Sunday, 1 January 2017

Religious Philosophies, Scientology x The Empire, Sexual Perversion

Lesbian is a very instructive and interesting video about Scientology and it involves an ex-Scientologist. Several issues appear as centers: sexuality, the teachings of L. Ron Hubbard, punishment, discipline, and so on. A major issue is perversion. What is perversion? I then thought that, given my existential situation since the end of 2001, and for several years during my adolescence, I was stuck with basically having a little thing with my own vagina without touching it, therefore not something that most people would classify as masturbation; something that gave me a kick that is similar to an orgasm with a man. Is that a perversion? If I enter Ron's thinking, according to this video, I should see when it started. I went back to it, and the reason is quite obvious: I really wanted to have sex and couldn't. My mother passed a law to me, something that I respected as a law, and I therefore couldn't. I had to wait until I were eighteen just in case I became pregnant and I couldn't take it. That at least was the reason she alleged not to let me do it, like all contraceptive methods could fail or something. I didn't think I could do something about it because, first of all, I would not eat or have a home if she did not pay the bills, something she always made clear to me. I don't think this is a perversion, like in my case: I am not using anyone else when I do that, first of all. I also do not touch myself, as, also according to me, we should do in masturbation, and that helps me quite a lot in life in terms of having energy, doing things, etc. She talks about lesbians. I do agree with Hubbard, if that is what he said: Homosexuality is a perversion. I also can see on my skin the consequences of depending on gay people, especially undeclared gay people. All those people at RMIT made me think that Horadam was gay and she did follow the steps of the story that I gave Trevor in case she were, so that I would say she must be. I do think immorality in general is associated with homosexuality, and therefore abuse and crime. What I most see is promiscuity in gay people. I find that being faithful, as God ordered, satisfying each other sexually, is something only possible, so far, in heterosexuality. Rarest cases of all perhaps in homosexuality, but, for instance, I have just watched videos with Pete Burns, the guy who just died, the travesti. He was doing Big Brother (I absolutely A-D-O-R-E-D his figure on this day, so beautiful, but it was on this day that he licked the other guy, I reckon. I just found another day on which he was hugging the black guy from behind as well) and we then watched him even licking another man on TV. As for what everyone knows, he was married to another man, had a declared partner, and therefore shouldn't be doing that. We must perform more scientific studies, unbiased ones, to investigate the social consequences of homosexuality, but, from my observation, it is very harmful, especially when it is undeclared. Florica Cirstea kinda determines my end at VUT and she was an undeclared homosexual. She declared to me that she was absolutely heterosexual and even wanted to get a boyfriend before she sexually and physically assaulted me in the bathroom (and that, as we know, is both civil and ethical crime). The very reason to go with her when she asked was that she guaranteed that she was heterosexual (despite her looks, I did believe her words). I trusted her. I feel that lots of people are raped by undeclared homosexuals: We don't know what they think or do with their genitals, and we are then betrayed in our trust to highest degree, sometimes accumulating lifetime trauma because of what they have the courage of doing to us. That is certainly criminal and therefore immoral. Masturbation is against God's Laws, but if you get aroused from watching people doing stuff, for instance, as it is my case, and you can get something from it without touching yourself, then that is not masturbation, I think. Having sex with yourself would be wrong because that destroys your social utility, your connection to others, etc., so that masturbating is wrong. If you can simply get aroused for remembering how it is when you have a partner because you are watching something, if you can do that without connecting to what you are watching in any sense apart from feelings, as it is my case, then I think it is OK. It would probably be called perversion by Hubbard, but, as I said, we intend to be their sister Church, not the same. We will still gladly have their books available, since we are truly about Science. 

Perhaps it is worth discussing another small point that appears in this video: What is a sexual interaction? Holding hands may be sexual, but may also not be, I think I am sure about this one. An adult can carry a kid by the hand or hold the hand of their parents or carers without that involving any sort of sexual desire or intents to have anything sexual. We can also hold the hands of the men we want and have all our buttons turned on, all will on earth. In this way, holding hands is not necessarily what I will now call Sexual Act. Hugging and shaking hands are probably in the same category. Hugging is a bit more dangerous in those regards, and some people, for instance, use the hug to pass sexual vibes, so say they use the opportunity to press their bodies against the person's body. Shaking hands can be as dangerous, since some people stretch their fingers. The difference between a sexual and a non-sexual act is nowhere but in the intentions. I am sure we can have a father with a naked kid on his chest and nothing sexual in the scene, meaning also nothing sexual in their inner realities. I am also sure we can have a pervert and all sexual intention on earth, which may actually transfer to the kid, a process that I will call infection by psyche. The victim of the deviation, so say a hug that becomes a Sexual Act, has a choice: They can reject the advance and say Stop. They can hit the other person somehow to immediately stop the action, which may progress to other levels very quickly. They can let it happen and act on a post-event basis, what is obviously not advisable. They can also accept, so say they were boyfriend and girlfriend, and that was the intention, like their relationship is finally becoming sexual. We recommend not kissing people's cheeks or mouths unless you are sexual partners or intend to be. Never kiss the mouth of your kids: That is both anti-hygienic and criminal. We recommend avoiding physical contact with others in general unless they are your sexual partner. We also recommend keeping a safe distance from the body of the other, regardless of who is speaking to you. If a person is crying, psychologists say that simply holding their shoulders is enough support. In fact, you may also not touch them, but if you feel as if that is necessary, then shoulders are a good choice. A light touch on both sides is what they usually do. In acting, people do hug a lot, but they also usually have a lot of sex with each other, like they are usually promiscuous. We should avoid being promiscuous at any expense, so that if that is what they do in acting, we should avoid acting. Intimacy should be always something you accept because of love: Either for already loving or for attempting, to the deepest of your soul, to love, and this love here is obviously connected to the person with whom you have intimacy. Some people advance over you to kiss your cheeks, some charge you on that: If you don't want to look uncool, then simply make the move with your head and put your cheek lightly against theirs. That is both polite, considered finest in the finest social circles, and prudent. 




No comments:

Post a Comment