(233) Homo-erotic coping strategies in desert religions

Basic Dimension 

http://sexualreligion.blogspot.com/ 

Number Archive  

Malbork figurka Chrystusa 1390

Polytheism

In polytheism, sexual roles were respected and free in the conscious.

People were not ashamed of their sexual orientation and were valued as equal subjects, as human beings. This means homosexuals had the same rights as heterosexuals. Both types of orientation were not even distinguished separately. 

Apollo with Hyacinth

As an example we take Zeus and Ganymede, a 'beautiful Trojan shepherd boy' (Ganymede's abduction by Zeus's eagle, Aquila). Both sexual roles were empathically represented in the conscious:





In polytheism it is said gods were mating with animals. Sometimes, they wanted to acquire special powers attributed to certain animals, to acquire special sexual roles in Greek mythology:
                                   

The God Pan is described as amorous; a lusty phallic god of carnal gratification. He possesses a powerful kind of magic that inspires rampant sexual energy in whomever he chooses. Pan was known to chase and seduce countless nymphs, shepherd boys, and other goats in ancient times. https://greekgodpan.wordpress.com/tag/paganism/

There were a lot of gods and a lot of acknowledged sexual roles. We see the parallel between the number of gods and the number of sexual roles. And if we look at Greek mythology it is obvious to equate gods with sexual roles:

Assumption 2: Gods are sexual roles.

(Of course there were a lot of other gods who had nothing to do with sexuality and are not involved in this discussion.)

If gods are sexual roles, we build a bridge between sexuality and religion. It is our view that religious space is equivalent to sexual space in the heads of males. Religion is the eternal form of sexuality. Though religion gives another meaning to the sexual domain, it uses the same space:

The eternity dimension of sexuality:

It follows polytheism (religious space) has the same rank=5 dimensional sexual space.

The space of gods

Notice sadomasochism equals monotheism = male heterosexuality

In the evolution a physiological substrate must have been formed in the brain that integrates the sexual power of male animals. We call this substrate 'the archetype of God' and the underlying space 'the space of gods'. For humans, this power center contains five major 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. 

Sexual roles in the conscious are empathically acknowledged and persons belonging to these roles are seen as subjects, as human beings. On the other hand, sexual roles suppressed in the unconscious belong to persons seen as objects, persons seen as tables and chairs. Psychopaths are not empathically involved:

Well, it must be corrected in polytheism not all sexual roles were equal, there were indeed some differences. Sexual roles were acknowledged in the conscious but they were not quite equal. Straight male sex had the lead:

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






Straight sex was for reproduction and meanwhile men had time for beautiful boys. Young boys had to be mentored by older men to learn a profession, so they had not to complain for a bit of sex in return. 

Thus, a social difference in status was visible in the relationship of straight-gay sex. In general, people were not so happy with sex between men from equal social status. In any case, it is much more complicated than what is often sketched about homosexuality in polytheism.

This all means we keep the same rank order of sexual roles in the conscious as in the unconscious. Bestiality remains the lowest rank of sex.

Anyway, and this is important, homosexuality was not forbidden and therefore we place 'other sexual roles' in the conscious. 




The role of the conscious 

Merging both systems - sexuality and religion - means thousands of human gods must be depicted as interdependent vectors in the 5-dimensional sexual space. And if all these gods are in the conscious, then it is called a polytheistic space, a full space of conscious sexual roles, just as in Greek mythology:

And the vertical main factor of this religious polytheistic space must be monotheism, on which all interdependent god-vectors project their sadomasochism, the primal sexual impetus of mankind. 

But if it concerns monotheism like Islam, then this SM main factor is the last remaining conscious dimension in religious space. Then, this dimension is the ultimate shrunk in the conscious of sexual or religious space, caused by testosterone:





Here also the religious dimension 'monotheism' equals the sexual dimension 'sadomasochism':

Assumption 68: In humans, the number of interdependent gods (n) in the polytheistic space of gods (rank=m=5 vectors) in the archetype of God (rank=p=5 factors) is unlimited, with the SM-dyad as principal component (main factor) (p=1). SM-dyad is called 'monotheism' otherwise. With male testosterone this space will be gradually restricted to only one conscious dimension (p=1), the SM-dyad or Allah-construct, named otherwise monotheism or sadomasochism. Remaining (m=4) components are relegated to the unconscious. But in case of estrogen all sexual factors (p=5) remain unaffected in the conscious of women. 

Assumption 34: The maximum 5-dimensional polytheistic sexual space is finally reduced to a one-dimensional space of gods in the conscious. The principal component of this is sadomasochism, the greatest common denominator in human sexuality. This is the last step towards a monotheistic sexual dictatorship in which only heterosexuality is allowed.

So, monotheistic space consists also of 5 dimensions but four of them are suppressed in the unconscious. And the remaining factor must be sadomasochism, which falls together with monotheism.

We conclude, in monotheism 'other sexual roles' are oppressed by SM-dyad. Oppressing females through SM-dyad is the only way to get their cooperation for inbreeding, since their natural drive is outbreeding. 

Female sexual roles are empathically acknowledged in the conscious only in polytheism (atheism) with Vanilla-dyad.

