(51) Women's emancipation causes Chrislam

Basic Dimension

http://sexualreligion.blogspot.com/ 

Number Archive

Religion can be seen as a subset of sexuality:

Within both cultures, Islam and Christianity, we assume an 

endogamous - exogamous relation that yields the operational effect of religion: permeability.

                                        

But the difference between Islam and Christianity is the endogamous core of Christianity has been institutionalized in the clearly visible sadistic and authoritarian Catholic Church: 

While within the Muslim world there are no visible institutions leading the culture. That's why only in Western culture, Christianity could be cut out as the endogamous heart by Marxist relativism:

Earlier in Enlightenment, Western culture developed the Vanilla-dyad of equal sexual roles:





But as said, in Islam the endogamous - exogamous dimension is not visible in institutions but is hidden in the SM-dyad, the relation between husband and wife:

And this instinctive relation based on inbreeding can only be altered by outbreeding or by women's emancipation.






So, in Islam, the endogamous heart of culture cannot be removed, except by the physical separation of husband and wife:

We know in Islam, the exogamic mantle is closed for females, so for them there is no sexual permeability to genetic diversity. It's just all red endogamy:

               

                                                        

A healthy society

In a healthy society of higher mammals, permeability arises from the interaction between the endogamous core and the exogamous mantle. The degree of permeability determines genetic freedom for females. Below you see a healthy patriarchal group of higher mammals:

Assumption 1: God is a sexual ideal projection of higher mammals in the alpha male. He personifies the role of polygamous heterosexuality.

Assumption 2: Gods are sexual roles.  

Assumption 50: The polytheistic space of gods (in the archetype of God) exists of five sexual dimensions. With two dimensions, heterosexuality is opposed to other sexual roles. With five dimensions it concerns the following hierarchy:

1: First God: male heterosexuality. [Alpha male]
2: Second God: male homosexuality. [homosexual clergy]
3: Third God: female sexual roles
4: Fourth God: pedophilia
5: Fifth God: bestiality

It is obvious the endogamy of Islam keeps the culture in an all suffocating grip without genetic freedom for females:

Hence, Islamic culture is lowest on the ladder of civilization:

Assumption 213: Group of higher mammals:

A group of higher mammals exists by virtue of the balance between endogamy and exogamy.

Its endogamous core consists of the power of the alpha male to fertilize all females. Hence, he basically establishes a genetic monoculture by inbreeding and incest, only serving the immediate survival of the group. But in the long run his genes will be over-represented in his descendants, unless competitive males in the exogamous mantle contribute to genetic diversity.

But tension also arises between the sexual desires of the dominant male and females. Since females naturally tend to genetic diversity with other males. Hence, the exogamic outer layer consists of adulterous females chasing genetic diversity with other males and from other groups, what comes down to the permeability of the group.

For humans, the total permeability of the mantle depends on the relation between endogamous repulsion and exogamous attraction of external genes. This relation is the natural base of 'human religion'.  

But only on the basis of inbreeding and incest (Islam) permeability is related to endogamy. Endogamous cores in completely permeable cultures as the Enlightenment are derived from other values. 

Unlike Islam, female animals can easily escape the group of higher mammals. But it instinctively happens they prefer protection by the alpha male in exchange for sexual enslavement. In this way, strong posterity is assured, albeit by inbreeding. And that's why they also exchange genes with other males.

Now it happens, Islam also has a very good side because it has male heterosexuality as its natural core. 

In contrast, Christianity cherishes the second God: male homosexuality in the core and into the mantle (not visible here because placed primarily in the core). 

And male homosexuality of the clergy placed in the endogamic core hypocritically sees itself as representative of God on Earth, after the Alpha male remained in the animal kingdom, leaving the human god as a fossilized and anachronistic physiological trace in the brain:

Now remember sexual relations only work when females cooperate with males. And in Vanilla-dyad females are cooperative only because they have got equal rights. But actually it is against their sexual instinct because suffering is a sexual lust in SM-dyad:






And if Muslim females really didn't like to participate in this crying and moaning, Islam had not survived in evolution.

Now it is the merit of Jesus that he became the personification of 'other sexual roles', whereby in Christianity in particular females are seen as subjects. Remember 'other sexual roles' are the anti-projection of male heterosexuality and females in Islam are objects.

Though Jesus wanted protection for all oppressed on earth, those 'other sexual roles' have nothing in common, other than enforced masochism by Muslim males in Islam. This means, women naturally feel no sexual attraction to male homosexuality. And that's why they instinctively did not stand behind the haggling of the homosexual clergy in Christianity. 

Therefore, after the murder of Christianity by Marxist nihilism, the homosexual clergy lost all power over women because social interests no longer ran parallel. Women no longer were protected by the church. Now, in women an unconscious longing awoke to the SM-dyad of Islam:

And that is the real reason Christianity collapsed late in the Enlightenment: females got enormous emancipatory power from Marxist nihilism and flocked back to SM-dyad, while at the same time not wanting to give up the benefits of Vanilla-dyad. 
But now Western culture rolled into the schizophrenic situation, a hybrid form of religion, sadism and masochism, what combination we call SM in sexuality and Chrislam in religion:








Concluding, Christianity was only the second best solution, because is guaranteed natural rights, though it was against sexual nature:

After the Enlightenment was placed in the endogamic core by Marxist relativism, women got full equal rights by women's emancipation. And now they rejected the artificial prosthesis of Christian homosexuality completely. This means they rejected 'religion', but not the underlying sexual instincts.





