Gayness, Homosexuality and Anatomy

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.
Leyla Shen
Posts: 3851
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA

Re: Gayness, Homosexuality and Anatomy

Post by Leyla Shen »

Distortion? That word implies so much faith.
One who takes it out of context will most definitely infer such a thing.
And there's even no stable to be found in the Christian story -- it's Isis her dwelling :)
Um, yes there is. Jesus was laid in a manger, found in the ground floor of ancient Israel peasant homes, near the animal pen. Into this room (the only stable they had) they would bring the animals at night and during bad weather both to protect the animals and for heat (no gas, electric or central heating back then). Bethlehem is a big part of the actual Christian myth!
Between Suicides
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Gayness, Homosexuality and Anatomy

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

Leyla Shen wrote:
And there's even no stable to be found in the Christian story -- it's Isis her dwelling :)
Um, yes there is. Jesus was laid in a manger, found in the ground floor of ancient Israel peasant homes, near the animal pen. Into this room (the only stable they had) they would bring the animals at night and during bad weather both to protect the animals and for heat (no gas, electric or central heating back then). Bethlehem is a big part of the actual Christian myth!
So you agree, there was no stable mentioned then. The mangers were indeed features in the floors of the living quarters of the houses. They were single room houses mostly and it was not that strange for babies to be put in there when not is use (it was summer!). It signified that is was a simple house without luxury. But not a stable and people were not sleeping in cow dung! The idea that a pregnant stranger would not be taken in and given relatively prime seats is insanity for anyone knowing that culture or human beings for that matter.
Leyla Shen
Posts: 3851
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA

Re: Gayness, Homosexuality and Anatomy

Post by Leyla Shen »

No, I don't agree with you, Mr I-Always-Have-to-be-Right:

There was indeed a stable to be found.
Between Suicides
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Gayness, Homosexuality and Anatomy

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

Leyla Shen wrote:There was indeed a stable to be found.
You seen quite desperate in turning over every inch of the stable issue here. LOL! But really, an empty manger does not make a stable unless you really desire it to be.
Leyla Shen
Posts: 3851
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA

Re: Gayness, Homosexuality and Anatomy

Post by Leyla Shen »

Ha-ha-ha, ho-ho-ho! Always the comedian, eh?

When-oh-when to see the man who writes instead with his blood...
Between Suicides
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Gayness, Homosexuality and Anatomy

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »


What? In such a gay thread?
User avatar
Cory Duchesne
Posts: 2320
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:35 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Gayness, Homosexuality and Anatomy

Post by Cory Duchesne »

"Gay men appear to be somewhat more masculine than straight men - at least as far as the auditory system is concerned. Diminished hearing isn't the only realm where gay men appear to be hyper-masculine compared with straight men. On certain skeletal anatomic measures, gay men appear to be hyper-masculine compared with straight men. And on the most salient "anatomical measure" - whose penis is bigger? - Gay men are hypermasculine. That's right: gay men have bigger penises, on average, than straight men do.

Curiously, some Native American tribes regard the gay man as hypermasculine.

The most masculine men have sex with other men. Men who have sex with women are perceived as less masculine.

[...]

What is the connection between sex and love? Most people, even most psychologists, have assumed that romantic love usually arises in the context of sexual desire. In fact, for most of the twentieth century, psychologists believed that romantic love was little more than a sublimation of the urge to have sex. But many psychologists in the past fifteen years have questioned that assumption. It's been noticed that romantic love and long term relationships share many characteristic with the relationship between parent and child. Maybe it's no accident that lovers sometimes address each other as baby. Maybe love and affection come from a different part of the brain than sexual desire does. Maybe romantic relationships derive from the same part of the brain that parent-child love comes from."


(from, Why Gender Matters, by Leonard Sax)
User avatar
Cahoot
Posts: 1573
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:02 am

Re: Gayness, Homosexuality and Anatomy

Post by Cahoot »

The vogue is surgeries littered with the body parts of ego-dominated, culturally-conditioned deniers superficially seeking to be male or female. C’s desiring A or B. Lots of unnecessary fuss and confused identity made necessary by kleshas, samskaras and vasanas.

Discover the root of cause before whipping out the blade.
User avatar
Cory Duchesne
Posts: 2320
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:35 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Gayness, Homosexuality and Anatomy

Post by Cory Duchesne »

Cahoot wrote:The vogue is surgeries littered with the body parts of ego-dominated, culturally-conditioned deniers superficially seeking to be male or female. C’s desiring A or B. Lots of unnecessary fuss and confused identity made necessary by kleshas, samskaras and vasanas.

Leadership: the ability to inflict pain and get away with it.

Discover the root of cause before whipping out the blade.
I never interpreted that passage in a literal way. Isn't the teaching referring to the various delusional concepts the mind injures itself with? Achilles weakness was in his foot, and his bad heel was a metaphor for his pride. Since the mind is relating itself only to the totality of life, psychology becomes mostly metaphysical.
User avatar
Cahoot
Posts: 1573
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:02 am

Re: Gayness, Homosexuality and Anatomy

Post by Cahoot »

Yes, mind (meaning maker) can turn every perceived phenomenon and form into a conceptual metaphor, and humans driven by desire have the capacity to elevate a concept into cause enough to arbitrarily lop off body parts. When concept controls mind, the tail wags the dog.

