Re: Islamic Women Are Forced To Dominate Men Sexually - (Textnote of {HRI 20060521-V1.3})
I Hate muzzies
Koos Nolst Trenite wrote:
> Islamic Women Are Forced To Dominate Men Sexually
>
> 21 May 2006
> {HRI 20060521-V1.3-Islam}
>
> (Version 1.3-Islam)
> on 9 Oct 2006)
>
> (The 'Textnote' is placed on top.)
>
> *(a) In some Islamic cultures, the girls and women are told to cover
> their hair, even their whole body, "because they have to stop
> (or to not invite) 'the bestial desires of men;' they have to
> dominate the Sexual behavior of men towards women."
>
> Some might give you other "reasons" which are, however,
> merely to hide that actual intention:
>
> A destructive intention, which is actually - as you
> will see at some time - 'to please Criminal Minds'
> by assuming or practicing (their) very false views
> about people. *(7)
>
> '
>
> Now, I happen to be a man, and - like the vast majority of men -
> I do not at all have any 'bestial desires that should be curbed'
> by anyone, also not by women.
>
> But Criminal Minds want you to think, that "all people
> have bestial desires" - WHICH IS NOT TRUE AT ALL.
>
> Truly Criminal Minds only form ONE percent of the
> living population on Earth, in equal amounts both
> as women and as men, and of any age, any religion,
> any caste or social position or profession or race.
>
> '
>
> So, to most men, it is just a straightforward insult, to be
> shown by a woman, that 'she has to control your bestial desires.'
>
> The faithful reader understands, that I am talking about
> absolute truth
>
> which means, that - regardless of whether something
> is voiced, or understood, or even known -
>
> that, what is going on, IS going on, and that is
> absolute truth.
>
> (I have explained this elsewhere very thoroughly, and
> easily understandable for you.)
>
> '
>
> On top of that insult, the girls and women are taught, either
> directly, or by implying it, the ATROCIOUS LIES
>
> that "most men are evil,"
>
> and that "a person who is close family, 'BY DEFINITION' IS NOT
> evil,"
>
> and that it is women who "must control men's bestial desires,"
>
> that men must be dominated by the manner in which women dress -
> in this case, by covering anything
>
> "that could remind men of Sex, yes, even of the Beauty
> of women
>
> ...which would then again unleash his bestial desires."
>
> '
>
> That is a straightforward denial of the spiritual nature of life:
>
> YOU FEEL people, because you are a spirit, a soul, and
> because others are a spirit, a soul - and this has nothing
> to do at all with the clothing worn, unless you are in a
> culture where Sex (the spiritual Energy of Sex) is
> heavily denied to exist,
>
> where the senses are supposed to be those of the
> body only, without feeling or seeing the soul of
> another - which means - without Love, without
> Understanding, without Responsibility or Care for
> another. *(3)
>
> '
>
> A normal man or boy FEELS how women or girls feel, and equally,
> a normal woman or girl FEELS how men or boys feel - and that has
> nothing at all to do, with whether they are dressed or not, or
> whether they are in another room, or whether they are married or
> not:
>
> You still FEEL them, simply by the fact of your being alive, and
> the fact of their being alive; spiritual Energy also knows no
> distance, and no walls.
>
> But DENYING that, is the behavior of animals - and even animals
> usually are not that stupid - to refuse to know, that they are
> entirely spiritual in nature, and
>
> DENYING that, you would also be refusing to act according to
> your own nature, which IS entirely spiritual:
>
> People are souls, and they feel and think as souls, which
> IS done spiritually, of course.
>
> '
>
> If you DENY that, then normal men, of decent nature, are indeed
> told to behave like animals, also towards women:
>
> They may develop customs of locking their wives up in their
> houses, and to forbid women to take part in social life,
> and they may prevent women from showing their Beauty in
> public.
>
> Which is - if you like - the automatic and historic
> 'retaliation' of enforcing in turn on women, the ugly lie,
> the very destructive lie, that
>
> "women must be dominated" - "else they will seduce men."
