Sex

anart

A Disturbance in the Force
hkoeli said:
Could it not be a pre-incarnational choice? What if lamasing had said that being born middle-class "seems to fulfull a need, a choice within certain people." If we accept karma (say, atlantean karma? holocaust?), this makes sense on a certain level. People (like the Palestinians) sure as hell won't think "well I really did choose this life of abject poverty and suffering," but it seems to me to be a choice of lessons. A few paragraphs down, lamasing says "Homosexuality can be caused a number of ways. Often it is karmic." What I got from this is that:

1) homosexuality is often karmic (what isn't?)
2) for 'certain people' it is a choice (perhaps even a conscious one in rare cases)
3) for non-OPs, at least, it wouls most-likely be 'chosen' in 5D
4) for OPs, perhaps the more 'mechanical' explanatios apply, like parents' karma

What do you think, Anne?
I totally agree that it most probably is a pre-incarnational choice, but so is heterosexuality - and his way of stating the issue just struck me as judgmental/ill informed and, quite frankly, rather stupid. Personally, I know that I could not understand 1/10th of what I understand about being human if I were not in this most maligned minority. Knowing from a very young age that I was not only different from everyone else I knew, in this most central of issues, (face it - from the time you're old enough to hold a doll or watch a Disney movie, you're told that you are waiting for Prince Charming - that marriage and children are the goal of your life), but that this difference would subject me to hatred and discrimination from complete strangers. This gave me an extra window of understanding on the injustices and cruelty of which humanity is capable. Luckily for me, I was also born with a sharp wit, and a genius level IQ - so I learned quickly and well that as long as other people saw something in me that they could relate to (the humor in my case) that they were more likely to just leave me alone instead of beating me up psychologically or physically. My sexuality has taught me volumes about other people and myself. It has taught me that love, real love, is never easy to come by in this world, but I know that lesson can also be learned in many other ways. Basically, being born gay and female in 1966 to an upper middle class family in America led to an extremely interesting life path, filled with awe, pain, love and, very often, solitude. That's okay, I wouldn't have it any other way; I'm lucky enough to be a woman and still get to love women - we're amazing creatures and in some small way, I feel really lucky to have had the chance to do what I've done and be who I am. Although my sexuality does not define that, it has definitely added extra facets to my life.

Laura said:
I certainly knew from experiences with hypnosis that sex was one of the major ways of getting attachments, so that part certainly interested me.

We published an article on Signs the other day about some studies that showed that the chemistry of the mother and whether or not she had had several boys already could influence a subsequent child to be homosexual. It was also pointed out that it was partly genetic and could "run in families." That DOES tend to support the part where Lama Sing says in some cases "homosexuality is the result of imbalanced sexual energies of the parents which causes an imbalance to the entering soul." This study related specifically to boys and nothing was said about women, but I expect that something similar can be the case with women. Reading this study is quite compelling for understanding that it is not a "choice" in the sense of just up and deciding one day to be gay.
Yep, I've no question that sex can lead to attachments; anytime one person energetically opens that completely to the energies of another person, it seems that they are rolling out the red carpet for any attachments hanging around. If you add to that the situations in which one of the people involved is an OP, well then not only do you have a feeding frenzy going on (no wonder no one else has ever made you feel 'that way' - you just had a deluxe buffet of my energy!) - well, then you have more than one recipe for disaster. It is a tricky tricky thing.

Also, I've read much information on the mother's previous child bearing and its possible affects to sexuality. I think that they may be on to something with that. My mother miscarried a little boy about a year before she conceived me and before the miscarriage, she had given birth to my older brother. So, basically, she had conceived and carried two little boys before I came along. It was all those 'boy germs' I tell ya!! Seriously, though, it may well have been. I have a little sister as well and she is straight, but not 'fru fru' at all - rather like she's one step away from me on the boy/girl continuum. The oldest sister in the family, the first born, is very 'fru fru' - so if you just took a case study of my siblings and their birth order, that alone would correspond with these studies mentioned. Overall, it's just another few pieces of data to add to the rest, I suppose, and no real conclusions could be drawn from my single situation.
 
