women.
Who ran the Silk Road shipping business; the men did the leg work. There
was a lot of cultural diversity, as you expect of matriarchy, but not so
much genetic diversity. Because both the Aryans and the Chinese evolved
in agrarian villages, which takes careful resource management to make
it, they understood each other. There are frescos of Aryan merchants in
Chinese silks, and Chines bodies in Tocharian graveyards dressed in the
same clothes with the same high quality grave goods.
But both Occidental and Oriental documents show the distrust they shared
with the barbarian nomads who couldnt be civilized. Even today, neither
Chinese or Aryan families worry about how the kids will turn out if
there is intermarriage, but both are concerned if a mate comes from a
hunter or nomad lineage. Rightly so.
All European lineages evolved in agrarian villages over the course of
the last 10,000 years... but two: Saami and Gypsy. Which both have the
same sociopathologies of non-white cultures even tho they are as white
as I am.
Agrarian cultures have always respected the rights of women, who in turn
had more power to select sperm donation, and demanded more self control
on the part of their men. Which has paid off in the ability of both West
Europeans and the temperate zone East Asian cultures to organize. Both
also have long histories of capitalist economies, very well documented
in Kucha, which operated for over 1000 years in the world's first
transnational free market that existed between the hegemony of the
Chinese, Byzantine, and Persian empires.
The Silk Road was not a single route, but at least three more or less
parallel roads (Kucha was on the dominant Spring/fall line, a Northern
line thru southern Siberia and a southern winter line across the north
edge of the Himalayas thru Khotan.)
Violence was bad for business. It took a different route to go around
it, as we see Xuan Zang did in the 7th century. Matriarchy was not, in
fact, amoral, but tolerated many spiritual traditions, which if you are
a fervent supporter of Christianity, Islam, or any other, looks like it
is evil. But Kucha had the shrines of 22 different religions in order to
meet the needs of a wide variety of merchants. But the superstitions of
the barbarians were not catered to. We expect to see this again.
M Winther
"Day Brown" <dayh...@gmail.com> skrev i meddelandet news:4b809cd5$0$18995$ec3e...@news.usenetmonster.com...
It is correct that matriarchal societies are plethoric in terms of
deities and temples. When Christianity first came to India, the Christ
was enveloped and subject to hinduization, put into a little temple
and worshipped as yet another deity. This is the explanation for the
plethoric religious activity, everything is warmly embraced by the
great Mother. Thusly, everything new is being overwhelmed and
asphyxiated, rendered into a little idol. That's why the Magna Mater
in religious history is surrounded by the 'cabiri', little phallic
diminutive male brownies. Although she allows a thousand flowers to
bloom, she also smothers every attempt at individual distinction, thus
preventing a true emancipative development. In southern India, there
is no real sense of individuality.
The patriarchal conception revolves around the emancipation of the ego
from its serfdom under the unconscious "Mother", a progressive
movement which engenders true creativity and individuality. That's why
Hollywood films return to the heroic theme again and again, as a means
of compensation. America cannot risk sliding back into a matriarchal,
or southern Indian, frame of mind. That's why American politics
revolve around the fear of socialism, which is the ideal condition for
the 'cabir', the diminutive mother-dependent male. The reason why the
Europeans lack a pronounced fear of socialism is because, over here,
the inner regressive tendency is not so strong. It makes us less prone
to hero worship. In the U.S., the mingling of races has led to a
constitutional regressive tendency, which must always be compensated.
However, partly due to present-day mass-immigration, Europe is again
challenged by the great Mother.
Mats Winther
http://home7.swipnet.se/~w-73784/
Day Brown
Europeans had in Gaia. Or Potnia, Brigit, Freya, Hera, Juno, Venus,
Aphrodite, Sophia, Maeve, Demeter, and who knows how many more. The
reason there are so many names, is that nobody ever went to war over
what the name should be.
Gimbutas also shows us the innovation of the Chalcolithic era when
everyone worshiped the Great Mother. Weaving in hemp, wool, & flax.
Which was then made into tailored pants, jackets, blouses, skirts, with
knee length laced boots. Bronze (5000BC!) made into gardening and
woodworking tools, broaches, clasps, buckles, & jewelry. (But nobody has
found bronze armor or weapons of war). Writing on platters and pots and
a cave wall in Bulgaria 7000 BP. A timber frame well casing in Austria
that dendochronology shows was made of trees cut in 5078 BC. Riven and
sawn. The first plank hulled sailboats illustrated on pots from 4800BC,
and of course, sails are made of canvas because they were first woven
from cannabis. As was the rigging.
