Philip Gardiner, Homosexuality and Alchemy Disinformation

[Laura]

i've had as acquaintances homosexuals of both genders, i've been privy to their idle chat, i've had some extensive and interesting conversations with some of them. in both genders, what strikes me most is the trophy-hunting approach towards mating and the sexually-tinged nature of almost any social activity. it looks to me almost as if they overcompensate for something that is missing.

Is what you have described above any different from the average heterosexual?

I think that homosexuals are pretty much like anybody else: there is a small percentage of them that are seeking truth and the majority that are just ponerized.

 

[anart]

the few things (not facts !) i know about homosexuals are:
- plain folks dislike them, fervently. when one goes up in the scale of education, the dislike is expressed more in terms of derisory comments and exclusion from social activities; down the education scale the dislike is expressed rather in form of direct (physical) aggression.
- they are a significant minority of the population, at about 4% IIRC.
- the girls i classify broadly in three groups: one would be the 'strictly for fun' crowd, another (big) group those who have had BAD stories with men (rape, abuse by immediate family, ...), and a third group those who i'd term 'innate' and who discover the preference in themselves early on.
- the boys i classify along other lines: the aggressively promiscuous ones and those who have themselves in relative control. that probably has to do with my interaction with them rather than any other objective criterion.
- there is another group, the transgenders, who i dont even know where to put. only thing i know is i've met exactly on person from this group IRL. i felt marked aversion and disgust towards this person.

No, they're not facts - not even close to facts, actually. I find the statements you've made here and throughout the rest of your post to not only be incredibly insulting, but also bigoted, ignorant and indicative of some serious, deeply seated issues about your own sexuality and self-acceptance.

I will not even address the rest of your post since I find it so ignorant and repulsive, but perhaps others may have more to say.

 

[Cyre2067]

Well, as one of "them" I'm highly offended by your opinions. That link is to the opinions thread, which will show ya just how much your 'not facts' and otherwise are worth.

And like anart, im thoroughly repulsed by the post itself i find no desire nor need to respond to any of it.

edit:

BTW: i'd be grateful for any reference (URL) where i can read founded psychological information about homosexuals.

You could try asking, openly, without bringing any of the above garbage to the table, I'm sure anart and myself could give you interesting first person accounts of our formative years.

 

[anart]

You could try asking, openly, without bringing any of the above garbage to the table, I'm sure anart and myself could give you interesting first person accounts of our formative years.

Thanks for the thought, Cyre, but I'm not in the habit of sharing my personal background with people who evidence the level of ignorance and bigotry as has been evidenced here by 'name'.

Also, the vast majority of 'homosexual psychology' is exactly the same as 'heterosexual psychology' - the exception, perhaps, being the PTSD from a lifetime of discrimination/abuse by ignorant people, and other self-esteem issues that rise from growing up in a society that hates you for how you were BORN. Being homosexual in this world is no joy ride, it is not something I, nor anyone I know, would 'choose' to do - so the idea that it is a choice, or a result of some psychological problem is simple ignorance. With that said, there will always be exceptions to the rule and a very small percentage of heterosexual and homosexual people may engage in certain sexual activities due to some sort of sustained damage - but this percentage is exceedingly small and is not limited to homosexuals.

Ignorance can be fixed with education - bigotry, however, is another story all together.

 

[domi]

Hi name or whichever "I" that was writing,

You forgot bi-sexuals. I'm dying to hear your opinion on "them".

 

[manitoban]

I have to agree with Anart and Cyre, I find Name's post insulting, hurtful and filled with subjective views that reveal bigotry.

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

for starters, i'm not one of them, so i'm probably as competent to say anything about gays as priests are competent in relation to marriage.

But if you know your own ignorance and incompetence in the matter, why proceed to say what you already know is incompetent and ignorant?

i've done extensive experimentation on all kind of things when i was younger, and homosexuals and homosexuality (of both genders) are one of the few things which are a 200% turn-off to me.