C

Cricket

Guest
Magus said:
It has long been obvious to me that the anti-homosexuality Lies are just among the most widely acceptable of the many means used to condition people to living in the ways of prejudice and bigotry of all kinds, so as to continue to divide and conquer Human Beings.
Totally agree.
ANY, and I do mean ANY attempt, being it particular or general, to elaborate a Subject (a person), is a lye to "condition people" to prejudice and slavement.
The existance of the notion of "identity of the subjectivity" is, actually, the main "mining grownd" to elaborate such a constructs.
Who am I? -There is an ideology behind, ahead and around that so called "question" which is, more realistically, a construct which has been possible only after cultural/ponerogenic interests: This item of the identity, and the identity of the subjectivity, drags along fundational lyes and nothing but fundational lyes. The evident consequence is, precisely, the set-in-place of a particular actitude towards that which is different. And it sets "The Other" at the far end of the table.
Sexual identity: This has been the tool par excellance for the diferentiation between the "curiosity for the self" against the "identity of the self".
Who are we? Where are we comming from? Where are we going to? -This are the triad of questions often utilized to transmit a comprehension of what could the Philosophy be. And this kindergarden set of questions points towards the direction of the identity, as if such were the main objective of the philosophical activity.
But a subjectivity (the inner live of a subject) does not needs identity to be subjectivity: It needs a space to express its being. A being which it alreayd is.
"Know thy self" comes as the conceptualization of the issue of the identity. And this formulation betrays the subjectivity by giving its back to the the idea which originated the "worry" for the self (i am translating from spanish the word "inquietud", which is not a strict "worry" or an "anxiety", but more a "curiosity" for the self, so I used the word "curiosity" above): The "self-curiosity", a curiosity for the own being, for the own corporal being.
When we are send to "know" our selfs, we do that against a given profile, so as to be able to compare and acertain our knowledge of our inner self as, effectivelly, knowledge. So we can discover "faults" or "mistakes" listed on the profile as faults and/or mistakes.
Who made that list? Freud is one.
This is a cartesian understanding of knowledge, and it produces OP's sort of individuals (or hinders the progress of the individual): Homosexuality, transexuality are, then, "problems".
This is not the panoramic one acces through the notion of the "curiosity of the self" which was the original notion engarved at Delfo's Temple (and which became aristotelized). When I have curiosity about my self, and there is a space to express it, the knowledge derivated from it is not of a cogitative nature, but of a metaphisical nature (lets just say for now metaphisics is the "underground movement" opposing to the classical onthology).
Ann has gone through a metaphisical understanding of her self, which is not a onthological "being" as to be "gay" and thats all: Llive in shame now. No. She has expressed for us, with a courage I addmire, the self-knowledge of her self beyond the indentity of the self.
The identity is a STS concept. Mainly because it has to be a "correct" identity. So Lama Sing can say about homosexuality: "This activity is limiting mentally, physically and spiritually. The body cannot cycle the energies and there is abnormal off-shoots of energy which can result in metabolic changes. There is a definite ion alteration within the body fluids and the secretions from the glandular centers is changed. Cell structures change and the red cells will often show marked differences. Since such individuals cannot balance their polarities from level to level, they only intensify their same polarity with each encounter".
To have identity, is to have attatchment(s). This is evident when one seeks to find on one's subjectivity a positive indentity -when the self-knowledge (and not the adecuation), the self acceptance (and not the self-punishment) are in order.
Control System is utterly interested on this ideas since it is through the identity it can operate on us.
One of the ideas I hold more beloved from the C's and Laura is this when they say:
C's and Laura said:
Stop filling your consciousness with monotheistic philosophies planted long ago to imprission your being. Can't you see it by now, after all you have learned, that there is no source, there is no leader, there is no basis, there is no overseer...
There is no God, there are no teachers, there is no Laura, there is no Arturo, there are no men, there are no women... Control System need this identities to reach us.
Is not to "know thy self" but to "express thy self".
Magus said:
Where could this be more fundamentally imperative, for any Being, than at the levels of gender and sexuality? We all simply must BE as we are, for doing otherwise will destroy us, one way or another, sooner or later. It is the LIE that endangers and can kill the Soul, not the Being who Lives in Truth. It has long been obvious to me that the anti-homosexuality Lies are just among the most widely acceptable of the many means used to condition people to living in the ways of prejudice and bigotry of all kinds, so as to continue to divide and conquer Human Beings.
Bravo!
 
B

birdman

Guest
Ra said:
QUESTIONER: Going back to the previous session, you stated that each sexual activity was a transfer before the veil. Would you trace the flow of energy that is transferred and tell me if that was the planned activity or a planned transfer by the designing Logos?

RA: I am Ra. The path of energy tansfer before the veiling during the sexual intercourse was that of the two entities possessed of green-ray capability. The awareness of all as Creator is that which opens the green energy center. Thusly there was no possibility of blockage due to the sure knowledge of each by each that each was the Creator. The transfers were weak due to the ease with which such transfers could take place between any two polarized entities during sexual intercourse.

...

RA: I am Ra. The energy transfer occurs in one releasing of the potential difference. This does not leap between green and green energy centers but is the sharing of the energies of each from red ray upwards. In this context it may seem to be at its most efficient when both entities have orgasm simultaneously. However, it functions as transfer if either has the orgasm and indeed in the case of physically expressed love between a mated pair which does not have the conclusion you call orgasm there is, nonetheless, a considerable amount of energy transferred due to the potential difference that has been raised as long as both entities are aware of this potential and release its strengh to each other by desire of the will in a mental or mind complex dedication.
Cassiopaeans said:
Q: (L) What happens psychically at the moment of orgasm?
A: For whom?
Q: (L) For anybody. In just a general way. Does anything happen to a person psychically when they have sexual climax.
A: Open.
Q: (L) Is it different for each individual?
A: Close.
Q: (L) Is it different for males from females?
A: Usually.
Q: (L) The reason I ask is because a man named Wayne Cook did some work with dowsing and he found out that the human body, after sexual climax, dowses the same pattern as a dead body. Why is this? (T) Draining of energy.
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Okay, where does the energy drain to?
A: To the ether.
Q: (L) Does the energy go to one or the other partner?
A: Maybe.