To be clear, when free of desire’s control, a C is free to be a C and discover the true nature of that identity without the conflict of facing the conditioned choice of A or B.
Bobo
Posts: 517
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 1:35 pm

Re: Gayness, Homosexuality and Anatomy

Post by Bobo »

Let's say that [1] There's no woman
From this it follows that [2] Everybody is gay.

A, b and c may be possible denials of [2].
A) Nobody can be gay. B) Somebody (in particular) is gay. C) I'm not gay.

The denial of [2] come in to deny [1], and affirm that there's Woman.

The tension probably comes from the affirmation (in absolute) of woman, or the denial (in absolute) of man.
User avatar
Cory Duchesne
Posts: 2320
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:35 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Gayness, Homosexuality and Anatomy

Post by Cory Duchesne »

Bobo wrote:Let's say that [1] There's no woman
From this it follows that [2] Everybody is gay.
"Woman" is a reality that I can't prove to you. Woman is like a rock that a person hits his foot against accidentally. Just when you think you really understand what woman is, you realize it's more painful than you thought. You keep striking up against more rocks, and each rock is further proof of woman.

Woman is essentially the need to project oneself outwardly to a person or to an audience... to be watched. Woman is not so much concerned with penetrating, as she is having eyes penetrate through her. She wants to be seen as an image. The cunning of woman is best demonstrated by her need not only to conceal her defects, but to discover the defects of others. Everything she does serves this need to be an image to somebody, to a community, to an audience. In this sense, the essence of wanting a good reputation, and wanting to control the environment is primarily a female need. Politics is the art of controlling the environment.

Masculinity or maleness is really the capacity to lose control for the sake of discovery, creativity, productivity, or inspiration. Most men are inspired by the image of woman, so most men are essentially a slave to female values, constantly worrying about how they are perceived by others. The result is generally jealousy, or the opposite - contempt. I had one fellow tell me not to associate with a man because it would be seen as "social leprosy". Contempt for inferiors is something most people are familiar with as teenagers, and as teenagers we're terribly insecure about who we're friends with, or who might know about our weaknesses. If a harmful weakness is revealed, we sometimes find ourselves deserted. This feeling of abandoment and falling into social disgrace may only intensify our jealousy. So we can see that it's a horrible thing to be born, for most of us.


Everybody is gay?

It's difficult to say. I've never had any craving for homosexual sex. I've never been aroused by men.

Granted, when we're teengers, we often find it is the girls our age who are most physical with us. For a lot of boys, myself included, initial lust is stirred by the girl next door sitting on our lap. Often she has no sexual intentions. However, it's true that a sexual fascination with girls goes far back before puberty. Despite not being capable of lust, I was certainly determined to know about the female body, whilst being rather indifferent to the body of men.

The naked male body, for young boys, is often an image of fear. As Weininger says, the phallus is universally regarded as an image of terror. I never wanted to go there.

The bountiful female body was always one of rolling hills, flowers, comfort, and even just electrically charged eroticism.
User avatar
Cory Duchesne
Posts: 2320
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:35 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Gayness, Homosexuality and Anatomy

Post by Cory Duchesne »

If Leonard Sax is correct about more feminine men being more heterosexual, it makes you wonder if "Neoteny as a trait" is more pronounced in feminine, heterosexual men. A tendency toward childish, babyish, buffoonish humor, silliness, shock humor is certainly Neoteny, or appeals to the immature.

Consider Leslie Neilson in the Naked Gun

My own view of ethics is that it involves creating a comforting environment of acceptance and fun.

What we consider Neoteny is really a form of nurturing. And it would appear that the majority of the society needs to be nurtured, from an ethical standpoint. Those who feel oppressed by the nurturing or the stupidity would be the candidates to pursue more alien territory. To impose feminine or immature standards upon such minds would be unethical.

A capacity for excitation in response to an alien environment, to be thrilled by the thought of productivity and reaching new knowledge; these are humorless enterprises. However, the isolation and frustration that causes the "class division" between lower maturity and higher maturity would produce higher forms of humor.
User avatar
ardy
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:44 am

Re: Gayness, Homosexuality and Anatomy

Post by ardy »

Gays and Lesbians are just the extensions of ourselves outside the bell curve. Most people have some side of them that is not totally straight and in some it shows.

Most gays will tell you, men with families are their bread and butter but don't tell the wife.

Frankly I am over the gay debate, any brain cycles put into minorities I feel is time wasted whilst the majority seem to be suffering.

The gay marriage thing is amazing in our country [australia] we have all state and national governments tied up in discussions about this non event, whilst the cost of government spirals out of control and our infrastructure is falling to pieces. Young men are unemployed at a rate around 25% yet nobody seems to care about this fact.

They will argue and fight for marriage rights for a small minority within a minority and how to 'fix' the aboriginal problem but silence on the biggies is crashing.

DO politicians prefer to fight little battles rather than face the big ones that are eating the country?
Locked