Well, it is quite simple: female oppression takes place in inbreeding cultures. Equal rights are combined with outbreeding societies.

In Islam 'other sexual roles' are suppressed in the unconscious of heterosexual males:

Indeed, in Islam homosexuals, females, children and animals are seen as objects, as tables and chairs. And that is kind of a psychopathic trait, not to involve empathically with other people.

Homosexuality in desert religions

Hence, we conclude homosexuality finds no empathy in the conscious. Also adding homosexuality to the conscious comes down to two sexual roles or two gods. Then monotheism would change into polytheism. Would be the end of Islam.

Therefore, monotheism forbids homosexuality as a direct projection on its cultural plane and the lust is delegated to the unconscious: 

But on suppressing drives, the unconscious works as the inverse of the conscious, disguising the lusts into acceptable form. 



Homosexuality and monotheism are two sides of the same coin

As we see, the monotheistic coin has another side. Heterosexual males are also able of homosexual conduct. But only their straight sexuality is empathically established in the conscious. So the sexual conscience of Muslims is split over the conscious and the unconscious. And now we grasp the schizophrenia of monotheism:

Officially Muslims cannot also have homosexual feelings and that is why plain homosexual behavior cannot be added to the conscious. So, forbidden homosexual lust seeks its own sinister path to flourish in the conscious.

Homo-eroticism assisted the Alpha male

Male homosexuality is the second god, to whom the Alpha male delegated his power. He trusted friendly and less aggressive males more than heterosexual males, which were competitive to females. Also in normal life we sometimes see homo-erotic behavior in the ranks just below the leader. It is no real homosexuality but a coping mechanism from lower ranked males. But these males easily get entangled into strange situations. Call it a nose kiss, or whatever...

Ahmadinejad kiss

We see this behavior also in other primates, especially in chimpanzees.

Every society needs such a touch of homosexuality (homo-eroticis or whatever) as a lubricant in male behavior. Pure male conduct would not work and makes aggressive. 

This means homo-eroticism is also needed in desert religions. But as said before, it is not allowed as second god in the conscious. That is why they do not officially recognize the need for homo-erotics in male relations, nor do they see the link with the second god. This is pure schizophrenics, splitting the conscience from males. And this is visible everywhere in Islam, where they exaggerate into absurdly homo-erotic and pedophile conduct.

Disguising the lust into acceptable form

Above we saw sinister homosexual wishes in the unconscious from monotheistic males, leading to weird conscious behavior. Another example is the way Christians and Muslims pray to their gods which is remarkable and indicates a kind of submissive relationship. Their body posture portrays an almost feminine submission. Anyway, it is not masculine, nor heterosexual. Not that this is required, of course:

Masochistic submission

Only disguised and sublimated homo-erotic behavior is permitted in the conscious of monotheism:

In fact it shows a sadomasochistic relationship to their inner God, it is kind of role play. 

Masochistic submission

Women are kept away, since it is too embarrassing. What is the precise relationship between males and their inner God? Homosexuality and monotheism are two sides of the same coin. Their agreement is that they love and hate each other. They love homo-erotics but hate another god in their conscious. Here, sexuality conflicts with religion, which can only be explained by their intimate relation.

The homo-erotic submissive option

In monotheism the best option for collaboration of male believers with God is the submissive option. They are not really homosexual, but use this coping mechanism to connect with their inner God, they are role playing with themselves, with a non existent entity. It is kind of a psychiatric disorder, not to be found in polytheism or atheism.

And we see the functionality of homo-erotic submission back in the hierarchy of monotheistic male relationships. We see the relationship of Jesus with his "Father". We see the position of the homosexual clergy in the Catholic Church. We also understand the masochistic attitude of Christian males. 

There is no other way for monotheistic males to get their faith working. Homo-erotic submission is the canary in the coalmine from monotheism. Sexual role play is unavoidable but cannot be acknowledged as homosexual tendency. It is impossible to accept this second god, and that is why they found some other formulation for homosexual behavior: religious devotion.


SM-dyad in monotheism, also for males

Time and time again we say SM-dyad is equivalent to monotheism. Both go together in real life. Women must be enforced to inbreeding through SM-dyad, it does not work with Vanilla-dyad from polytheism.

But as shown above the SM-dyad also works between males. On the one side we have masochistic submitting worshippers like Jesus and the homosexual clergy and on the other hand we have the sadistic God. So it works also for males. But remember only Allah is sadistic and capable to hatred. The God of the Christians is more a real father, so the SM-dyad only works in pure monotheism from Islam, it does not work in Christianity.

And indeed in Islam, male homosexuals are terrorized by male heterosexual males:

Competition and submission in male relations

In polytheism with all gods free in the conscious, the lower echelon maintains openly homo-erotic submissive relations with superiors, connecting with the Alpha male. This is shown above with boys learning a profession from older men.

Pan Daphnis

So, the difference between polytheism and monotheism is that homo-erotic submissive behavior in monotheism is not named as such. It is called 'piety', 'godliness' or 'devotion', while in fact it is a homo-erotic coping mechanism in disguise.

What is my point? Islam and Christianity are filled with homosexual tendencies which are disguised as 'religious devotion'.

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