Q: (L) Is it possible, during this activity, for Lizzies or other beings to be hanging around and be drawing this energy?
A: Yes.
Cassiopaeans said:
Q: (L) Let's go back to a question I asked in another session on this same subject: what happens to our energy at the point of orgasm? Where does that energy go?
A: Drains to 4th level STS.
Q: (T) Is this a manifestation of the Lizards feeding off of us?
A: STSers there retrieve it.
Q: (T) So, orgasm is a 3rd density manifestation of the 4th density consumption of 3rd density energy?
A: One of their methods.
Q: (D) In "Bringers of the Dawn" it talks about sex and it says that it is an expression of love and so forth and that you should not have sex with someone who does not really love you.
A: Love is all that is needed.
Q: (L) If two individuals, as an expression of true love at higher levels, desire to express this love in a physical way, is it possible to channel the energy in a positive way without feeding the 4th level STS guys?
A: Nope.
Q: (L) In other words, no matter what you do, how you think, or whatever, that's where it goes?
A: Sex is a physical craving.
in the Ra transcript ive highlighted what i suspect to be the keys to "minimize, or even completely eliminate any energy transfer to STS 4 dimentional beings", if such a thing is possible.

confusingly, the Cassiopaeans, at first questioning, respond that energy may be transferred between partners, then, in a subsequent session, respond that sexual energy is always transferred to 4d sts. perhaps, in the first session they were referring to sexual energy draining to 4d sts via partner proxy. or perhaps we have a contradiction in material, the second session responses do seem rigid, or closed, which of course is in opposition to their philosophy in general. perhaps there were energies or assumptions present during the second session which colored the response? or perhaps the second session is accurate, and wishful thinking on the part of the I of the body has created all alternate scenarios and mechanisms?

in any case, this is a complicated topic, and observing ones self during sexual arousal and sexual activity is most difficult. if one must engage, it seems only appropriate to do so in line with the Ra material, that is, seeing the partner as Creator, and attempting to open the higher emotional center to broadcast and reception, somehow creating a 'secure line' between partners. at this time i am unsure whether this is possible. thoughts?
 
R

Realmhiker

Guest
This is a very interesting discusion and as I mentioned once before, it's a theme very close to home. I agree when Laura says that what's important is what you do with what you bring. On another related subject, one has to wonder why societies, and especially goverments and organized religion have taken it upon themselves to demonize homosexuality, is it an activity that threates STS forces in some way? The multiple US military agencies condemn the practice, and in the past a popular way to difame someone who might tell a "truth" was to accuse them of homosexuality.

In the country I grew up in, Catholicism was the rule, and it's hypocracy extended to many levels. Condemning women to a "slavery" type existance and exhonarating men from their philadering. Being a homosexual was a worse paraia than being a drug addict, and if anyone knew you were gay, it basically meant you never got a job. Many gays ended up in those days in prostitution as profession.

A can agree with the equation love plus sex can bring spiritual growth. I also think that something is definitelly wrong with an overly sexualized society, and where promiscuity seems to be encuraged by the media, and young people no longer experience the full extend of childhood due to so much exposure to sexual experience. Even some famous televangelists were found to be promiscious, and don't get me started with Mormon harems.

Yet, the scape goat of this society over all, the sore spot of all sensitivities is GAYs. So, again, I would like to know, why is the US goverment so interested in eliminating them from society. We recently had a discussion on AIDS, and vaccines. But the issue doesn't stop there. With the invasion of Iraq, it was in Abbu Graib that American soldiers forced Iraqi prisoners into forced--homosexualized situations, which insulted many of them to the core. I am one who thinks that this and other torture techniques were not just the product of a single cell of people, but that the order came from high above. I know the C's have talked about how STS in 4th density feed on fear, and terror, so I can see some correlations there. Still, I would like to know why the forces of the PTB have zeroed down on this element to cause division. In what way does it threat the STS PTB.

I have personally struggled long and hard on this issue and now that I am at peace with myself, I want it to become a tool for further developement. I agree with Anart, and I applaud her willingness to share her experiences here.
 

Saman

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Laura said:
Like I said, I was never quite satisfied with the discussion though I certainly knew from experiences with hypnosis that sex was one of the major ways of getting attachments, so that part certainly interested me.


And yes, the C's said that homosexuality was pretty much there from the beginning which also suggests that it is related to what Harrison suggests: pre-incarnational choice.

C's transcripts said:
Q: (L) So you are saying that particular genetic conditions are a physical reflection of a spiritual orientation? That the soul must match itself to the genetics, even if only in potential?
A: Yes, precisely.
Q: (L) So a person's potential for spiritual advancement or unfoldment is, to a great extent, dependent upon their
genes?
A: Natural process marries with systematic construct when present.
I think that, at some level, I must have chosen the genetic line that I came through because there were important elements of it that matched spiritual needs. That's probably true for everyone. Yeah, one of the "side-effects" of this genetic line is the above mentioned organic issues. So, maybe one of the side effects of the genetic line you needed for your spiritual purposes is gender issues?

