+- tapatalk (https://tapatalk.sorcerytime.com)
+-- Forum: ALL (https://tapatalk.sorcerytime.com/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: New Seers (https://tapatalk.sorcerytime.com/forum-6.html)
+--- Thread: Sexual celibacy and the absolute withholding of the sexual chi as an enlightening practice. (/thread-18889.html)
Sexual celibacy and the absolute withholding of the sexual chi as an enlightening practice. - Finwe - 08-15-2017
.
Sexual celibacy and the absolute withholding of the sexual chi as an enlightening practice. - Finwe - 08-15-2017
Shhh..
Sexual celibacy and the absolute withholding of the sexual chi as an enlightening practice. - serloco - 08-16-2017
You know what I found lately? I found that most often I am involved in deeply creative aspects of sorcery, mind control, telekinesis, commanding intent, fighting evils, and much more sorcery feats. Yet lately I have been, for the first time in ages, not fighting and not doing much sorcery at all. This way of life has freed up my sexual energy and given me an abudance of heavy and tasty lust. I usually am not so involved in sexual endevours. yet lately that all I can think about. I dont know what like better, fucking hot girls or doing powerful sorcery? I think i can find a balance..
Sexual celibacy and the absolute withholding of the sexual chi as an enlightening practice. - rosygyro - 09-10-2017
I am just a ceaseless flow of orgasmic hot spunk.. occasionally my physicl body catches on and kicks out a few sticky globules of the real.
just totally sexy i guess.
Sexual celibacy and the absolute withholding of the sexual chi as an enlightening practice. - rosygyro - 09-10-2017
the only people who shoud be holding in their sexual "chi" are those who have mental or emotional fuckups about sexual consent.
i.e. rape fantasists pedophiles etc.. all of whom are people whos sexual energy should not extend from their tonal "EVER".
sexual energy is a ceaseless part of our total dimension and although the river of sex is eternal
our access to it is sticcato and individual.
as such there is a HUGE divide between witnessing the river of sex
and being a part of it.
unlike an actual river on the surface of the earth you cannot just jump into the sexual river
as the sexual energy of the collective and the sexual energy of the personal are at two different xtremes of the nagual ring.
there were in my more sexually wanting years a few occasions where i would only know i had met a female i was sexually matched with by the fact i had spent the past 20 mintues legging it down the road trying to get away..
attempting to get away from the river instinctivly so i could make the turn to access as individual.
of course by the time i had objectve to the sex that could exist between us as personal i was already too far away to initiate any..
But that has always been my predilection on sex.
i SEE the sexual river and its flow, but also the ugly rock that the male known is upon its bank.
attempting to find a place to access the female without carrying the habitual assemblage and its known
is very important to me..
but one slip and it can all go so wrong.
habitual assemblage of the known is nt just the perpetuation of systemic rape in the vein of honoured patriarchy.
it is also recognising the cheap and ordinary, generic and everyday common desires to just *** all the women on the planet.
you dont think there are perverts who work in dildo factories? who carry the cartons of shlongs to the delivery trucks
like they are sending their own personal fucks?
It is very commonplace and ordinary (hence habitual) for a male to try to *** the unknown..
for where his known exists the unknown is displaced.
he may remain ignorant as long as he plugs the holes to awarness.
there is absoluteley no knowledge in making an icebreaker of your prick.
when you try to takedown the systemic known in your sexual energy
you will undersatnd that it is not just a case of not being habitual in your energy
but you must also practice not-doing.
Sexual celibacy and the absolute withholding of the sexual chi as an enlightening practice. - Julio Juliopolis - 09-17-2017
rosygyro wrote:
the only people who shoud be holding in their sexual "chi" are those who have mental or emotional fuckups about sexual consent.
I believe Finwe made this thread as a place to discuss the withholding of sexual chi as a spiritual practice designed for the purpose of storing and/or gaining energy for sorceric-type purposes. It seems you're discussing the withholding of sexual chi more as though it is a sort of punishment, or at the very least a means of preventing the contamination of humanity with certain types of sexual desires which you happen to dislike.
i.e. rape fantasists pedophiles etc.. all of whom are people whos sexual energy should not extend from their tonal "EVER".