Again, what you present us are the reports of scribes in the pay of the
warrior elites. Do you have an unbiased source? What Gimbutas shows us
are the artifacts that have been dug out of the tels and bone middens.
The garbage dumps never lie.
The egoism you seem to say is necessary for innovation is not seen in
today's open source movement. Linus Torvals tried to give credit where
due when he introduced Linux, which however only gave him more credit
for his character in so doing. In sharp contrast to William Gates who
tried to build a monopolistic empire while making himself the richest
jackass the world has ever seen, and doing so by hiring enuf lawyers and
paying off enuf judges to PREVENT innovation from competing with him.
M Winther
Gimbutas's idea of a former matriarchal civilization in Europe,
predating the Indo-European invasion, has made her the prophet of a
neo-pagan feminism that wants to combat the ongoing patriarchal
Indo-European and Semitic oppression.
Her ideas are naive. Today we know that the Indo-Europeans, during the
Bronze Age, were themselves the carriers of a matriarchal culture,
when the Mother goddess was in ascendancy. In Sweden there are Bronze
Age artifacts, like the golden solar shield, and an enormous amount of
rock carvings, depicting this era. This is the double-axe culture,
also flourishing on Crete at the same time.
The Celts maintained a relatively advanced matriarchal culture,
dominating Europe for 700 years, until the Roman/Teutonic invasions.
The Celts were very nature-oriented, worshipping woodland-deities, and
the numina present in groves and well-springs. A trinity of Mother
goddesses was dominant. However, the Celts were *Indo-Europeans*.
Moreover, the men remained in power. The druids were foremostly male.
It is a preconception that matriarchy means female power. Rather,
matriarchy means the ascendancy of the Mother goddess, not that
females have more power as persons.
Indeed, there did exist an indigenous culture in Europe before the
Indo-Europeans. In Sweden two cultures lived side by side for a long
time. These were the Funnel Beaker Culture and the Pitted Ware
Culture, which names refer to the ceramics artifacts. The latter was a
neolithic hunter-gatherer culture, while the Funnel Beaker Culture
constituted of the agricultural Indo-Europeans. Genetic research has
shown that the Funnel-Beakers are non-existent in today's Swedish
gene pool. They simply disappeared out of history at some stage. Unlike
the Pitted-Wares, they could not digest milk.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pitted_Ware_culture
Likely, the Pitted-Wares represent the indigenous Europeans, predating
the Indo-Europeans. But they did not represent sophisticated
matriarchal culture, on lines of the Celts. Nor did the Indo-Europeans
invade with patriarchal hierarchical conceptions, forcing it upon
hapless matriarchal cultures. That picture would better describe what
happened to the Celts. Celtic civilization, however, is not to be
romanticized. They performed very cruel human sacrifices, and they
were very warlike.
A backside of patriarchal culture is, perhaps, "egoism". But this is
when personality development goes wrong, when it is misunderstood as
collecting riches on earth instead of becoming a mature and
independent individual. On the other hand, a backside of matriarchal
culture is that individuals never grow beyond the psychological level
of a twelve year-old. Many of the rural Indians, Pakistanis, and
Somalis that arrive in Sweden, lack a true individuality and have
acquired a collective group-personality. This gives rise to very
appalling group-narcissistic phenomena. One is sometimes astounded by
their social incapacity and their continual and unmanly expression of
fear.
Mats Winther
M Winther
Correction: it is not the Funnel-Beakers that have disappered from the
gene pool, it was the Pitted Ware Culture that vanished without a
trace and who could not digest milk.
/Mats
Day Brown
> Gimbutas's idea of a former matriarchal civilization in Europe,
> predating the Indo-European invasion, has made her the prophet of a
> neo-pagan feminism that wants to combat the ongoing patriarchal
> Indo-European and Semitic oppression.
>
> Her ideas are naive.
to control the men, they used the positive re-inforcements of sex. She
shows us innumerable "phallic wands". She never saw porn flicks, so she
did not know dildos when she saw them.
She, and others, pick up on the way the original agrarian communities on
the floodplains of the rivers that empty into the West End of the Black
sea were all abandoned, citing how the digs reveal structures that were
never vandalized or burnt, but simply collapsed over time. But she didnt
know that when horses were introduced from the Steppe 6000 years ago,
they would have brought anthrax in with them.