Does that mean that what Lama Sing said about spiritual potentials of homosexuality is true?

I don't think so. It is counter-intuitive to me.

I think that there is a good possibility that the emphasis of this "reading" was somewhat skewed as we know channeled material can be - and skewed by the prejudices of the channel.

I think that the bottom line for everyone is this: "Any individual who engages in sexual activities simply for the physical pleasure and without intent to further a relationship of mutuality and commitment is using the sexual energy for self-aggrandizement. There will be the lessening of the spiritual energies and will require great effort to rebalance these."

So, whatever a person's internal make-up, that is the key - the SPIRITUAL key that expresses the spiritual intent. If that principle is honored, I don't think it makes any difference. We deal with these bodies we have to use as our vehicles the best way we can.
Hi Laura, All,

How about this part from Lama Sing in regards to Homosexuality?

[....]
"Homosexuality seems to fulfill a need, a choice within certain people. In most cases, the individuals involved have chakras which are dull -- one or two, sometimes three -- or nearly extinguished. They may find someone who has the corresponding chakras especially strong and they artificially exchange energy from one to the other. But they cannot move, grow, cycle. They remain static. But because something has happened to make them feel a bit more complete, they believe this to be spiritual growth. It is an illusion. But, it is a part of their progression and growth to experience this."
[...]

He said in the end of the above statements that "But, it is a part of their progression and growth to experience this." My question is, if this is the case according to Lama Sing, then how is it counter-intuitive in regards to "all there is is lessons"? So, I don't think Lama Sing is being judgmental of Homosexuals in the manner he has stated his comments, but that he is rather giving an explanation for the possible reasons of why some individuals are at this 'points' on the learning cycle in regards to 'sex' and their karmic lesson profiles, or so I think. So I think the "natural process marries with systematic construct when present" has to do with one's karmic lesson profile in regards to "it is a part of their progression and growth to experience this" since this is a Free Will Universe, and it is the Free Will Choice of the spirits to have such 'contemplated' experiences through Creation in order to balance their energies with "all that is" based on their choices in the 'past', 'present', and 'future' incarnations through 'time', or so I think...

Moreover, as for why the PTB have such a hate agenda for Homosexuals, I think this IS simply another psychological tactic for the "elite" to divide and conquer the populace by trying to program them again into another form of Infra-sex, that is, a state that abuses 'sex' through the negative halve of the lower emotional center corrupting the Life-force/sexual energy into providing fuel for the negative halve of the lower intellectual and movement center in order for one's multi-leveled three brained Being to "think" and react through corresponding psychologically 'implanted' 'buffers' in being judgmental and intolerant of the Free Will choice of other individuals in regards to their sexual orientation, bypassing the understanding of the higher emotional center and intellectual center that "it is a part of their progression and growth to experience this", or so I think...

Well anyways, just some current thoughts. What do you guys think?



Saman
 
D

dhess31

Guest
It might be wise to remember the hyper-dimensional nature of our existance. Doing so can put the whole "sex" issue into perspective. Why? Because it is a GREAT way to control people because it is such a strong component to our predetor's mind.

Think about what a nifty way this is for 4D STS to feed on us.

So, they gave us their mind, which means we are physically progrmmed for sex. So, let's take a look at this. I think everyone craves sex to some degree unless they are advanced in "the work", which as we all know the majority of people are not. In and of itself this craving probably leads to negative energy draining to 4D. But then, here comes religion. As if it already doesn't control people enough, let's add this "suppression" to sexual ideas. What does THIS do? It generates much more negative energy as people attempt to supress their desires, and lose focus of HOW to possiblly not let the energy drain. If ya can't "study" sexuality then the predator reigns supreme does it not?

Why supress homosexuality? Because by doing so it creates LOADS of negative energy for 4D STS to eat. Not only do the people who are homosexual get to hate themselves because of this "programming", everyone ELSE gets programmed to hate them too. The powers thaty be KNOW some people will be homosexuals, so why not take advatage of it and co-oop it like everything else?

Divide and conquer. Just like politcs and religion et al.

Not to mention that if people start studying homosexuals maybe they can take a few steps towards realizing the nature of reality (i.e reincarnation, the fact that there are no 'sexual' divisions at higher densities.).

Or so I think.

Don
 

Cyre2067

The Living Force
I have to agree with Anart - mostly b/c i tend to sexually be attracted to guys. I also noticed it at a young age, puberty hit in the 5th grade and i started to have wet dreams about boys in my class. Needless to say i was confused, my school was catholic and my parents relatively conservative so i hadn't even heard of homosexuality. The sex ed class they gave us didn't mention it at all so i had no clue what was "wrong" with me.

Then in 7th grade i started @ the public school and the use of the term "gay" soon clued me in that it was a bad thing, and only "fags" were "gay". As such i eliminated every stereotypical gay facet from my personality and being except that i was still into guys. I dated girls, but it usually ended up more of a friendship then a sexually driven relationship. I made out with them, felt them up, did all the typical hetereo things my friends were doing - and i must say i was good at it.