Are you aware that the most common sexual fantasies women report having are rape fantasies? It's so common that odds are even your mother probably had rape fantasies. It seems you are saying these women should never be allowed to masturbate. Or is it different if someone is fantasizing about themselves being raped, rather than raping someone else? What if a man and woman are watching a rape fetish video together? Are they allowed to have sex to this? How about masturbating; should either of them be allowed to masturbate? Which one and why?
sexual energy is a ceaseless part of our total dimension and although the river of sex is eternal
our access to it is sticcato and individual.
as such there is a HUGE divide between witnessing the river of sex
and being a part of it.
I think that all applies to consciousness as a whole.
unlike an actual river on the surface of the earth you cannot just jump into the sexual river
Because it's a metaphor?
as the sexual energy of the collective and the sexual energy of the personal are at two different xtremes of the nagual ring.
That isn't very clear to me. I don't know what you mean by nagual ring, nor what it's extremes are, nor why the sexual energy of the individual versus the collective falls on those two different extremes, nor why any of that might matter.
there were in my more sexually wanting years a few occasions where i would only know i had met a female i was sexually matched with by the fact i had spent the past 20 mintues legging it down the road trying to get away..
You only knew you were sexually matched with a girl after you'd spent 20 minutes running from the sight of her? Has it occurred to you that maybe the messages you were given about sex and your sexuality growing up weren't very good?
attempting to get away from the river instinctivly so i could make the turn to access as individual.
of course by the time i had objectve to the sex that could exist between us as personal i was already too far away to initiate any..
Ah but the benefit of that is that you were then far enough away that she would be protected from your evil sexuality, male.
But that has always been my predilection on sex.
i SEE the sexual river and its flow, but also the ugly rock that the male known is upon its bank.
What is the male known? Why do you choose to see it as ugly? Who told you it was and made you believe it?
attempting to find a place to access the female without carrying the habitual assemblage and its known
is very important to me..
but one slip and it can all go so wrong.
The habitual way men and women have dirty sex is perfectly good.
habitual assemblage of the known is nt just the perpetuation of systemic rape in the vein of honoured patriarchy.
You know the feminists who created that kind of language want to kill you right? First of all, the feminist concept of patriarchy - that because most of the most powerful people in a society are men we can conclude that they must use that power to benefit men at large - is false. In order to conclude that the powerful people are using that power to benefit one sex over the other we have to actually look at how they use their power, not what gender they are. And when we actually look at that it becomes obvious that powerful people, whether male or female, have always used their power more to help women than men. No legitimate patriarchy has ever been shown to exist.
Secondly, "honoured patriarchy"? Are you nuts? Have you not heard the millions of deluded idiots shouting about how horrible patriarchy is for the past 70 years? Where is anyone honoring patriarchy?
Third... "Systemic rape"? No! There is no systemic rape. Rape is frowned upon. Nobody likes rape. Even in jail, rapists get treated horribly by other criminals as punishment for committing such an unacceptable act. As with other acts that are so frowned upon and heavily punished rape isn't happening very much. The feminazi generated 1 in 4 and 1 in 5 statistics the media keeps hyping about rape are total BS. Go check the police records instead. The real numbers of women who are raped are closer to 1 in 1000. And don't buy that **** about "women are afraid of being called a slut so that's why they don't report the other 249 out of 1000 rapes". Does that actually make any sense to you? Do you know *any* women who even worry about being called a slut at all... let alone actually think they would be called one if they told people they were raped? The truth is we don't live in a rape culture, there is no "systemic rape" and never was. What we actually have is a rape-phobic culture created by feminists in order to demonize men and raise money for "spreading awareness" and other such BS.
it is also recognising the cheap and ordinary, generic and everyday common desires to just *** all the women on the planet.
That doesn't sound ordinary to me. I'd say what's more ordinary is to want to *** a bunch of attractive women. Not unattractive ones, and certainly not every woman on the planet. Likewise I imagine the ordinary woman wants to *** a variety of attractive men.
you dont think there are perverts who work in dildo factories? who carry the cartons of shlongs to the delivery trucks
like they are sending their own personal fucks?
It wasn't that long ago when masturbating was considered perverted. Why aren't the women who buy and use the dildos getting called perverts here? Why only the guy who masturbates thinking about the possible women who might be using the dildo he made? Do all of your judgements on sex fit into the "women sex good, men sex bad" model?
It is very commonplace and ordinary (hence habitual) for a male to try to *** the unknown..