This discredited the female dominated clergy and faith in the Great
Earth Mother. The dispersal into areas that had been hunter territories
brought the rise of the warrior elites, and with them the rise of the
alpha male warrior gods like Zeus, Ares, Jehovah...
Then too, as long range trade picked up, it introduced STDs that the
witches didnt know how to cope with, and so monogamy was promoted, and
the 'fertility rites' were abandoned.
But now, there are safe sex methods as well as a host of contagions that
only need close personal contact, not sex, for transmission. Biological
WMDs and/or mutating microbes are a real serious threat the ruling
warrior elites today cannot do anything about given the way they want
people concentrated in urban settings to facilitate control.
The feminists today just dont get how their maternal ancestors used sex
to get the cooperation and alliance of men to promote their agendas. I
have however, seen witches host a safe sex orgy, and then noted how that
experience altered the priorities of the men who attended. Problem was,
they didnt have a well thot out agenda to make use of cooperation. Some
will no doubt get it, maybe do already, but wont be posting here to tell
you about it. Obviously, they want to stay below Christian radar.
M Winther
"Day Brown" <dayh...@gmail.com> skrev i meddelandet news:4b8420d9$0$18914$ec3e...@news.usenetmonster.com...
There is a *spirit* of sexuality, too, and the phallic item represents
this spirit. It can also represent the spiritual power in general, its
impregnating capacity. These are not "dildos". You should know that
sexuality has a spiritual aspect, too. It's not merely a bodily
instinct.
A cult of sexuality has existed in history, and continues to exist in
the present day, in secret quarters. Stanley Kubrick, in "Eyes Wide
Shut" (Tom Cruise, Nicole Kidman) gives us an insight into this form
of sect. One insight is how very boring it is, for the uninitiated. That's
why these sects are religious, otherwise the whole shindy would be
experienced as insipid and trite (Warner Bros. digitally altered the
orgy for the American release, blocking out graphic sexuality). Of
course, to a person who lacks faith, the experience of the Christian
service and Eucharist would be boring, too.
Hence, "free sexuality", as a matriarchal means of controlling men,
doesn't work, because it is powerless and boring. Only in a religious
cult can it spellbind people. A type of sexual gnostic sect occurs
repeatedly throughout the Christian era. Certain of these sects wanted
to emulate the blessed state of Adam and Eve before the Fall, and were
therefore known as Adamites. Historically, they were replete in
France, but also exist in prudent America:
"....A number of these societies also practiced Adamism and free sex.
Their exponents condemned modesty as a mark of hypocrisy and
corruption, because no one in whom the sight of a nude person of the
opposite sex excited feelings of lust, unease, shame, or modesty,
could be called pure. This curious philosophy reached its zenith with
the Perfectionists, founded at Oneida Creek, New York State, by John
Humphrey Noyes (d. 1886). He introduced a system of 'complex
marriage', under which wedded members had to surrender the 'ownership'
of their wives and husbands, and each could cohabit with anyone they
pleased. He stressed the benefits of coitus reservatus in preventing
conception, promoting male continence, conserving male energy,
gratifying the woman's needs, and at the same time providing a
wonderful spiritual experience"
(cf., Walker, B., Gnosticism, 1983, pp.185).
The sexual sects are ubiquitous in the Christian era, and do not
merely represent vague memories of a bygone matriarchal era. In 1781
it was found that the nuns of the Dominican convent of St Catherine in
Prato, Italy, led by the prioress, Sister Spighi, were preaching
Catharist doctrines. They declared that since man's soul partakes of
the supreme essence it is immortal and divine, and therefore sinless
and free. The love of man for woman is the noblest example of divine
law, and the sexual the most perfect fulfilment of it. So also, any
person, man or woman, who, lifting up his or her spirit to God, has
physical enjoyment with a person of the same sex, or alone, also
fulfils the divine law. Asked by the members of the shocked commission
sent to enquire into the matter, where they had received their
teaching, they replied, 'From the deep and honest searchings of
natural inclinations and of those around us.' (cf., Walker, B. (1983).
Gnosticism, pp.179-80).
In recent history, in a Catholic context, it has been found that
sexual abuse of children is commonplace. It is practiced by strongly
religiously inclined people. People often think that the mundane man,
the pub crawler, and the womanizer, is the man with a sexual
consciousness. But he doesn't know anything about the deep roots of
sexuality. These are the laypersons. The religiously inclined man,
who confronts with the spirit of sexuality, has a much better insight.