Then i came out in 12th grade as "bi" b/c i was sick of lieing to myself and i really wanted to get with a guy - damn hormones. And shortly thereafter had my first experience and after i got over the shock i kinda realized that it clicked in my head when i was with guys and not when i was with girls.

That said I do believe i've "been around a long time" when it comes to reincarnation, i don't have specific memories, more like generalities or things that feel familiar. Esp when it comes to history, events, timing it all seems so predictable. So when it comes to the whole "homo-sex isn't as energetically balanced as hetereo-sex" i have to disagree. I believe it has to do with the individual bio-energies involved as i tend to always have an excess and found many of my partners to be severely lacking. This leads to them becoming "attached" to me in a relatively short time frame with which i become frustrated as i cannot develop those kind of bonds that quickly and the relationship dies (as soon as someone starts falling in L with me and im not "there" i loose my attraction to them).

There's also an interesting contradiction, for all intents and purposes I'm "straight" personality wise, the only thing "gay" about me is that i bang dudes. What i dislike is that "gay" carries so much context with it the meaning has become a stereotype in and of itself which does not define who i am. Therefore, to call myself gay is a misnomer. I'm not "straight" either b/c the only requirement to be "straight" is to have sex with members of the opposite sex only. There's no context, no assumptions about straight people other then they don't dabble with members of the same sex. Thus i tend to be too "straight" for my gay friends and my homosexuality makes me uncomfortable around my straight ones (b/c im attracted to most of em).

Now that i've ranted and given you my life story I hope I've provided something insightful.
 
J

Jonathan

Guest
My thanks to every one involved in this discussion. Great information, and wonderful food for thought!

Let there be LOVE. :)
 
R

Realmhiker

Guest
Cyre2067 said:
There's also an interesting contradiction, for all intents and purposes I'm "straight" personality wise, the only thing "gay" about me is that i bang dudes. What i dislike is that "gay" carries so much context with it the meaning has become a stereotype in and of itself which does not define who i am. Therefore, to call myself gay is a misnomer. I'm not "straight" either b/c the only requirement to be "straight" is to have sex with members of the opposite sex only. There's no context, no assumptions about straight people other then they don't dabble with members of the same sex. Thus i tend to be too "straight" for my gay friends and my homosexuality makes me uncomfortable around my straight ones (b/c im attracted to most of em).
Interesting, yet, I think it is important not to get stuck in the labels. We all know the term GAY comes from the pride that comes with being out. Now, you don't want to call yourself gay, that is ok. Strickly speaking you are a homosexual and that should be ok too. =)

I think it stems from ignorance that people say acting gay is acting effeminate, or whatever. There are many straight people that act effeminate, and are labeled gay... again stemming from ignorance. The obvious truth is that nature provides us with extreme variarity of types and sorts. I remember in one the podcasts Laura talked about the variarity of entities out there when dealing with hypnotic patients... I remember her saying something that kind of stroke a chord with me. She said something like "In the universe all things are possible, and all things are permisible." If you take this to the realities we all face in a day to day basis, this is most certainly true, and it is only societies conventions that serve to catalog, label, and sanction behaviours and actions of people's sometimes very unfairly. Just as it was and continues to be with race, ehtnic, and cultural differences, so the same with sexuality.

I'm glad you brought that up, and shared your experiences... mine have been altogether different, because I grew up in a time and place where there was no information or help groups, or internet, or anything, just judgement and prejudice. You are so lucky to have been able to recognize your true sexual self so young. Now you if can use it to grow spiritually and work out those issues you were talking about. That is my opinion.

I think that this is a perfect place to discuss these misconceptions, because here we are all in search of knowledge and truth.
 

Craig

Jedi Master
Hi all,

anart said:
I totally agree that it most probably is a pre-incarnational choice, but so is heterosexuality - and his way of stating the issue just struck me as judgmental/ill informed and, quite frankly, rather stupid. Personally, I know that I could not understand 1/10th of what I understand about being human if I were not in this most maligned minority. Knowing from a very young age that I was not only different from everyone else I knew, in this most central of issues, (face it - from the time you're old enough to hold a doll or watch a Disney movie, you're told that you are waiting for Prince Charming - that marriage and children are the goal of your life), but that this difference would subject me to hatred and discrimination from complete strangers. This gave me an extra window of understanding on the injustices and cruelty of which humanity is capable. Luckily for me, I was also born with a sharp wit, and a genius level IQ - so I learned quickly and well that as long as other people saw something in me that they could relate to (the humor in my case) that they were more likely to just leave me alone instead of beating me up psychologically or physically.
Ain't that the truth sister! I did mention it on the old signs forum that I'm gay too and honestly cannot comprehend where I'd be now without my sharp wit and somewhat high level IQ. The amount of abusive situations these personality traits got me safely out of seems innumerable, in retrospect and what is funny is that I also saw similar scenarios with other gay people that I've observed. Many times getting out of a dangerous interaction by the skin of their teeth because of quick thinking and a very precise (comparatively anyway) ability to deflect - and always non-violently - bullying intentions.

