PDA

View Full Version : New Law - It is now "illegal" to flirt with (much less have sex with) another if...



Sammy
14th November 2012, 12:58
Just In (well... maybe this isn't exactly "new" news) - it is now "illegal" to flirt with (much less have sex with) another person besides your "legal spouse." This is irregardless of any other consideration in the matter.

http://news.yahoo.com/investigation-warrior-monk-general-allen-surprises-acquaintances-013120352.html

As the Petraeus / Kelley / Allen "scandal" widens what no one is willing to talk about is the self imposed prison we have created where those who have transcended this childish human practice such that "society" requires "monogamy" upon married couples regardless what those couples private agreements may be.

Even if a couple does not have their own privately created agreement regarding what each partner can and cannot do regarding each partner's sexual activity (of course, as long as all of those activities are lawful as well), many societal cultures around the world paint the picture that extramarital sex is so, so wrong, so, so evil, that the PTBs have one of the greatest weapons against humanity and we hand them the weapon locked, loaded and aimed right at us.

This is amazingly, utterly ridiculous and is a clear example of why I am sure the elite are behind our backs giggling at how incredibly childish we are and it is no wonder to this writer that humanity is in the position it finds itself.

Focusing on America first (as America is the leader of this insanity with the UK right behind her) here is what you got.

You have a TV blasting into your home where if the focus of a program is not on violence, it is on sex, sex, sex and more sex. The "news" media plays serious about what is supposed to be right or wrong regarding sex - the news media creates and upholds what is supposed to be "right and wrong" in parallel with the opposite messages projected by most of the rest of the media (other than a few "dramas" - soap operas, etc). Meanwhile most of the rest of the media through inuendo supports the projection of this view but then slams you with the "sneaky truth" that just about everyone wants to have sex, wants to have sex with others besides just the same human being over and over and over, wants to have sex with themselves, sometimes enjoys watching others have sex (via any form of media, even live sex) and since most of society has already been brainwashed into believing that "it is bad" to feel this way, "it is bad" to act upon this, then you have several wonderful results (as seen through the eyes of a PTB) that most humans are self conflicted against their most natural nature... and through this one direction alone can be manipulated into such a state of confusion the rest of the controlling effort is far easier to perform... and that if you need to take someone down, all you got to do is get their private life data into the hands of the right media resource and the take down is a certainty.

We are utter idiots. We are naturally sexual beings... (well most of us). We like sex. When we have plenty of healthy sex along with all the other healthy practices we can pursue related to activities of our human body we are empowered in a way you cannot achieve otherwise. If you are like most human beings, you know that the last sentence I wrote is true.

So what if two people decide to make a life together and those same two people decide that as long as they strive to protect each other from "diseases" (thus perform healthy, safe sex) and if it is important additionally agree not create babies outside of their partnership arrangement but as long as each remains respectful about their adventures on the side (or perhaps they have some together!) - so freaking what???

It is really hard to feel sorry for the condition humanity has allowed itself to be in. And this is just one example of how silly... no, that's not the right word - how down right childish we all are.

I am so glad I was able to transcend the petty and horrific feelings that come forth from jealousy. I am so happy to have created (finally) a life for myself where I can do what I want in that regards to what I want to do sexually AND that I am mature enough to know how to go about that AND that I do not have sex on my mind day and night (because I am secretly frustrated) AND because I found sexually activity is not the first level of permission one requests when having sex with another... it is the LAST permission to request (something I may elaborate upon in another post depending if this thread survives.


Anyway, I am sick and tired of seeing Americans mind "screwed" (I had a similar but very different word in mind instead of "screwed" but am attempting to stay within the forum guidelines here) and mind screwed willingly!

Of all the weapons the PTB uses to "manage the sheep" or should I saw "rabbits" this is by far number two on the list just after the fear we all have of death. Interesting that the first chakra focuses our survival desires and the second chakra focuses our sexual energies and desires.

Enjoy the Day and Love to All - justoneman

added - No wonder France and Spain and many other European cultures and many other cultures found around the world thinks we are idiots.

Flash
14th November 2012, 13:44
i like your new hair cut Chester

Oups, I may be having trouble with the flirt police just for those words.

Strat
14th November 2012, 13:54
It is really hard to feel sorry for the condition humanity has allowed itself to be in. And this is just one example of how silly... no, that's not the right word - how down right childish we all are.

Very well put.