Actually I'm pretty sure men want to know *what* they're fucking at the very least.
for where his known exists the unknown is displaced.
he may remain ignorant as long as he plugs the holes to awarness.
there is absoluteley no knowledge in making an icebreaker of your prick.
You seem to be linking the knows, (the tonal), with male sex parts and the unknown, (the nagual), with female ones. Why do you do this? You could just as easily analogize male sex parts to the nagual and female parts to the tonal. Then your last sentences would read...
"For where her known exists the unknown is enveloped.
She may remain ignorant as long as she veils the pillars of awareness,
There is absolutely no knowledge in making a tarp of your snatch."
... and it would be no less reasonable than the metaphor you're using.
An alternative way to look at sex parts is to view them whether male or female as just a small part of the tonal. Neither males nor females are born with superior nagual genitals. That would be an egalitarian view, as opposed to the feminist view you seem to be looking at them from now.
when you try to takedown the systemic known in your sexual energy
you will undersatnd that it is not just a case of not being habitual in your energy
but you must also practice not-doing.
Re-arrange your sexual energy however you like, but I'd advise you start by recapping all the messages about how evil male sexuality is that seem to have worked their way into your worldview first.
Sexual celibacy and the absolute withholding of the sexual chi as an enlightening practice. - rosygyro - 09-22-2017
Julio Juliopolis wrote:
rosygyro wrote:
the only people who shoud be holding in their sexual "chi" are those who have mental or emotional fuckups about sexual consent.
I believe Finwe made this thread as a place to discuss the withholding of sexual chi as a spiritual practice designed for the purpose of storing and/or gaining energy for sorceric-type purposes. It seems you're discussing the withholding of sexual chi more as though it is a sort of punishment, or at the very least a means of preventing the contamination of humanity with certain types of sexual desires which you happen to dislike.
i.e. rape fantasists pedophiles etc.. all of whom are people whos sexual energy should not extend from their tonal "EVER".
Are you aware that the most common sexual fantasies women report having are rape fantasies? It's so common that odds are even your mother probably had rape fantasies. It seems you are saying these women should never be allowed to masturbate. Or is it different if someone is fantasizing about themselves being raped, rather than raping someone else? What if a man and woman are watching a rape fetish video together? Are they allowed to have sex to this? How about masturbating; should either of them be allowed to masturbate? Which one and why?
sexual energy is a ceaseless part of our total dimension and although the river of sex is eternal
our access to it is sticcato and individual.
as such there is a HUGE divide between witnessing the river of sex
and being a part of it.
I think that all applies to consciousness as a whole.
unlike an actual river on the surface of the earth you cannot just jump into the sexual river
Because it's a metaphor?
as the sexual energy of the collective and the sexual energy of the personal are at two different xtremes of the nagual ring.
That isn't very clear to me. I don't know what you mean by nagual ring, nor what it's extremes are, nor why the sexual energy of the individual versus the collective falls on those two different extremes, nor why any of that might matter.
there were in my more sexually wanting years a few occasions where i would only know i had met a female i was sexually matched with by the fact i had spent the past 20 mintues legging it down the road trying to get away..
You only knew you were sexually matched with a girl after you'd spent 20 minutes running from the sight of her? Has it occurred to you that maybe the messages you were given about sex and your sexuality growing up weren't very good?
attempting to get away from the river instinctivly so i could make the turn to access as individual.
of course by the time i had objectve to the sex that could exist between us as personal i was already too far away to initiate any..
Ah but the benefit of that is that you were then far enough away that she would be protected from your evil sexuality, male.
But that has always been my predilection on sex.
i SEE the sexual river and its flow, but also the ugly rock that the male known is upon its bank.
What is the male known? Why do you choose to see it as ugly? Who told you it was and made you believe it?
attempting to find a place to access the female without carrying the habitual assemblage and its known
is very important to me..
but one slip and it can all go so wrong.
The habitual way men and women have dirty sex is perfectly good.
habitual assemblage of the known is nt just the perpetuation of systemic rape in the vein of honoured patriarchy.
You know the feminists who created that kind of language want to kill you right? First of all, the feminist concept of patriarchy - that because most of the most powerful people in a society are men we can conclude that they must use that power to benefit men at large - is false. In order to conclude that the powerful people are using that power to benefit one sex over the other we have to actually look at how they use their power, not what gender they are. And when we actually look at that it becomes obvious that powerful people, whether male or female, have always used their power more to help women than men. No legitimate patriarchy has ever been shown to exist.