Like Cyre, these differences didn't hit me until high school when I saw all of my old friends going off into what I perceived as an abyss of ignorance, bigotry and hostility. It's like their childhood purity was seized by a malevolent force and twisted and crushed and they all turned against me. From an observing point of view, I think this is a terrible thing for a child to experience and it is literally like an experiential course in psychopathy that shatters all previously held views as to the nature of people. It may even be part and parcel of Mouravieff's "moral bankruptcy", but like he says, through the darkness it IS possible to see specks of light in people that we may never have even noticed had the situation been different.

Unfortunately though the psychological abuse gets too much for some, and I've seen quite a couple of individuals basically turning into quite nasty people themselves. You know, quite bitchy and narcissistic. It seems that these people are made to feel so worthless and inferior (and I understand that a lot), their "true self" is rejected with constant "narcissistic injury" that they kind of deflect their personality into a "false self" that is very self-important. A few months ago, I came across something very close to this issue from a "fourth way perspective" , although I have no idea who said it; but it's interesting nonetheless:

Now, we have to turn to the special situation of people who, for whatever reason, do not find themselves entering into heterosexual relationships but are attracted to members of their own sex. As we have said. Love can enter into any relationship, even into that between a man and a plant. And it is evidently true that there can be a very pure love between members of the same sex.

In Plato's Symposium, for example, he shows deep understanding when he distinguishes between the attitudes of Socrates and Alcibiades towards the love of boys: Alcibiades sees love between men culminating in the sexual act and he expects Socrates, who has declared his love for him, to see it in the same way. He is astonished to find that Socrates is totally unresponsive on the physical level; although his love for Alcibiades and the youth of Athens is unbounded.

It is often asked if the homosexual man or woman is able to achieve transformation. To answer this question, we must first make clear distinction between the different stages of transformation. In the first, or exoteric stage of transformation there is comparatively little difference between normal and homosexual relationships, though there are two obstacles that can arise. The first is the sense of guilt that homosexuals can develop in a society which condemns the relationships as "unnatural". This, as with all guilt concerning sex, is a degeneration of the sexual energy.

The attraction between people of the same sex is not unnatural and even the desire to have sexual contact is not unnatural, though they are not of positive value in self perfecting as the relationship between man and woman can be. There is however, another obstacle for homosexuals which comes from looking upon themselves as "special". They are very often more sensitive and perceptive than other people, whom they are inclined to look upon as coarse and earthy. The sexual energy then degenerates into a particular kind of imagination which is fed by both partners in the relationship, and this can prevent any real progress.

Then the homosexual with a real wish for transformation is confronted with the choice between putting his sexual life or the work of transformation first.

In the second, or mesoteric, stage of the work, where it begins to penetrate more deeply than our ordinary selves, the homosexual may even have a certain advantage because he often is able to come to the realisation of his own nothingness more completely than "normal" people. I have myself seen this happen and have therefore no doubt that it is possible.

Nevertheless, in the mesoteric stage of the work, the sexual function must be subordinated to the transformation of energies required for the formation of higher bodies, and the homosexual who cannot restrain his sexual impulses and yet seriously wants to work may have to wait until he reaches an age at which the sexual function begins to lose its force, when a wonderful change can come and a remarkable process occurs. Many homosexuals are indeed exceptionally perceptive and sensitive to other people, including those of the opposite sex, and they can, therefore, so a great deal of good even if their own transformation is delayed. I must however, emphasise once again that the homosexual who thinks of himself as special or superior to others, cannot even enter the mesoteric stage of the work. It is equally necessary here to put aside any sense of guilt or inferiority.

When Gurdjieff dealt with homosexuals he was at pains to give them confidence that they could work on themselves and he never allowed them to feel themselves special. This is perhaps the central consideration and the most practical touchstone for the right working of sex in all of us: there should never be any feeling that we are special, or that it is by virtue of some power or quality we have that the sexual act comes about or is what it is.

Sex is a cosmic act in which we participate. We do not originate it and all we can "do" in terms of our own powers, is to interfere. Most important of all, the sense of being special or different separates us from the other person and then we cannot get the benefit of the sexual experience; it becomes simply food for the ego, a waste and a disease.

That is why many people find that sex does not lead to unity but to greater separation. The miracle is that though most of us do what we can to spoil ourselves through sex, we are somehow protected, and rarely does it happen that people are irretrievably lost through their indulgence.
I had just saved this in a word document and if I recall correctly, was from/quoted by a yahoo group participator, so the usual vigilance is necessary; many of the points, however sound very reasonable in my opinion.

My sexuality has taught me volumes about other people and myself. It has taught me that love, real love, is never easy to come by in this world, but I know that lesson can also be learned in many other ways. Basically, being born gay and female in 1966 to an upper middle class family in America led to an extremely interesting life path, filled with awe, pain, love and, very often, solitude.
I'm sure it has indeed and thank you for your perspective. In my immediate surroundings, I always thought that those who I suspected to be lesbian had it easier in terms of "attracting" attack scenarios. It was as if the expression of sexuality through the personality was more subtle whereas it seemed, the distinction between homosexual males and heterosexuals was blatantly obvious to everybody and thus could be targeted. But yes, the psychological pressures are probably more pronounced, or maybe the physical risk is lessened due to what is considered "correct" for female behaviour.