>
> '
>
> If you trace these customs back in history, you will find some
> Criminal Minds, who intended to destroy the religion they were
> part of. *(6)
>
> '
>
> ___________
> Quoted from:
>
> Sex In Any Religion
>
> 21 May 2006
> {HRI 20060521-V1.3}
>
> (Version 1.3
> on 9 Oct 2006)
>
> (Suitable for foreign
> language students)
>
> '
>
> Men and women are souls, spiritual beings, and all their feeling and
> their thinking and their looking and their communicating and their
> emotions, are entirely spiritual in nature (which is also called
> spiritual Energy).
>
>
> By DENYING the continuous, spiritual (or spiritual Energy) exchange
> between men and women, that takes place all the time, you are then
> degrading men and women
>
> as if they are like animals, or worse. Which is a degradation
> that any religion opposes.
>
> '
>
> '
>
> There is, there exists, there is taking place, everywhere,
>
> and entirely regardless of whether the body is dressed and
> covered, or not,
>
> there is a constant Sexual Energy exchange between men and women
> (and boys and girls, and girls and men, and boys and women).
>
> '
>
> And this continues to take place also when they do not see each
> other, as you know very well to be the case:
>
> Love, or your liking for another, is not stopped by walls; Love,
> or your liking for another, knows no distance, and neither does
> Sexual Energy.
>
> And the same applies, of course, to someone who Loves you, or who
> has a liking for you - spiritual Energy knows no distance, no
> walls, and so it is with Sexual Energy too.
>
> Again, whether you are taught, that "you are not a
> spiritual being, that you are not a soul," does not make
> any difference at all as regards the fact of your
> spiritual activity - truth is absolute.
>
> '
>
> It does not wait, and it does not ask whether someone is married, and
> it does not ask for someone's age, but it radiates, it emanates, it
> is a natural component of Love, of Love for Life, of Love for people,
> as long as someone's soul is alive, as long as your soul is alive.
>
> Now whether that ALSO results in an activity of physically
> joining bodies, THAT is an entirely different matter,
>
> and that primarily is guided by the amount of Truth, of
> Love and Beauty that would be contained in and resulting
> from such a union of bodies,
>
> which you may also want to translate as 'absence of
> Lies,' 'absence of Hate,' and 'absence of Ugliness.'
> *(1)
>
> '
>
> '
>
> '
>
> Again: When you DENY the continuous, Sexual, spiritual Energy
> exchange, that does take place between men and women all the
> time - when you DENY the spiritual activity of Sex - then you
> degrade men and women into being animals.
>
> '
>
> Thus any ban on contact between men and women, does oppose, does deny
> and does destroy the active, existing, real and true spiritual nature
> of man (man meaning mankind, here),
>
> and that, of course, destroys ANY religion
>
> - and has indeed destroyed or severely damaged any religion
> at times in the past,
>
> and has been A MEANS of destroying religions in the past.
>
> '
>
> '
>
> To regard and define "Sex" as - and in terms of - 'physical
> (bodily) contact between people'
>
> - as has been done at various times in history, by various
> Criminally Minded "religious leaders,"
>
> and which was of course not voiced as being such, but
> which was done entirely
>
> with the purpose to DESTROY the religion they were part of,
>
> because, to make people regard and define "Sex"
> as being a type of 'physical (meaning bodily) contact
> between people' -
>
> is degrading people - into regarding people and treating people as if
> these "are animals" - or worse.
>
> '
>
> '
>
> And indeed - in order to agree and comply with such doctrines about
> "Sex" - THEN many start to behave like animals, and indeed THEN
> many start to treat the opposite Sex, as if these "are animals."
>
> But that is exactly what you try to prevent.
>
> And such a "definition" and resulting practice of "Sex," is
> indeed wholly opposed to the purpose and activity of ANY
> religion.
>
> '
>
> '
>
> '
>
> '
>
> Now we have cleared the main subject, and then we can again look at
> the details that life provides, also regarding existing Sexual
> activities:
>
> As in any activity, so also in Sexual activities, Religion
> may have - and in my opinion should have - legitimate objections
> directed against Hatred, against Ugliness and against Lies *(1)
>
> which are injected by Criminal Minds *(2) indeed into ANY
> activity of Life, and so
>
> of course also in Sexual activities and Sexual
> communications. *(a)
>
> Criminal Minds can get very Ugly, extremely Hateful, and
> utterly Deceptive, also in their Sexual "activities."