Can you elaborate on this? What do you mean by "turn-off"? Sexually speaking, heterosexuals aren't suposed to be "turned on" by homosexual relations, and vice versa. So I don't think that's the meaning of the word "turn off" you had in mind. Perhaps yours is closer to "dislike"? But why?

- plain folks dislike them, fervently.

Some do, some don't. There is a reason for why certain people dislike them. Sometimes it's their own sexual insecurity, fears, or feelings of inadequency and the desire to prove something to themselves and to others because of it. Sometimes it's cultural/family/community/religious conditioning. But it varies from region to region, community to community. I think it's very similar if not the same as racism.

- there is another group, the transgenders, who i dont even know where to put. only thing i know is i've met exactly on person from this group IRL. i felt marked aversion and disgust towards this person.

Is it because he was a transgender or because of who he was as a person?

- during the last 10-15 years, homosexuals have been elevated into a state of semi-divinity, of minor deities in the ponerological panteon of politically-correct minority groups, akin to jews, women, "immigrants", ...

They, and other "minority groups" have been oppressed for a long time. In their struggle to become seen as equals some of them take it too far, probably the psychopaths among the minority groups. So you have situations where girls sue guys for rape and the guys' life is destroyed regardless of whether it was true or not. Or situations of people accusing someone of racism or sexism, also regardless of the truth, and also destroying lives. The psychopathic media is always too happy to accomodate and exploit any "sensitive" social issues and milk them as much as possible, regardless of who is hurt or why.

- homosexuals/homosexuality have been integral and known traits of many ruling groups from history and present: nazis, catholic church, military officialty (especially special forces), royal courts across europe and elsewhere, diplomacy. conversely, they are almost absent from plain folks affairs.

But is it homosexuality, or is it sex with men for other reasons than natural attraction? Are you saying there is a link between homosexuality to psychopathy? Or that out of a total percentage of homosexuals in population, there is a higher percentage of them among those in power?

- WHY are they being promoted to so many positions of power ?

They are? Who in power now is homosexual?

- is their new 'protected' status and the promotion to positions of power of many of them originary within the ranks of their own subculture, or does it originate from somewhere else ? if elsewhere, from where/whom ?

What makes you think that homosexuals are being promoted to power disproportionately? Is there any data to this assertion or did you make it up?

- WHY are they interesting enough to the pathocracy that they have acquired a 'protected' status ?

What do you mean by "protected" status? Who says they are in protected status?

- is it possible that homosexuals as a group express psychological traits useful for pathocracy statistically more often than the rest of the population ?

Everything is possible, but I have seen no data at all to suggest this even remotely. So if you have data for all these assertions, show it. If not, what on earth would prompt you to make them?

- (edited) more in detail: if one could do a Venn diagram showing: whole population, groups in power, psychological traits as per lobaczewski, homosexuals: how (quantitatively) would all these overlap ?

Why are you pretending to sincerely care about data for this question, if you have already made your conclusion above without data? Why would you create a link between psychopathy and homosexuality, political power and homosexuality, and only AFTER having conclusively established this link as you just have with absolutely no evidence, suddenly as an after-thought ask something like "Oh yeah, does anyone have any evidence for what I just concluded above without evidence?".

- (added) is innate homosexuality a selector for essential psychopathy ?

Again, you state that you think this IS in fact the case, and then you ask, "Is it, in fact, the case?". Why?

last but not least, i find it interesting that somebody would come to this forum with what has been exposed as disinfo and expect not only to get a pass but also that nobody here would take an attentive look back at them.

Indeed...

BTW: i'd be grateful for any reference (URL) where i can read founded psychological information about homosexuals.