As for solitude, I have symptoms of something called "avoidant personality disorder" which means I'm fearful of being attacked (based on those past experiences) further so I avoid going out, unless I need to. But the thing is, I never wanted to do what other people my age tend to do, so in a sense, I still don't think I would go out if I didn't "suffer" from these anxieties. I've found that the best way of combatting these fears is simply exposure, which means directly testing the validity of my thoughts... I've found they are almost completely unjustified because all of that was in the past and a result of that particular age and situation. Although, there is always a "what if", but isn't there always?

So, basically, she had conceived and carried two little boys before I came along. It was all those 'boy germs' I tell ya!! Seriously, though, it may well have been.
No, no, it's all those icky female germs! I'm the only male child in this generation, so go figure! Jesus, you'd think my whole family would be accepting considering I have better taste in wallpaper. They don't know what they're missing! Actually, saying all of that, I haven't even said those three dreaded words yet.
 

Mike

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Anart said:
I have a little sister as well and she is straight, but not 'fru fru' at all - rather like she's one step away from me on the boy/girl continuum. The oldest sister in the family, the first born, is very 'fru fru' - so if you just took a case study of my siblings and their birth order, that alone would correspond with these studies mentioned.
Anart what is 'fru fru'? Never heard the expression before.
 
R

Realmhiker

Guest
Craig said:
So, basically, she had conceived and carried two little boys before I came along. It was all those 'boy germs' I tell ya!! Seriously, though, it may well have been.
No, no, it’s all those icky female germs! I’m the only male child in this generation, so go figure! Jesus, you’d think my whole family would be accepting considering I have better taste in wallpaper. They don’t know what they’re missing! Actually, saying all of that, I haven’t even said those three dreaded words yet.
My father had two big families, 9 children with a woman never divorced, whom I had very little contact with and my mother, with him he had 7 children. I am the oldest of them. To my knowledge I am the only homosexual of this second family. I don't know of others in the first family. So if there is something to that theory of previous children and their gender, I don't know how it applies to me. As of now, (I am now 35years old) I have only spoken about my sexuality to my mother, and my three sisters, all who are very supportive. The only brother I told, completely shut me off, which was very painful of course. I have not made it to the other two brothers or my father who is currently 76 years old. So, I think I am going to leave it at that.

Now I agree with Craig about "the Scene" his notes on this article I think are fairly reasonable and accurate. I don't think of myself as being special. I think aware people in a relationship should use sex if possible as a way of strenghening their mutual bond. The "scene" is particularly toxic and full of STS messages. I had a chance last year to go out with a friend of mine to some clubs in Chicago. I am not a clubbing type, not that I fear the clubs or anything, I just don't like the noise. My friend wanted to show me gay life in Chicago (Boystown) anyway, at first he takes me to this quiet piano bar. The person sitting at the piano and singing was a most vulgar and repulsive person, who played the piano beautifully and had a very nice voice. But his message were all the same STS oriented, and invasive of other people's business. When my friend first told me about the piano bar, I thought, well this could be a pleasant experience, but I was mostly offended by the whole thing. After 20 mins, I asked my friend if we could go somewhere else. He then took me a to big complex bar. It was not any different than an heterosexual sports bar. The big difference was that on the big flat screens in stead of sports you had gay videos, music and sexy images. I figured, well, this is the way it is, the place is set up so that people can hook up. I looked at 100's of individuals all dressing to impress one another, and after 20 mins I said to my friend, thanks I have seen enough. He pleaded for me to stay. I stayed, but no more than an hour. I was genuingly bored, and felt toxic there.

I am not trying to portray myself as good, or better than others. I simply do not relate to bar culture. I don't think it's possible to find a meaningful person that can give you a meaningful conversation in a bar, and even harder to find someone who might become interested in a spiritual journey. I do not say however that the chances or meeting such person in a place like that are 0, after all I was there, even if for that night. But, still, I rather spend my weekends at home reading, or watching some movie, or going t the theater, or simply hicking in the woods. Somehow, because of my music I have not lacked of company, or people that love me, and at the moment I enjoy a relationship which has now lasted a year. I didn't find it in a bar, I found it in music.

Now, over this year there were many issues that I had to learn about. What in a relationship was STS and STO, how to best express certain aspects, and eliminate others. How to create an environment of trust, and selflessness. It aint easy, but it is possible through communication. This is where the cruxis is. People tend to mostly fail in communication either by poor or no listening, or, but poorly stating of the facts. Like the old saying goes "Mean what you say, say what you mean." But most people are just not interested in accurate language, and most people are just way too immerse in their own inner dialog, no one listens. Trust as oppose to jealosy and knowing when your individuality stops and your partner's begin. Just because you are together doesn't mean your journey will be exactly the same. This has been perhaps the hardest lesson for me.