Anyway, I am sick and tired of seeing Americans mind "screwed" (I had a similar but very different word in mind instead of "screwed" but am attempting to stay within the forum guidelines here) and mind screwed willingly!

I sat here for like 30 minutes writing and subsequently deleting a response. So I'll just say, "There is much to be said about this and I agree."

truth4me
14th November 2012, 13:57
To each their own. I was married 13 years and my wife left me and our kids behind. The emotional damage was devastating and lingered to me for 10 years and my children still won't talk to their mom. Now you better be on the same page when the two of you decide to marry and that still could be a problem.One spouse might fall deeper in love then the other no matter the agreement before hand . You bring kids in the mix wanted or by accident then you compound the problem. I've been ask a few times to join in with married couples and I will not cross that line now thats me but each their own......

A true story- my brother got involved with a married couple now as long as the husband was there watching he felt like his wife wasn't "cheating" and he was pleasing her by letting my brother do his thing with the wife then the husband over heard my brother and the wife talking about"hooking" up without the husband being there WRONG! the husband came in the room and hit my brother over the head with a bottle and it was a mess.....the husband felt like his wife was "cheating then".....:suspicious:


Serious mind game.......I date women from time to time but they are single and avoid any problems dealing with spouses.


I could tell you another true story about a man his wife and a man with a gun in a fantasy game but I let it pass for its pretty wierd......unless you like that type of thing of course......

Sammy
14th November 2012, 14:21
Serious mind game.......I date women from time to time but they are single and avoid any problems dealing with spouses.

Your entire post is a great post and raises many of the details I was hoping would come forth - but this last part I had to quote as it demonstrates perhaps an evolved form of existence which, I can see at the end of the day being the healthiest in our current cultural environment.

I was married and monogamous for 5 years when one day my wife said she had to talk to me. She informed me that her father's wife's son and her have been having an affair. We had two sons (ages 4 and 2) at that time, and "happy" home with a few cool dogs, I was making good money and she loved being "mom" and I loved my work and we were having sex daily (sometimes more often) and had been doing so since shortly after we met (5.5 years prior).

I was shocked and scared when she laid it on me that Friday morning. Within 5 minutes I got over myself (my ego bruise) and considered the bigger picture as this involved my father in law's step son, a good kid and someone I loved. I immediately said to my wife, "I am most worried about lance... how can we help him?" The I started thinking about Lance was because I had assumed that since Mandy told me what had been going on, her intention was to stop the affair and stay with me. Her next words were, "I am unsure if I intend to stay with you or leave you for Lance."

Again, my ego was bruised but the most important thing I recognized was that part within me that said "I can't live without her." I was attached. I was attached in an unhealthy way and did not know it. In fact, it took me another 10 or more years to figure all this out about myself and transcend this form of attachment... but THAT is for another post.

As it ended up, after three days of pure fear, fear for myself first, fear for breaking up the happy family illusion I was fully invested in, fear as to "what will this do to our sons emotional states." Fear, fear, fear... she came to me on Monday and said, "I have decided to stay with you, Chester."

Trust me... this story evolves and hopefully, if this thread does not get out of hand (or banned - so let's keep it PG 13 as best we can, folks) - all of this will come forth. My intentions are only to pass along to others, if they desire to know, how I have been able to transcend completely - jealousy. It has been my greatest personal accomplishment and the freedom I experience from this at my core level of being - my Spirit is truly wonderful.

I am off to "the day job."

Love to All - Chester

Kimberley
14th November 2012, 15:00
Thanks Justoneman for the rant that has been in my head also.... if I hear or read the words "Sex Scandal" one more time I might scream. Although I know I will read and hear the words "Sex Scandal" again over and over and over again. I'll get over it. :-)


However, I too have transcended jealousy and when that happens everything changes.

And yes sex has been controlled by the institutions of religion and government to keep the masses in check for the last several thousand years.

I look forward to the day when sex is not a negative issue for us all!!

Much love!

Daughter of Time
14th November 2012, 15:39
Religions have been labelling sex "guilty" for so long now that the programming, like all programmings, will be very difficult to undo.

Celibacy would not do for me, but neither would promiscuity. As I get older, sex becomes more sacred.

If a couple in a committed relationship or marriage should decide to have an open marriage, that is their business, provided that they both agree this is what they want. I've known couples in these situations, but in most cases only one of them wanted the openness. The other agreed in order to please their partner. This does not work because then jealousy enters the game and sooner or later the relationship breaks down. But if having an open marriage is what each truly wants, then it's no one's business but their own. Some couples are happy in this type of situation. Some couples enter this type of agreement after their sex lives become stagnant. They say it revives their intimate times together.