Secondly, "honoured patriarchy"? Are you nuts? Have you not heard the millions of deluded idiots shouting about how horrible patriarchy is for the past 70 years? Where is anyone honoring patriarchy?
Third... "Systemic rape"? No! There is no systemic rape. Rape is frowned upon. Nobody likes rape. Even in jail, rapists get treated horribly by other criminals as punishment for committing such an unacceptable act. As with other acts that are so frowned upon and heavily punished rape isn't happening very much. The feminazi generated 1 in 4 and 1 in 5 statistics the media keeps hyping about rape are total BS. Go check the police records instead. The real numbers of women who are raped are closer to 1 in 1000. And don't buy that **** about "women are afraid of being called a slut so that's why they don't report the other 249 out of 1000 rapes". Does that actually make any sense to you? Do you know *any* women who even worry about being called a slut at all... let alone actually think they would be called one if they told people they were raped? The truth is we don't live in a rape culture, there is no "systemic rape" and never was. What we actually have is a rape-phobic culture created by feminists in order to demonize men and raise money for "spreading awareness" and other such BS.
it is also recognising the cheap and ordinary, generic and everyday common desires to just *** all the women on the planet.
That doesn't sound ordinary to me. I'd say what's more ordinary is to want to *** a bunch of attractive women. Not unattractive ones, and certainly not every woman on the planet. Likewise I imagine the ordinary woman wants to *** a variety of attractive men.
you dont think there are perverts who work in dildo factories? who carry the cartons of shlongs to the delivery trucks
like they are sending their own personal fucks?
It wasn't that long ago when masturbating was considered perverted. Why aren't the women who buy and use the dildos getting called perverts here? Why only the guy who masturbates thinking about the possible women who might be using the dildo he made? Do all of your judgements on sex fit into the "women sex good, men sex bad" model?
It is very commonplace and ordinary (hence habitual) for a male to try to *** the unknown..
Actually I'm pretty sure men want to know *what* they're fucking at the very least.
for where his known exists the unknown is displaced.
he may remain ignorant as long as he plugs the holes to awarness.
there is absoluteley no knowledge in making an icebreaker of your prick.
You seem to be linking the knows, (the tonal), with male sex parts and the unknown, (the nagual), with female ones. Why do you do this? You could just as easily analogize male sex parts to the nagual and female parts to the tonal. Then your last sentences would read...
"For where her known exists the unknown is enveloped.
She may remain ignorant as long as she veils the pillars of awareness,
There is absolutely no knowledge in making a tarp of your snatch."
... and it would be no less reasonable than the metaphor you're using.
An alternative way to look at sex parts is to view them whether male or female as just a small part of the tonal. Neither males nor females are born with superior nagual genitals. That would be an egalitarian view, as opposed to the feminist view you seem to be looking at them from now.
when you try to takedown the systemic known in your sexual energy
you will undersatnd that it is not just a case of not being habitual in your energy
but you must also practice not-doing.
Re-arrange your sexual energy however you like, but I'd advise you start by recapping all the messages about how evil male sexuality is that seem to have worked their way into your worldview first.
da *** do i know?
i done my 20,000 fucks.
medical studies show that the human sexual system goes into atrophy without use.
that sexual activity keeps the sexual energy physically able to continue.
NOTE- when i first studied tensegrity it became wholly apparent that
the holding in and retaining of sexual energy by male practitioners was coupled
to a energetic vampirism upon sexual energy in general.
this is aside from the obvious and transparent excuses of middle aged sexuallly dwindling males
claiming that they now want to conserve sexual energy for sorceric means
masking the very normal ordinary mid life crisis that "normal people" can at least admit.
sexual vampirism upon individuals is in my opinion
part of the reason why uncontrolled sexual response exists.
i.e. those who have their sexual energy drawn out into the cocoon by sorceric means
who do not undersatnd such means
are more likely to hunt down their misclaimed energy in a wrongly interpreted manner
and commit acts of non consentual sexual violence.
dont believe anything i say..
but at least see that i am erring on the side of caution
regarding the impulsive use of sex.
impulsive use of sex is possible the only part of sexually withholding
that i am glad to see thwarted.
sex should be wholly consensual.
Sexual celibacy and the absolute withholding of the sexual chi as an enlightening practice. - Le_Regard - 09-24-2017
rosygyro wrote:
sex should be wholly consensual.