An after-after thought if I ever saw one! After a whole bunch of unfounded proclamations and insinuations that have no basis in fact, you turn around and ask if anybody has any facts to support anything you just said? I'm really confused o_O

 

[Laura]

The Cs on the subject:

Q: (L) The fellow who wrote the Ultimate Frontier, was he
channeling that information or did those events he
described actually take place?
A: Yes and yes.
Q: (L) Was he, in fact, the reincarnation of King David as he
claimed?
A: If he prefers.
Q: (L) He lost me when he went off on his thing about women
and that souls reincarnated as only one sex. (J) No,
that's not so and I think switching sex has a lot to do
with homosexuality. (L) Yes. (T) But I do think that a
soul has a tendency to be more of one than the other.
A: No.
Q: (L) I think it ends up being balanced.
A: It is all just lessons.
Q: (J) Does the human state of sexuality, such as
homosexuality, have something to do with changing sexes
from one lifetime to another?
A: Sometimes.
Q: (L) Of all the modes of sexual expression, which one is
more likely to advance one to 4th density more rapidly?
A: Total celibacy.
Q: (D) Well then I'm okay! [laughter] (V) Can you explain why
total celibacy?
A: Because you are then "letting go" of the cravings for
physicality.
Q: (T) It is a 3rd density act which entices you to 3rd
density. (L) Okay, now, what is the second most likely
for advancement? [laughter] (D) We have me taken care of,
now we're going to get you taken care of! (J) In order of
importance... [laughter]
A: Does it matter?
Q: (D) It does to Laura, would you please answer?
(L) I suppose that everyone should get to the point that
they would simply desire to be totally celibate and
totally let go of all physical things and so forth, but,
we have left to us, at this point, heterosexuality,
homosexuality, bisexuality and multisexuality [laughter]
(D) We also have the ability to take pleasure in our
physical bodies in those forms of sexuality. We have the
ability to have pleasure in the flesh and they can't.
And, what I have read, is that they envy that. (L) Is
that true, that you envy our physicality?
A: No. Not in the least!
Q: (L) I have read that when you are at the higher spiritual
levels that you can do a spiritual merge which is better
than orgasm. Is that true?
A: Why do you need orgasm of any kind?
Q: (L) Well, it does seem to be like one of the penultimate
experiences of physicality. (T) That's exactly it...
it's physicality... (L) If that is so, isn't everything
that exists in the physical, 3rd density world, in some
way a reflection of experiences or states of being on
higher realms?
A: 3rd density as you experience it is an illusion you have
been fed to continue your imprisonment therein.
Q: (L) So, in other words, there is no cosmic orgasm that
keeps the worlds in existence as exemplified by the
eternally copulating Vishnu and Shiva?
A: That is Bull! [laughter]
Q: (L) Well, they teach this stuff in the Eastern religions
and they even have the idols sculpted in this posture...
A: That is a rationalization to continue the illusion.
Q: (L) So, in other words, the orgasmic experience is quite
literally a lure to keep us... (D) Controlled... (T) And
in the third level... (L) Is that true?
A: Yes.

[...]

Q: (L) Here's another of the kid's questions: When and why
did homosexuality originate?
A: It originated when sexuality did.

And, since there are homosexual members of the animal kingdom, one might suppose that it is simply a natural variation, though admittedly a small segment of the population. That's to be expected if some of the instances are a genetic variation since homosexuals generally don't reproduce.

 

[Z...]

And, since there are homosexual members of the animal kingdom, one might suppose that it is simply a natural variation, though admittedly a small segment of the population. That's to be expected if some of the instances are a genetic variation since homosexuals generally don't reproduce.

Well the thing is apart from the animals which form lifelong homosexual bonds (dolphins, giraffes, hyenas, pengins and swans being most notorius) most of the animals exibit homosexual behaviour at one time or another depending on the circumstances. This can also be observed in humans limited to same sex populations.
Of course with humans there are different other things that come into play but this thing with animals really makes you wonder - can essential sexuality flow be contained within a gender.

 

[dant]

Reflecting in the C's response reposted here by Laura, one thing
missing of course and that is of self-gratification (masturbation).

Also missing, is WHY is it, in our current systems that there are LAWS
short-circuiting all but heterosexuality?