I, however, get rather miffed when married men come on to me, with or without their wives' approval. I have had the misfortune of becoming involved with a man who was married and kept it from me. He fabricated a life which did not exist. I later discovered he had a cell phone which he used only for me. He had an e-mail address only for me. He told me countless lies to keep me in his life. And even though he later explained that he and his wife were not having sex anymore, that didn't assuage my anger. An involvement with a married man is out of the question for me. I'm not a prude. But I do have principles which I stand by.

For me, an open marriage would not work. And even if it's not a marriage, a committed relationship is just as sacred, imo. If I fall in love with someone then I want to be with him and him only. I want to be encased in a cocoon of love and pleasure which is impenetrable by anyone else. In our intimate times together, I want to be in a world where only he and I exist. The thought that another person may be entering that sacred space in which we have our own little universe, would break the strong bond I'd have with him.

Having said all this, I find it utterly boring when sex scandals erupt. Provided that the sexual involvement is consensual and does not involve a minor, then it's no one's business but the business of those involved. What people do behind closed doors should not be infiltrated by the judgment of others.

Whiskey_Mystic
14th November 2012, 16:03
Religions have been labeling sex "guilty" for so long now that the programming, like all programmings, will be very difficult to undo.

Not all religions. Actually just the religions stemming from Abraham, which is really just one religion. So...One religion has been labelling sex "guilty" is more accurate. Even within these three branches we see some sex-positive teachings and these have increased over the last couple decades. Protestantism in particular has tried to adopt a sex-positive message.

Some religions, such as the Tantra school of Buddhism and some schools of Taoism, believe that a healthy sex life is ultimately necessary for the attainment of enlightenment.

TargeT
14th November 2012, 16:19
I think its sad that the media (in all cases, but this case particularly) is being taken seriously..

that this "story" of resignation due to infidelity is anything but a cover; this type of thing happens all the time & as Justone says, it's a point of view issue, a Perspective issue, not a true problem.

one of my mom's favorite sayings comes to mind: Pain is manditory, suffering optional.

I can't see this topic as anything but selfimposed suffering, something we choose to do but do not have to do. Some of us have found the way out of this trap, most have not as it is so deeply ingrained via society, religion and social stigmas.

Sammy
14th November 2012, 17:05
Religions have been labeling sex "guilty" for so long now that the programming, like all programmings, will be very difficult to undo.

Not all religions. Actually just the religions stemming from Abraham, which is really just one religion. So...One religion has been labelling sex "guilty" is more accurate. Even within these three branches we see some sex-positive teachings and these have increased over the last couple decades. Protestantism in particular has tried to adopt a sex-positive message.

Some religions, such as the Tantra school of Buddhism and some schools of Taoism, believe that a healthy sex life is ultimately necessary for the attainment of enlightenment.

Exactly and is in fact the two "schools" I found myself most attracted to and which were my last two "religious disciplines" (if you could call it that... I prefer to use the term "practices") I have been involved with. Man, Whiskey Mystic, I sure love your posts. justone

deridan
14th November 2012, 17:18
to those who have accended a ladder, STAY ON Elet us know the call and fimilirize ourselves with the wisdom which comes from that high place

Sammy
14th November 2012, 17:45
To each their own. I was married 13 years and my wife left me and our kids behind. The emotional damage was devastating and lingered to me for 10 years and my children still won't talk to their mom. Now you better be on the same page when the two of you decide to marry and that still could be a problem.One spouse might fall deeper in love then the other no matter the agreement before hand . You bring kids in the mix wanted or by accident then you compound the problem. I've been ask a few times to join in with married couples and I will not cross that line now thats me but each their own......

A true story- my brother got involved with a married couple now as long as the husband was there watching he felt like his wife wasn't "cheating" and he was pleasing her by letting my brother do his thing with the wife then the husband over heard my brother and the wife talking about"hooking" up without the husband being there WRONG! the husband came in the room and hit my brother over the head with a bottle and it was a mess.....the husband felt like his wife was "cheating then".....:suspicious:


Serious mind game.......I date women from time to time but they are single and avoid any problems dealing with spouses.


I could tell you another true story about a man his wife and a man with a gun in a fantasy game but I let it pass for its pretty wierd......unless you like that type of thing of course......