Do you also think death should be wholly consensual?
Sexual celibacy and the absolute withholding of the sexual chi as an enlightening practice. - rosygyro - 09-24-2017
I guess when you have unprotected sex knowing the risks of hiv that it is.
Sexual celibacy and the absolute withholding of the sexual chi as an enlightening practice. - Le_Regard - 09-24-2017
rosygyro wrote:
I guess when you have unprotected sex knowing the risks of hiv that it is.
What I mean to say is, your views on human sexuality do not seem entirely consistent.
I'm inclined to agree with the previous commentator who suggested your views could maybe fit into a "female sexuality good, male sexuality bad" model. I think you've maybeunnecessarily and perhaps accidentally, imposed "good/evil", or "pure/impure", onto "male/female"... which is not the same thing at all.
Sexual celibacy and the absolute withholding of the sexual chi as an enlightening practice. - Le_Regard - 09-24-2017
rosygyro wrote:
I guess when you have unprotected sex knowing the risks of hiv that it is.
I also think it is very necessary to point out how unusual and revealing it is that you immediately went to death from HIV... instead of pregnancy, the continuation of the species through time, etc., which I think is a much more common result.
Sexual celibacy and the absolute withholding of the sexual chi as an enlightening practice. - Le_Regard - 09-24-2017
For the record, if there are any FEMALE humans reading this, I would really appreciate your input on what this guy thinks about male sexuality. Just saying.
Sexual celibacy and the absolute withholding of the sexual chi as an enlightening practice. - rosygyro - 09-27-2017
Existing trends in sexuality of the habitual assemblage point versus energetic sexuality despite the habitual assemblage point.
Sexual celibacy and the absolute withholding of the sexual chi as an enlightening practice. - rosygyro - 09-27-2017
You just gotta understand that underpinning the world IS the masculine known.
There are plenty of females who perpetuate the masculine known, plenty of males also.
The issues with the human habitual assemblage point are the reason our civilisation is tearing itself apart.
Sexual celibacy and the absolute withholding of the sexual chi as an enlightening practice. - rosygyro - 09-27-2017
Le_Regard wrote:
rosygyro wrote:
I guess when you have unprotected sex knowing the risks of hiv that it is.
I also think it is very necessary to point out how unusual and revealing it is that you immediately went to death from HIV... instead of pregnancy, the continuation of the species through time, etc., which I think is a much more common result.
You asked wether death is consensual.
And as i chose to walk a sexual maze of unprotected sex based upon the guidance of the yellow rose- sex was my answer.
Ooo ya
Sexual celibacy and the absolute withholding of the sexual chi as an enlightening practice. - rosygyro - 09-27-2017
Le_Regard wrote:
For the record, if there are any FEMALE humans reading this, I would really appreciate your input on what this guy thinks about male sexuality. Just saying.
Sexual celibacy and the absolute withholding of the sexual chi as an enlightening practice. - Le_Regard - 09-27-2017
rosygyro wrote:
Existing trends in sexuality of the habitual assemblage point versus energetic sexuality despite the habitual assemblage point.
"Existing trends” like what?
You are sounding a lot like the kind of Christian fundamentalists who disown their children for being gay.
Sexual celibacy and the absolute withholding of the sexual chi as an enlightening practice. - Le_Regard - 09-27-2017
rosygyro wrote:
You just gotta understand that underpinning the world IS the masculine known.
There are plenty of females who perpetuate the masculine known, plenty of males also.
The issues with the human habitual assemblage point are the reason our civilisation is tearing itself apart.
No, I don't. Calling it "the male known" is exactly what people are complaining about when they complain about "the patriarchy".
YOU need to understand that other assemblage points exist in your world, you shift them as much as they shift you, and a system of more or less consistent rules for communicating and getting along are what we call a "civilization".
Sexual celibacy and the absolute withholding of the sexual chi as an enlightening practice. - rosygyro - 10-01-2017
Le_Regard wrote:
rosygyro wrote:
You just gotta understand that underpinning the world IS the masculine known.
There are plenty of females who perpetuate the masculine known, plenty of males also.
The issues with the human habitual assemblage point are the reason our civilisation is tearing itself apart.
No, I don't. Calling it "the male known" is exactly what people are complaining about when they complain about "the patriarchy".
