STUDIES IN THEOLOGY - Popular Christianity 07/08/2006

STUDIES IN THEOLOGY;

Popular Christianity - 07/08/2006

Study Notes And Journal Entries,

An Observation

By

David A. Archer

02/15/1968

07/08/2006

I have recently made a rather peculiar realization pertaining to myself and my relationship with/within society; I am somewhat of an abnormality and unique example in a curious way.

I am the youngest of five children (all now well into adulthood) naturally - and an additional pair as "step" sibling - rather removed, but I have no incestuous leanings from my youth - no incestuous relationship to speak of in that situation.

My mother died when it was my fifth or sixth year, so I can't be directly faulted for not having had oedipal leanings.

My only sister was already married in my first of memories of her.

I did all of that early, young exploration with neighbor girls my own age. Strange as it may seem, this sets me aside as a sort of social abnormality it would seem. Especially given the number of children in my family. ~

This strikes me as odd in several ways - one of which being the thought and question of where it is then that such inter-familial relationships gain such negative social connotations? Sure, as intelligent creatures and from experience as a species we know that such relationships produce ill effects within the species- But why then, is it still such a common occurrence, then further socially frowned upon in the "light of day?"

In every measurable way except that detrimental effect we as a species have experienced, such tendencies are very much a seeming normality so to speak - though very much limited to the human creature.

Is this yet again an area similar to that I have described between "conceptualization" and "application?"

How is it, especially given modern advance in medicine, that such tendencies have not yet lost the mysterious shackles of the social negativity associated with such actions?

I have personally witnessed those with such tendencies actually being rewarded within society much for said leanings in a preferential manner - why does their example in being more forthright about it, not serve to set a standard in having obtained social gains? I have trouble understanding from where it is that this obvious (or seemingly so) majority of the population continues to exist racked with guilt and under a social stigma and hush. ~

This then brings me to consider other supposed "taboos" in the social sense. One of which being bestiality.

Looking back through history, and in the context of social standards and structures - even under the yoke of hard line religions and oppression - the very common coupling with "slave classes" very much, within the mind set and social scope of the time periods where such transpired - represents such violations and "abominations." As much as were the actual examples of human/animal inter-relations at the time. That is just how slaves were considered.

Given then those "leanings," where then do such "lofty" standards as are now posed, actually come from?

Even as far back as Egyptians copulating with Hebrews in the slave class - such can be literally cited, as per the understanding of the time, as bestiality.

Other early Mediteranian cultures even actually accepted such activities - as stated, even to the level of inter-species relationships. That is to say in no uncertain terms, sex with animals was at one point in time accepted.

Odd then, that we can find several examples in social movements and ploys which list such activities as wrongful. Some even while simultaneously promoting such activities in other forms, and even rewarding them.

Some of these social movements even vehemently demanding separation of races, while actively promoting philosophical bents rooted deeply in areas of humanity which were to the contrary.

Much of humanity then, is a product of such forms of bestiality - even as it was considered under those social constraints and persecutions. ~

Again, in considering it (incest) as a majority which it exists as in society - I again have trouble understanding the continued direction in self loathing. I imagine massive amounts of mental illnesses are derived from such torn existences. Especially considering that such incestuous relationships are even celebrated in some modern cultures in various ways. As a loose example, the reference to all in existence being "brothers and sisters."

What an odd duality - ethical dilemma within the human potential and capacity.

How is it that we seem so suspended in that sense, between tendencies and the ability to conceptualize. What we are capable of understanding and those things we continue to actualize.

Considering this, actually brings me yet again to speculate that perhaps - if it couldn't be said that humanity "went the wrong way," then perhaps certain ideas within introduced structures were mishandled?

Again, perhaps example of that consistent human failing between conceptualization and application? Again, in my opinion, directly exemplifying what I have asserted pertaining to hasty and over zealous implementation of those conceptualizations and proposed ideologies (then resulting in a distorted effect perhaps).