One thing that comes to mind is: "To procreate, to create more offspring" and
this must be the main thing required by the PTB?

I think this was also discussed in the C transcripts or elsewhere.

 

[Laura]

Also missing, is WHY is it, in our current systems that there are LAWS
short-circuiting all but heterosexuality?

Well, that is derived from Judaism. They were certainly after a population increase - more people for the priests to control.

 

[Cyre2067]

::raises hand::

So,

1.) all there is is lessons

and

2.) a percentage of any population of mammals will be homosexual

Those of us that are, are to learn the lessons associated with that experience?

 

[Nienna]

My two cents.

Some of the most sensitive people I have ever met are homosexual. And some of the crassest people I have ever met are heterosexual.

I think that if people would drop the labels and see the person for "who" they are rather than what color they are, or what nationality they are, or what sexual preferences they have, or what they eat for breakfast, there would be a little more harmony here on the BBM. But, then again, that is the last thing that the PTB want.

Keep everybody at each other's throats. Gotta feed the moon, ya know.

 

[Azur]

It's important to understand that the happenstance, or range of the total people that you have met so far in your life and the subjective interpretation thereof, based solely on a shifting base of perception, does not encapsulate all of what is possible, or even capture how everybody "must" be by your limited perception.

I've met people so far in my life that are nasty, egotistical, maniacal, sensitive, depressive, intelligent, stupid, endearing, selfless, selfish, living in a tiny world of their own making, and others who have wondered outside of what is presented as "reality" from others. (The list would go on forever. When I factor in new understanding and revise my previous experience with said people, I understand even more about what I wasn't seeing before).

Of all these people, some were homosexual, and some were not, and they were even across the field from above. Their so-called sexual orientation was a minor consideration to their overall character and what they chose to do, in any given situation. (Of course, some identified more with a SINGLE aspect of their character, equal again in both orientations. And here I do NOT mean ONLY their sexual aspect, but all others too. Try to enumerate aspects of a person, and make a grid, it gets complex in a hurry).

That homosexuals have been singled out, despite it being a natural phenomenon that has been with the human and animal kingdom forever, is definitely an extra hardship that presents a more pressurized environment in the human sphere. Definitely an extra challenge that might affect some and not others.

If you look at any same sex group activity, be it a fishing trip with the guys, or a shopping trip with the ladies, it is essentially platonic homosexuality.

In hetero, or homosexual, "relationships", with sexual impulse as a factor, the thing to understand here is the reason for the binding beyond the impulse (if it exists), and not the orientation.

 

[Ruth]

If you look at any same sex group activity, be it a fishing trip with the guys, or a shopping trip with the ladies, it is essentially platonic homosexuality.

Nah! I think its a reflection of our societies obsession with sex. Sex rules everything, ok?... And if it doesn't 'rule', then it complicates... Especially our relationships with our fellow human beings.

For such a small part of our existence to take center stage so often, is I think a distraction. You don't need constantly functioning sexual organs to survive or live in 3D. Its not like we're talking about lungs, heart or brain.

Technically speaking its not even necessary to have sex to reproduce either. It can be done in a test tube.

In hetero, or homosexual, "relationships", with sexual impulse as a factor, the thing to understand here is the reason for the binding beyond the impulse (if it exists), and not the orientation.

Yes, well its pretty hard to 'fight' that 'sex rules, ok', nonsense that most of us dumbed down humans are subject to, day after day. What is plain to see is that with homosexuality, orientation does not equate to gender which suggests that the causes or reasons for it are complex and possibly multifactorial.

What is really surprising is that our society treats those people who have this 'difference' in a negative manner (must be that Judeo religion origin thing - a person is no good, accept for breeding purposes - afterall, they need people to fight wars, dominate and kill others 8|).

If gays are given such a hard time by the PTB, surely they have some sort of hidden advantage? Or maybe not, afterall, we are dealing with sex here, which has been over-rated by 3D and 4D STS. There could be something more to it, though.