>
> '
>
> '
>
> '
>
> Some people have tried to "remedy" evil
>
> - for instance the acts of greed and theft by Criminal Minds -
>
> BY NOT HAVING THINGS "that could be the object of anyone else's
> evil"
>
> - for instance of a Criminal Mind's desire to steal or to
> vandalize.
>
> '
>
> This was proclaimed in Communism: to abolish ownership, in
> order "to remedy Crime and Criminals"
>
> - while in fact, Communism was designed to ENABLE Criminal
> Minds
>
> enabling them to take all your possessions away and to prevent
> your responsibility for life and for people, and to dominate
> you,
>
> an activity which is of course denying and opposing the
> very nature of life itself.
>
> '
>
> But, agreeing with such "remedies," is doing exactly what Criminal
> Minds want of you:
>
> They try to get you to, in some way or other destroy life - in any
> way that they can trick and force you to.
>
> '
>
> '
>
> Thus also, to "wait with so-called Sex" till you are married
>
> - while the natural truth is, that men and women, boys and
> girls, do have Sexual feelings for each other continuously,
>
> these feelings are not waiting at all, and they are felt
> continuously by the opposite Sex too, and
>
> thus you feel these things, towards many - and many feel
> these feelings towards you -
>
> because IT IS THE NATURE OF MEN AND WOMEN TO LIKE
> PEOPLE,
>
> which automatically generates Sexual spiritual
> Energy as well,
>
> so you are NOT AT ALL in actual fact "waiting with Sex till
> you are married,"
>
> nor are you, in actual fact, "waiting with Sex till you
> have found the very true one, and waiting still then till
> after the wedding" -
>
> thus such "waiting with so-called Sex"
>
> must be an idiotic lie which has no basis in factual life,
>
> UNLESS you define "Sex" as the 'physical joining of bodies,'
>
> suggesting and implying and enforcing in many aspects the
> atrocious lie, that "you are a physical object," "a body,"
>
> "ONLY WHAT YOUR BODY DOES, is done by you;" enforcing,
>
> that "you are not of a spiritual nature," which is an idiotic
> lie, and which leads
>
> to define the FEELINGS - the spiritual Energy - as "not Sex," but
>
> to define the physical touching (which may be without feeling, and in
> many cases is indeed without or with very little feeling) as "being
> the so-called Sex."
>
> '
>
> When you (being a girl or woman, or a boy or man, respectively,
> and of normal, healthy Sexual disposition) when you think of
> a Beautiful, Loving man or woman, you NATURALLY create and flow
> Sexual Energy towards him or her!
>
> And vice-versa, this occurs, from him or her, to you as well.
>
> '
> To DENY that, IS DENYING your own spiritual nature, and IS
> DENYING the spiritual nature of others, and IS DENYING the
> spiritual nature of your own body and the spiritual nature of
> someone else's body. *(3)
>
> '
>
> '
>
> '
>
> Sexual activity is thus entirely a spiritual matter, and without it
>
> - if you still would call it Sex when it is in fact not
> more of an activity, than moving your legs would be -
>
> "Sex" is then a mechanical activity which has nothing to do with
> the nature of people,
>
> not with your nature, and also not with the nature of someone
> you love, of the opposite Sex, *(4)
>
> then "Sex" is - at best - a degrading, soul-less activity.
>
> '
>
> '
>
> '
>
> Such a degrading, soul-less view of life, is opposed to ANY religion,
> and thus,
>
> if the continuous creation and existence of Sex as an
> entirely spiritual activity,
>
> which takes place continuously,
>
> IS DENIED in any religion, then it is destroying itself, and is
> destroying any other religions as well. *(5)
>
> '
>
> The purpose of religion is, however, not to diminish, degrade and
> destroy, but to MAINTAIN and enhance and protect your spiritual
> nature, isn't it.
>
> '
>
> Koos Nolst Trenite 'Cause Trinity'
> human rights philosopher and poet
>
> 'Men of all nations came
> to listen to Solomon's wisdom,
> sent by all the kings of the world,
> who had heard of his wisdom.'