Maybe even such a consistent "failing" is example of the rigidity I have referred to as result of our over bearing want to "control." As a given concept or idea begins to "manifest" through such over amplified application - it then gains "mass" so to speak which in turn equates to a form of "drag" in that larger process and motion of existence. This then perhaps acts as a confining space as it were, which in turn is then within and part of our "reality."

In other words, as a given "concept" is transformed into our "reality," it solidifies - more is "cast" in that transformation through that cumulative perception -

This strikes me as interesting in this given example of our seemingly "natural" sexual tendencies, and those hard line ethical standards which are nowhere near the "normality" within even their own societies as per said "conceptualization."

The interesting part of this, is that said "solidification" continues within that process of perception and continued perception (even through change of said concept), while the real tendency is separate from the over bearing social standards.

Can there then be cited (as being attributable) any actual human progress as result of the over bearing, controlled application of those over imposed structures and limitations? this in light of that established tendency in failings within that transformation process through explicit rigidity and applied control?

It would again seem that we are very much suspended between conceptual capacity and that of it which has manifested as "reality" through our existence and those dwindling variables of and within perspective/perception.

Is it then that our existence is an amalgamated conduit of sorts (as previously presented)- consistently losing more and more flexibility?

This then would lead to the consideration that it isn't any "idea" being introduced which may be hurtful or a detriment - but more that tendency in haste and control which produces the ill effects. "Half baked" as it were then being implemented on a grand scale as established and firm, while in effect then firming in said efforts.

The idea of a cartoon rat running the world may be absurd, but the idea of it is very much harmless, entertaining even. It is the effort and results of over applying such designs and solidifying said as described, which then produces the "harmful" result and effect on humanity - per say. In that solidification it then gains said "density" within reality - which is just as detrimental to the "idea" itself - being the "idea" is from where said benefits began.

Absurdity is very much more than a part of existence, it is vital in many ways.

The idea of a cartoon rat running the world definitely serves such a purpose. The solidification of it, is rather detrimental to say the least.

"Nazi's" with Rat Ear Hats is rather absurd in concept and visual depiction no less, but once it becomes rigid, regimented through implementation etc... it is brittle so to speak - no longer even serving the purpose of absurdity.

I would even venture that through such a hypothetical introduction of rigid structuring, that humanity in real tendency would still remain quite similar to that which it was before "Adolph Mouse" and the "SS-kateers club."

such just seems to have remained the consistency through the ages, regardless of the implemented, more so imposed structures. ~

From another perspective there is a great level of safety - and even more potential - in such a tendency - even given the "perved" aspects of sex with your mother for instance, and overly explorative spankings from "daddy."

To consider what has been done to humanity, and then realize how little much at all has changed within it, even the "mommy love" and "daddies good girl" aspects - it then presents a huge amount of forgiveness in that ongoing process within the introduction and exploration of concepts and ideologies.

Why would anyone choose to re-introduce rigid and tired directions?

Through centuries of their failed attempts, people still are just as perverted and rather insane as were early civilizations screwing their goats for entertainment while dictating what would become base standards for early modern social structures and laws. And what is more, is they choose these things - even contrary to said want of introducing said rigid directions, and after centuries of conditioned existence within them.

Has "religion" then failed in that respect?

Was the "mis-step" in demonizing things which seem to be inherent tendencies - further, tendencies which are subconsciously promoted within even many religious structures?

It is as if such structuring is utilized in continuing to label what is obviously otherwise "normal" behavior- as per said tendencies, as "bad." Really achieving nothing more than promoting mental instabilities, the perceived need for said structure, and even further promoting more grotesque developments as per mutations in such respects. This especially in considering another tendency toward said "mis-interpretations, then re-applied" even while still wearing the "really old costume."

all the while posturing a righteous and "in compliance" stance which then adds more toward the mental instabilities.

A form of imposed narcissism in many regards.