YOU need to understand that other assemblage points exist in your world, you shift them as much as they shift you, and a system of more or less consistent rules for communicating and getting along are what we call a "civilization".
If i were to call it the female known and the male unknown it would mean a different thing and would not be as relative
to the collective habitual position.
i am not that interested in personal assemblages as they run at tangents to the collective need.
calling it the female unknown lends itself more to sexually respecting the female as an "unknown"
and calling it the male known lends itself to self evaluation, or a much easier tackling of one polarity of the sexual as
the material tonal.
we can drag it back to the basic phallic symbol as the male known
and just appreciate that millions of phallic symbols have been created over the millions of years
and that if these phallus had done the job they were supposed to
that our world would have no issues regarding sexuality and time.
the male known or the phallus can exist as a physical object
wheras the female unknown is wholly positioned in the female.
we can tackle a stone, wood or ice or even symbolic phallus without it being a direct
attempt to effect an individual or indeed any organic part of man.
the same cannot be said of the unknown
and forebearance as such exists.
Sexual celibacy and the absolute withholding of the sexual chi as an enlightening practice. - Le_Regard - 10-02-2017
rosygyro wrote:
Le_Regard wrote:
rosygyro wrote:
You just gotta understand that underpinning the world IS the masculine known.
There are plenty of females who perpetuate the masculine known, plenty of males also.
The issues with the human habitual assemblage point are the reason our civilisation is tearing itself apart.
No, I don't. Calling it "the male known" is exactly what people are complaining about when they complain about "the patriarchy".
YOU need to understand that other assemblage points exist in your world, you shift them as much as they shift you, and a system of more or less consistent rules for communicating and getting along are what we call a "civilization".
If i were to call it the female known and the male unknown it would mean a different thing and would not be as relative
to the collective habitual position.
i am not that interested in personal assemblages as they run at tangents to the collective need.
calling it the female unknown lends itself more to sexually respecting the female as an "unknown"
and calling it the male known lends itself to self evaluation, or a much easier tackling of one polarity of the sexual as
the material tonal.
we can drag it back to the basic phallic symbol as the male known
and just appreciate that millions of phallic symbols have been created over the millions of years
and that if these phallus had done the job they were supposed to
that our world would have no issues regarding sexuality and time.
the male known or the phallus can exist as a physical object
wheras the female unknown is wholly positioned in the female.
we can tackle a stone, wood or ice or even symbolic phallus without it being a direct
attempt to effect an individual or indeed any organic part of man.
the same cannot be said of the unknown
and forebearance as such exists.
Why do the known and the unknown have to be gendered at all? What good is it? Are you saying that's just the absolute fixed truth of how reality really is?
Do you maybe think gay sex is problematic because it's not properly attuned to the polarities of reality?
The point is not that you've gotten them backwards, the point is whether they're necessary parts of reality or just an awkward human, or even (gasp!) cultural, convention.
Seriously, the WHOLE POINT of romance is that "personal assemblages" "run at tangents to the collective need". Haven't you ever read Romeo and Juliet?
Sexual celibacy and the absolute withholding of the sexual chi as an enlightening practice. - Julio Juliopolis - 10-02-2017
rosygyro wrote:
Le_Regard wrote:
rosygyro wrote:
You just gotta understand that underpinning the world IS the masculine known.
There are plenty of females who perpetuate the masculine known, plenty of males also.
The issues with the human habitual assemblage point are the reason our civilisation is tearing itself apart.
No, I don't. Calling it "the male known" is exactly what people are complaining about when they complain about "the patriarchy".
YOU need to understand that other assemblage points exist in your world, you shift them as much as they shift you, and a system of more or less consistent rules for communicating and getting along are what we call a "civilization".
If i were to call it the female known and the male unknown it would mean a different thing and would not be as relative
to the collective habitual position.
According to whom?
i am not that interested in personal assemblages as they run at tangents to the collective need.
calling it the female unknown lends itself more to sexually respecting the female as an "unknown"
and calling it the male known lends itself to self evaluation, or a much easier tackling of one polarity of the sexual as
the material tonal.
So you admit your choice isn't based on "seeing" or anything, but a moral choice. Why do you think the female sexuality is the one that needs more respect, and the male sexuality is the one that needs more self-evaluation? It sounds like your just bleeting along with the other sheep "2 legs good, 3 legs baaaaad!" Since all the other sheep are also respecting female sexuality more, doesn't that mean it's the male sexuality that is in need of more respect?