The idea that mere carnal sexuality can control men, doesn't hold
water. These are the mundane men, the pub crawlers who can hardly
get it up. But spiritual sexuality, the cult of sexuality, as in a nun convent,
can have this effect. The phallus is a cultic item, and not a dildo. These
are the workings of the ambivalent force of spirit. I argue that it there
is no linkage at all with a power struggle between men and women in the
historical context.
Mats Winther
Day Brown
were only grossly sensual, only that Gimbutas just didnt get what they
were, which you allude to above.
Another factor today is that sexuality no longer is expressed so much
for procreation. People instinctively understand its important, and thus
seek a more spiritual interpretation. Which you outline. I dont see
anything in academic archeology picking up on this, obviously due to the
in loco parentis of academia, not wanting to disturb the sensibilities
of students and their parents.
From the graffiti at Pompei, I gather STDs were becoming a problem; no
doubt caused by the increased trade and travel in the empire. In sharp
contrast to the relative quarantine barbarian villages had. The record
of an imperial wife fucking hundreds of men in a short period of time
shows she was not afraid of infection.
M Winther
"Day Brown" <dayh...@gmail.com> skrev i meddelandet news:4b8574c8$0$18998$ec3e...@news.usenetmonster.com...
That was Valeria Messalina, third wife of Claudius. She was as mad as
her relatives. She appears in the TV series "Claudius" (Derek Jacobi).
She expresses (in the TV-series) that at some occasions, during the act,
she gets a feeling of transcendence.
True, how can cultic sexuality ever be discussed at American
university? It's no wonder that these facts from history are not
known. The gnostic form of liscentious sects were notorious for eating
menstrual and seminal fluid as a sacramental meal.
"...[The] power that resided in the life-seed contained the
imperishable soul-spark. Semen and menses had therefore to be
consumed as a sacrament, for these substances held the pure light.
The Bible directs, 'Drink waters out of thine own cistern, and running
waters out of thine own well' (Prov. 5: 15).
[...] These texts were taken to refer to the male and female fluids,
and Borborians accordingly enjoined their members to consume their
own substance.
[...] For semen too they dreamed up their contrived corroboration.
This from the Bible (Ps. 1. 3): 'He shall be like a tree [the male
member] planted by the rivers of water [testicles] that bringeth forth
his fruit [semen] in his season [ejaculation]; his leaf also shall not
wither [because he does not allow it to go to waste or into the
vagina].'
[...] They used the seed of masturbation, sodomy, or natural
intercourse, believing it to be poured out of the 'horn of salvation',
in support of which they found several allusions in the Bible.
Epiphanius describes the rite of spermepotation practiced by the
Phibionites. At the moment of the man's ejaculation the woman lets her
partner go, withdraws her body, and receives the emitted semen in her
palm. She stands up naked throwing back her head, and pretends to
pray, offering as an oblation to God the shameful product of their
immorality. Then saying, 'This is the body of Christ', she consumes it
(Campbell, Creative Mythology, 1968, p. 160).
St Augustine in his account of the Manichean (gnostic) system speaks
of confessions made by certain women of Carthage about the scandals
associated with their cult. On examination it was later confirmed that
'ground meal was sprinkled underneath the copulating pair to absorb
the semen so that it could be mixed and consumed' (Allegro, The Dead
Sea Scrolls..., 1979, p. 130)." (cf., Walker, B. (1983). Gnosticism,
pp.130-31).
Mats Winther
http://home7.swipnet.se/~w-73784/
Day Brown
> True, how can cultic sexuality ever be discussed at American
> university? It's no wonder that these facts from history are not
> known. The gnostic form of liscentious sects were notorious for eating
> menstrual and seminal fluid as a sacramental meal.
gnostic Christianity, to me it sounds oxymoronic, so I hadnt come across
your info. Thanx.
I wasnt a fan of St. Augustine either. The thing about sperm reminds me
of the Tantric tradition of trying to retain it in ritual. Which strikes
me as oxymoronic as well, the alpha male ego showing that it has that
much control. Its another clue to the emergence of misogyny because it
aint like the women didnt have perfectly effective herbal birth control
or cervical caps. Any oak tree will provide acorns that can be trimmed
to fit any woman.
The whole point of Taoist & Hindu tantra was to employ the endorphins
released in orgasm to stimulate the secondary nervous system, alter
consciousness, and produce enlightenment. Ramprasad makes it clear.
Dunno how long it'd be before academic coursework comes to terms with
this, and other forms of altered consciousness and its relationship to
spiritual enlightenment. Which shrinks never deal with.