Western women got power by women's empowerment of feminism and unwittingly yearned to long forgotten sexual lusts of the SM-dyad:

The sadistic Muslim God was the only God suitable to serve as sexual anti-projection for liberated Western women:






                                     

This work is licenced under a Creative Commons Attibution-Non Commercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International Licence.
         

(50) The Cause of Chrislam

Basic Dimension

http://sexualreligion.blogspot.com/ 


Number Archive

Religion is a form of sexuality

In our view, religion is a form of sexuality. We also think religion has its origins in the animal kingdom. As a consequence the human brain contains a network of nerve cells which is used for sexuality as well as for religion. 

In our working model we distinguish five areas of sexuality: 
heterosexuality, homosexuality, female sexual roles, pedophilia and bestiality. This five-dimensional space also is the power space of man, on which all human power is projected.

The space has a super power as a main factor. In sexuality this is called sadomasochism. In religion it is called 'monotheism'. Monotheism is the principal component (main factor) of the polytheistic set of sexual gods. Hence, 'sexual roles' is the same as 'gods'. And monotheism is equal to sadomasochism. Now our structure of religion in the human brain has been completed:

Assumption 1: God is a sexual ideal projection of higher mammals in the alpha male. He personifies the role of polygamous heterosexuality.

Assumption 2: Gods are sexual roles.  

Assumption 50: The polytheistic space of gods (in the archetype of God) exists of five sexual dimensions. With two dimensions, heterosexuality is opposed to other sexual roles. With five dimensions it concerns the following hierarchy:

1: First God: male heterosexuality. [Alpha male]
2: Second God: male homosexuality. [homosexual clergy]
3: Third God: female sexual roles
4: Fourth God: pedophilia
5: Fifth God: bestiality

Assumption 243: The cause of Chrislam:

As said, the first God is the masculine and polygamous heterosexual Alpha male who was left behind in the animal world. This is the configuration of Islam:





But this implies on the sexual dimension, Christianity always has been a religion weaker than Islam, because the homosexual clergy of Christianity is just the second God of the animal world, arrogantly only representing itself as deputy of the first on earth. In addition, a homosexual God has no superiority over women:







Human religion and bonobo religion

As said, the Christian church has been what we call the endogamous monotheistic heart of Western culture. But usually monotheism stands for the first heterosexual God, the Alpha male. It is clear a schizophrenic situation has arisen within Christianity where the homosexual clergy, as second sexual role, has taken the place the first God.

The endogamous Christian church was sadistic in nature so the teachings of Jesus in the exogamic mantle had to give counterweight. Jesus learned something quite different and respected 'other sexual roles'. 

Jesus is the personification of 'other sexual roles', which is the anti-projection of God. And Jesus as the son of God must be a God himself too. This means with two gods all sexual roles are consciously and emphatically known in Christianity:

But in Islam, Mohammed cannot be a God because Muslims can never be gods. What means there exists only one God in the conscious of Muslim males. All other sexual roles are suppressed to the unconscious. Would Muslims recognize homosexuality, Allah lost his omnipotence immediately and Muslim males lost their power over females. That's why real monotheism never will accept homosexuality:





The conscious experience of just one God means splitting sexual identity between the conscious and the unconscious:

Now we know monotheism of Islam kills homosexuals and the Christian church has great difficulty accepting them. That's why bonobos stand higher on the ladder of civilization than Christians:

Of course Muslim males will reject homosexuality as their God. They still worship inbreeding and incest of the Alpha male and that's why Islam will always defeat Christianity. 

Moreover, Christianity is nothing more than the masochistic counterpart of sadistic Islam. Hence, on the instinctive dimension, the SM-dyad of Islam will always defeat Vanilla-dyad of Christianity. That's because the latter is only prosthesis for the real sexual instinct. 

Therefore we see the murder of Marxist nihilism on the homosexual clergy of Christianity automatically created a vacuum for the heterosexual God of Islam. Marxism nihilism accidentally created Chrislam:

With the march through the institutions, at that historical moment, policor extradited Christianity to Islam, which became the new endogamous heart of Western culture:

Unaware of looking for a new religious endogamous core, policor suggested every effort to capture the endogamous heart of Islam. But they really thought they treated Islam the same as other religions under their multicultural exogamous mantle.

And so, as alleged multiculturalism, Islamic absolutism was imported right into the heart of Western culture. 

Islam occupied the empty place of the homosexual clergy to peace and salvation of policor, who sacrificed the empty shell of exogamous Western culture to a sadistic mass murderer.

But a major determinant of the emergence of Chrislam is women's emancipation in Western culture. Because it was women, who instinctively did not acknowledge sexual superiority of the homosexual clergy:

Assumption 246: In the exogamous mantle (sexuality) of Christianity, women project themselves in Jesus as personification of 'other sexual roles', which includes male homosexuality as a second God. But in nature, women have an anti-projection on the endogamous core (religion), on the first sexual God, well known as male heterosexuality. That follows SM-dyad. But in current sick religion of Christianity homosexuality plays a major role, both in the endogamous core (homosexual clergy) as in the exogamous mantle (Jesus), making Christianity fall under Vanilla-dyad. But the latter is only prosthesis on the sexual instinct and women have no instinctive relation with male homosexuality. Which means in evolution Christianity will return to SM-dyad, to Chrislam and women's emancipation will drag sadistic Allah into Europe.

This work is licenced under a Creative Commons Attibution-Non Commercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International Licence.