>
> 1 Kings 4:34
>
> _________
> Footnotes:
>
> (1) 'The Trinity Of Science - Truth, Love and Beauty'
> {HRI 20030307-pi-1-V2.1}
> (7 Mar 2003 - Version 2.1 on 17 Oct 2003)
> http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.europe/msg/4129fa4f1a67840e?fwc=1
>
> (2) 'Rights of Criminal Minds'
> {HRI 20040108-V1.0.1}
> (8 January 2004 - Version 1.0.1 on 12 Nov 2005)
> http://groups.google.com/group/human-rights-issues/msg/2d74f7c389973d14?fwc=1
>
> (3) 'Plato On Making Love - And Defining Loneliness'
> {HRI 20041114-V2.0.2}
> (14 November 2004 - Version 2.0.2 on 29 June 2005)
> http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.europe/msg/a8326be589085802?fwc=1
> {HRI 20041114-V2.0-UAA}
> http://groups.google.com/group/misc.education/msg/ebdd8f227dd037e2?fwc=1
>
> (4) 'About Sexual Orientation'
> {HRI 20050619}
> (19 June 2005)
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.anthropology/msg/8b802829a1da95d8?fwc=1
>
> (5) 'Religious Freedom - (Definition for Human Rights enforcement)'
> {HRI 20030407-3-V1.0.1}
> (7 April 2003 - Issue 3 - Version 1.0.1 on 6 Oct 2006)
> http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.europe/msg/9308443aa2e9bf31?fwc=1
>
> (6) 'The Nature Of Life As Seen From Earth - Introduction: Life Forms'
> {HRI 20010829-pi1-V1.1.1}
> (29 August 2001 - part issue 1 Version 1.1.1 on 11 Sept 2006)
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med/msg/88a7a7b2d830d5e6?fwc=1
>
> (p2) 'The Nature Of Life As Seen From Earth - Introduction: Our Planet'
> {HRI 20010829-pi2-V1.2}
> (29 August 2001 - part issue 2 Version 1.2 on 12 Sept 2006)
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med/msg/06119c3448d82941?fwc=1
>
> (p3) 'The Nature Of Life As Seen From Earth - The Denial'
> {HRI 20010829-pi3-V1.2}
> (29 August 2001 - part issue 3 Version 1.2 on 13 Sept 2006)
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med/msg/2c7d720f49c84375?fwc=1
>
> (p4) 'The Nature Of Life As Seen From Earth
> - Some Fine Particle Physics' {HRI 20010829-pi4-V3.0}
> (29 August 2001 - part issue 4 Version 3.0 on 14 Sept 2006)
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med/msg/c99ab8c8bdd57a1c?fwc=ccc1
>
> (p5) 'The Nature Of Life As Seen From Earth
> - The Nature Of The Physical Universe' {HRI 20010829-pi5-V3.2.1}
> (29 August 2001 - part issue 5 Version 3.2.1 on 18 Sept 2006)
> http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.japan/msg/f433f1aa6f29a904?fwc=1
>
> (p6) 'The Nature Of Life As Seen From Earth
> - Opposing The Nature Of The Creation' {HRI 20010829-pi6-V4.3.1}
> (29 August 2001 - part issue 6 Version 4.3.1 on 27 Sept 2006)
> http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.japan/msg/2978c2606a0953c0?fwc=1
>
> (p7) 'The Nature Of Life As Seen From Earth
> - Life Energy Particles And Your Body' {HRI 20010829-pi7-V2.0}
> (29 August 2001 - part issue 7 Version 2.0 on 16 Aug 2005)
> http://groups.google.com/group/Fine-Particle-Physics/msg/b030e02be2ba104a?fwc=1
>
> (p8) 'The Nature Of Life As Seen From Earth - Life Energy Particles
> - Perception And Motion' {HRI 20010829-pi8-V1.2}
> (29 August 2001 - part issue 8 Version 1.2 on 18 Aug 2005)
> http://groups.google.com/group/Fine-Particle-Physics/msg/48c04344037dac6d?fwc=1
>
> (p9) 'The Nature Of Life As Seen From Earth - Life Energy Particles
> - Perception At A Distance' {HRI 20010829-pi9-V2.0}
> (29 August 2001 - part issue 9 Version 2.0 on 21 Aug 2005)
> http://groups.google.com/group/Fine-Particle-Physics/msg/3c571f55d616c2c2?fwc=1
>
> (7) 'Obviously The Second Law of Human Rights'
> {HRI 20060924}
> (24 September 2006)
> http://groups.google.com/group/human-rights-issues/msg/114acdcfb40a7962?fwc=1
>
> '
>
> ________
> Textnote:
>
> *(a) In some Islamic cultures, the girls and women are told to cover
> their hair, even their whole body, "because they have to stop
> (or to not invite) 'the bestial desires of men;' they have to
> dominate the Sexual behavior of men towards women."