Look at the evidence -
How does society treat a woman who grinds up against or grabs a man's crotch at a nightclub without permission? What about a man who does that to a woman?
How does society feel about female circumcision versus male circumcision?
How seriously is male rape taken? How about female rape?
It's pretty obvious that if you're going by the evidence it would be male sexuality you'd be trying to get more respected, but if you want to let everyone else know you're a good boy who holds the same values as them and aren't really concerned with evidence than keep doing it the way you are.
we can drag it back to the basic phallic symbol as the male known
and just appreciate that millions of phallic symbols have been created over the millions of years
and that if these phallus had done the job they were supposed to
that our world would have no issues regarding sexuality and time.
A lot of those so called phallic symbols are highly questionable. Take the Washington monument for example. Is your penis composed of 4 flat sides joined together at sharp angles? Does the top of it resemble a pyramid? Feminidiots like to point to everything that's longer than it is wide as proof of the worship of male genitalia, but their arguments are, as always, highly dubious at best. "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar" - Bill Clinton.
Likewise, if we always looked at the world with a sufficiently focused paranoia of female genitals we could point to any doorway or monuments like the Arch de Triumph as symbolic of female genitalia. One feminist author I read did exactly that, stating that's why we should venerate the Arch de Triumph and disregard all those phallic symbols like the Washington monument. Because feminism is about equality or something like that.
the male known or the phallus can exist as a physical object
Female genitalia is also a physical object.
wheras the female unknown is wholly positioned in the female.
we can tackle a stone, wood or ice or even symbolic phallus without it being a direct
attempt to effect an individual or indeed any organic part of man.
Indeed, I can walk through an archway or put on a pair of gloves without it being an attempt to effect an individual or indeed any organic part of woman either.
the same cannot be said of the unknown
and forebearance as such exists.
"The nagual does not look up to anyone's sexuality, nor does he/she look down on anyone's sexuality." - Captain Kirk, (from the animated series, episode 5 "More Trouble, More Tribbles")
Sexual celibacy and the absolute withholding of the sexual chi as an enlightening practice. - rosygyro - 10-03-2017
You know what a diode is?
You know what a resistor is?
You know that with a high enough resistance in a circuit before a diode that the diode becomes merely intellectualcurcuitry.
The known or social conditioning is much like a diode.. it allows a one way flow of logic.
Paying lip service to political correctedness or current trends in LGBT type recognition as per awareness is way cool..
It's still a diode.
Empty of much current thank God.
Sexual celibacy and the absolute withholding of the sexual chi as an enlightening practice. - rosygyro - 10-03-2017
I hear the Hells Angels have a new initiation ritual! In keeping with modern trends they are using Robot hookers.
The bastards are unplugging them from the electricity mains before they ram their dirty engine oiled nobs into the now cold vibrationless silicone sex slots.
Sexual celibacy and the absolute withholding of the sexual chi as an enlightening practice. - rosygyro - 10-03-2017
When I talk about the male known I am using existential
Form as an analogy.
I am aware sexism exists and I stand against its perpetuation.
In order to stand against its current trends it is necessary to talk about basic forms of root physicality.
Much like you would talk about the factory from which a junkyard car once rolled out.
Sexual celibacy and the absolute withholding of the sexual chi as an enlightening practice. - Julio Juliopolis - 10-04-2017
rosygyro wrote:
When I talk about the male known I am using existential
Form as an analogy.
I am aware sexism exists and I stand against its perpetuation.
Well, that is exactly the point I've been contending in here. I don't think you are standing against sexism, but rather perpetuating it with your "male known", "female unknown" and general attitudes expressed here.
In order to stand against its current trends it is necessary to talk about basic forms of root physicality.
Much like you would talk about the factory from which a junkyard car once rolled out.
I don't know why you think sexism is rooted in the physical. It's roots are emotional. To examine it's roots, we ought to look for emotional manipulations so powerful they can get most men to refuse to accept a lifeboat for themselves if their ship is sinking, in favor of giving it to someone else on the sole basis of their sex, just to confirm to themselves that they are good people. Women of course are manipulated to feel entitled to the lifeboat just because they're women. Who emotionally manipulates and brainwashes the masses at large? How do they do it? These are the sorts of questions that should be looked into.