My partner and I have tried to work so hard at all these issues, because the sex part is easy, but a relationship is a lot of work, especially knowing and understanding what is STS or STO in the relationship... I think this applies to everyone no matter what sexual orientation they might have. Anyhow... enough BLAH- about me... :) Good journey to all...
 

anart

A Disturbance in the Force
Mike said:
Anart said:
I have a little sister as well and she is straight, but not 'fru fru' at all - rather like she's one step away from me on the boy/girl continuum. The oldest sister in the family, the first born, is very 'fru fru' - so if you just took a case study of my siblings and their birth order, that alone would correspond with these studies mentioned.
Anart what is 'fru fru'? Never heard the expression before.
Yep 'fru fru' simply means very girly - as in a 'girly girl'. Of course, that is not derogatory in any way, it's just a description of her female attributes which are much more pronounced than mine or my younger sister's. She's a great person, actually.

+0
 

Saman

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Since this is relevant to this thread called "sex" and the original question by Joda, I will repost what I wrote in the "sex and the work thread" also here:


FWIW, I thought to share here what I am currently reading which happens to relate to the the title of this thread that is about "sex and the work". It is about how one has the Free Will choice through honesty with oneself to make choices in the present to step by step become a man of normal and healthy sex, that is, becoming a man that is responsible for his own choices and actions in the present, and to not have the mind dwell like a victim with excuses rooted in the past, excuses that disassociate one from taking responsibility of one's decisions in the present and thus continuing the "predator mind's" various forms of addictions; in other words, how to learn to work with the mind to release the 'right' intrinsic chemicals that "begin to separate limiting emotions based on assumptions from emotions that open one to unlimited possibilities", or so I think.

http://www.sexualcontrol.com/most-personal-index.html#toc

A very worthwhile read for anyone seeking to overcome any form of addiction, or so I think. Hence, I am in awe and I thank the Universe for answering my remodified prayer due to showing my spirit the Light on how to learn to help myself find the strength to step by step overcome the Darkness that I see within.

Edit:

A note about the author Joe Zychik: I just did a search on the author on google to find out more about who he is - found his page under construction:

http://www.armthepeople.com/


I don't agree with him on his view on how having the freedom to own leathal firearms for self protection makes people safer then not having the right to own them. Making it legal to own firearms for ordinary citizens for protection against criminals' home invasions, etc, does not solve the problem but only adds to the problem of criminals having easier access to lethal firearms. I think that getting rid of all such firearms is the solution, but of course, that wouldn't be at all realistic in a STS world run by 4D STS's psychopathic puppets 'below'. Only solution I see would be for the people to become aware of pyschopaths and to elect a government that would make it illegal to produce firearms or any sort of weapons of mass destruction. Of course, if this happened, we wouldn't be in this STS realm any longer now would we? Just a dream I guess. Regardless, I still think what he says about normal healthy sex is wise and sound.
 

Z...

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Its interesting to observe how threads evolve on this forum.

The other topic about sex has evolved into discussion about meaningfull relationships and love, here we have topic sex which has ended up as the discussion about homosexuality. So what do we really mean when we say sex?


I must say that I was very impressed with anart's reply as I feel it holds alot of objective truth, to me it appears that being gay presents enormous opportunity for spiritual growth

Now for someone who has walked in "gay" (what an irony with this expression :) ) shoes it is obvious that this lama dude doesnt have a clue what he is talking about.
In any case I cannot resist but quote my dear friend's poem:

"My way of loving
unspeakable sadness,
like these shoes, worn on a long juorney
In these shoes I have walked so long
that I've became
a silent one"

Doesnt silence bring up the true voice of the soul?

I think this lama has got stuck in misconception about polarities, yin and yang.
As we know creation is never black and white (maybe at the very source) and it seems to me that yin and yang essence within living beings cannot be so clearly distinguished.
Many psychological researches confirm this as they point out that human beings are in their psychee essence bisexual. In children we can very often observe strong emotions for both sexes. Later on, due to various influences individuals become more or less comfortable in certain roles which results in adopted sexual behaviour.

Also what this Lama has to say about homosexuality reminds me of the book I read long time ago, about Taoistic Principles of Love Making, it says that in lesbian women , due to constant exchange of negative energies , energy gets stuck in the base of the spine which results in their hip area being swollen and body becoming pear shaped. What a nonsense.
This is clear example of wrong conceptions about distribution of polarities.

In any case what I am trying to say is that most of the human beings are harbouring different levels of both energies, masculine and feminine.
For example I am a man, with all phisical atributes of the man - tall, strong , mascular and hairy but when I hold the baby or a puppy I become Universal Mother ( If you are stuck on the appearance you would say Father but Mother is the true essence of such energy), and interesting thing is that I can stay in this energy as much as I like.

We can not possibly say this is the man and his polarity is + and this is the woman and her polarity is -. The things are just not as simple.

As long as the same sex relationship are based on right principles I cant see why would they be different to any heterosexual relationships in terms of spiritual growth.
 
Top Bottom