>
> Some might give you other "reasons" which are, however,
> merely to hide that actual intention:
>
> A destructive intention, which is actually - as you
> will see at some time - 'to please Criminal Minds'
> by assuming or practicing (their) very false views
> about people. *(7)
>
> (...) (see top)
>
> ____________
> Verification:
>
> http://www.angelfire.com/space/platoworld
>
> Copyright 2006 by Koos Nolst Trenite - human rights philosopher
> and poet
> This is 'learnware' - it may not be altered, and it is free for
> anyone who learns from it and (even if he can not learn from it)
> who passes it on unaltered, and with this message included,
> to others who might be able to learn from it.
> None of my writings may be used, ever, to support any political
> or religious or scientific agenda, but only to educate, and to
> encourage people to judge un-dominated and for themselves,
> about any organizations or individuals.
> Send free-of-Envy and free-of-Hate, Beautiful e-mails to:
> PlatoWorld at Lycos.com
> (address unreadable for Internet robots
> - replace ' at ' with the '@' symbol)
Koos Nolst Trenite
De Joker ©
>
> Islamic Women Are Forced To Dominate Men Sexually
>
> 21 May 2006
> {HRI 20060521-V1.3-Islam}
>
> (Version 1.3-Islam)
> on 9 Oct 2006)
>
> (The 'Textnote' is placed on top.)
>
> *(a) In some Islamic cultures, the girls and women are told to cover
> their hair, even their whole body, "because they have to stop
> (or to not invite) 'the bestial desires of men;' they have to
> dominate the Sexual behavior of men towards women."
>
> Some might give you other "reasons" which are, however,
> merely to hide that actual intention:
>
> A destructive intention, which is actually - as you
> will see at some time - 'to please Criminal Minds'
> by assuming or practicing (their) very false views
> about people. *(7)
>
> '
>
> Now, I happen to be a man,
Is that a fact, Koos? Well, very good of you to say so! The name
"Koos" can be either gender in Dutch.
> and - like the vast majority of men -
> I do not at all have any 'bestial desires that should be curbed'
> by anyone, also not by women.
Of course, Koos. We know! You still are sure you happen to be a
man, aren't you?
>
> But Criminal Minds want you to think, that "all people
> have bestial desires" - WHICH IS NOT TRUE AT ALL.
>
> Truly Criminal Minds only form ONE percent of the
> living population on Earth, in equal amounts both
> as women and as men, and of any age, any religion,
> any caste or social position or profession or race.
Also for politicians? Only one percent of them have a criminal
mind? For us in this newsgroup this is definitely good news! Things
are much better than we suspected, it seems...
Thanks for your contribution,
Have a nice day!
(J)
abourick
message de news: 1162053155....@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
> Islamic Women Are Forced To Dominate Men Sexually
> Now, I happen to be a man, and - like the vast majority of men -
> I do not at all have any 'bestial desires that should be curbed'
> by anyone, also not by women.
Because you're not a muslim. Considering their 'bestial desires' it is
obvious that muslims must be dominated and not only in a sexual way.
Muslims, a nation to be devotely whipped...
alsUblieft van Koelman
"De Joker ©" <anti...@Dont-even-think-of.it> schreef in bericht
news:45439792...@Dont-even-think-of.it...
OOOOooohhhhHhh no my Pal,
i want 1off these nights, from 1001, you know.....?
>
> (J)
>
