(520) What does the paradigm shift mean for honor killings?

 Basic Dimension

https://sexualreligion.blogspot.com

Number Archive 

(520) What does the paradigm shift mean for honor killings?

What does the paradigm shift mean for honor killings?

It means that Muslim girls can only understand Islam by splitting the conscience of Muslim males into conscious and unconscious sexual roles, or 'gods':

To truly understand the Muslim faith, it is advised to view 'Gods as sexual roles', both consciously and unconsciously. And now - above picture - we may freely interchange gods with sexual components. That's the paradigm shift of this blog:

Then just like the gods, we can depict Muslim males in God Space=Sexual Space:

Then:

A Muslim male worshipping two sexual roles, serving two gods, practices semi-polytheism and deserves the death penalty in monotheistic Islam:

So, by mistakenly thinking that monotheism can actually exist as a stand alone religion, Islam has imposed an impossible sexual stalemate on Muslim males. But that's simply how evolution has developed, and without this paradigm shift, this couldn't have been demonstrated.

So the Muslim statement is that a man cannot serve two sexual gods without falling into semi-polytheism, which would be the death blow to the monotheistic woman oppressive inbreeding culture yearning to perpetual orgasm in heaven. 

Therefore, a man serving two sexual gods in his neocortex, having visible homosexual feelings alongside heterosexual ones, can get the death penalty in monotheistic culture. This is because he practices semi-polytheism.

Correct that Muslim males divert to semi polytheism, but incorrect that this damages monotheism, because as I claim, strict monotheism cannot exist:

So Islam is based on a limited religious model that emphasizes the conscious but ignores the unconscious. This model is flawed.

Christianity:

But the difference between polytheism and monotheism is more complex:

The deeper reason lies in the relationship males have with God. This is very different for polytheism and monotheism.

In polytheism, males have a more wholesome (full conscience) and equal (heterosexual) relationship with the gods, in which they sometimes compete for female gods. Males are ready to fight with the gods. It is a sado-sado mirrored relationship.

But monotheism contains a more feminine relationship from males with their masculine God. Alternatively, males like to mask it to a father-son relationship, which would be absurd as well. So, may be there is something wrong in monotheism.

In monotheism males have a submissive and obsequious relationship with God. It is a sado-masochistic relationship. 

And in monotheism, males have only 1 degree of freedom to take action and they can hardly fight with God as in polytheism where males are free to go into all directions.

So, in polytheism, males can be equal to the gods in a sado-sado relationship, while in monotheism they are absolutely subordinate.

Monotheism is therefore a burden for males who take out their frustrations on females in SM-dyads.

In an overreaction, males in monotheism project extreme masculinity towards females. They repress their masochism (masochism hate) into their unconscious and tyrannize women in their conscious in SM relationships.

In monotheism, Desert Males believe that they better imitate the supposed masculine behavior of their God and therefore homosexuality should at least be banished from their conscious. They are ashamed of their masochistic feelings and are afraid that God can see them.

That's what monotheism can do....

Even further back in evolution:

Ultimately, polytheism can be traced back to solitary animals that also have Vanilla-dyad. It is the FIRST CREATION STORY cleverly transcribed from Mesopotamian religions by Jewish scholars.

And monotheism comes from group animals under an alpha male. This is precisely the SECOND CREATION STORY, in which the Chimpanzee Male Bloodline had to be supplemented by Eve, who was taken from Abraham's rib and therefore had also male DNA.