It was after 12 years my first wife required divorce. Interestingly I decided we had to divorce a few hours after her decision. We both obtained lawyers essentially the same day. We both petitioned the court on the same day - as we were living on the island Curacao where you had to receive permission from the court to divorce. In fact, under the law on that island at that time, the only reason considered valid by the courts... the only reason the courts there would grant you permission to file for divorce was if you claimed the other was promiscuous. But in our case, that was not the reason for the divorce.

How our incredibly excellent, fairy tale story marriage fell apart was when my ex-wife began a series of suicide attempts. Five bona fide attempts (that we were aware of) within a 5 month stretch of time between the end of year 1999 and the first part of 2000.

Her last attempt she was actually, completely dead. According to the doctor who spoke with me, they were in process of shutting all the machines down and he was off to the side writing the report when she did one of those "resurrection" bits like in the movies where she suddenly sprung up and let out a huge gasp and they all scrambled back to her side.

Anyways, I regret that I did not know then what I do know now about demonic entities - possession, etc as it is now my firmest belief I had been dealing with a possessed individual concerning my ex-wife and as anyone knows by now if they have read some of my posts over in Houman's Horus-Ra thread, I likely have been dealing with at least one entity ever since I was 6 years old. Anyone who has investigated the materials produced by Eve Lorgen may understand about what she calls "the Love Bite" and it is my firmest conclusion that my ex and I were firmly in the grips of an "entity influenced" relationship.

Over the next two years, we performed a real life rendition of "The War of the Roses" where we did everything but get each other physically killed. It was interesting times to say the least.

At the end of the day, with both of us consumed by our personal "entity" and both totally addicted to marijuana, cocaine and alcohol, she threatened to take our three sons to Russia with her Russian boyfriend. This was only a week after we both petitioned the court for permission to divorce.

I had hired an attorney in Curacao named Marjolein Hoff and as a side note, when I hired her she asked me why I wanted to hire her as she did not specialize in divorce. I told her because a.) she was recommended, b.) she was a woman. Then I told her that the reason I wanted to hire a woman was so that she would protect my soon to be ex-wife from me. True story.

So anyways, when Mandy told me her plans to take our three sons to Russia, I called Marjolein and she called the judge and the judge agreed to impose an emergency restraint order against Mandy. That was a Monday. The court hearing for this restraining order was set for Wednesday morning. On Tuesday, I called Marjolein and asked her to have the judge make the order against both Mandy and myself, essentially placing our three sons (who were ages 6, 8 and 10) into legal custody of the government of Curacao and the judge granted this request. The grounds I used against myself was based on my addictions as that was also the same criteria the judge used to enact the order against Mandy.

I then began a personal process of detaching emotionally from Mandy by "befriending" several different excellent ladies from Colombia over the next three months, sometimes I would spend the evening with two and a few times I ended up with three. The rumors of my new lifestyle managed to penetrate every corner of the island and especially the circle of friends Mandy had acquired. My plan worked as I was able to remove my obsession for Mandy in rapid fashion. I soon then met my now current wife who found herself on the streets just a week or so before we met. Two days after we met I informed her that I believed we would get married. Eight days after we met I gave her the ring and she accepted. 7 months to the day we met we married in Curacao. We have been happily married ever since and this is close to being 11 years now.

Yes, she is aware I am my own individual, do things my way, do things not the orthodox way and have had the capabilities of being a dog.

As for Lucifera... I mean, my ex- wife, Mandy... well she was unable to stop using drugs and alcohol and chose instead to live the life of a "crack prostitute" on that lovely desert island. I was able to muster up the strength to stop using the drugs and alcohol, passed all my government mandated drug tests, pass the psychological tests required by that government and after 18 months, earned the right to my children back and was granted full, unconditional custody of my three sons. I was told by another attorney friend that to achieve this on that Dutch island was one in a million for a male. But clearly, my ex handed the kids to me.

Hows that for a story? All 100% true. - Cheers, Chester

truth4me
14th November 2012, 18:04
WOW Chester thats a doozy for sure. Crack cocaine is a beast to beat and it's hard to have a relationship when drugs are involved. I've been clean from cocaine now going on 4 years. If you beat the devil once you don't give him a chance to win again.....

Krullenjongen
14th November 2012, 18:39
I think that a society that practices the "free sex spirit" (which is advertised through film and TV) will in the long run destroy the family and hinder the forming of deep meaningful relationships.
Well call me old fashioned but i still believe in the family as the cornerstone of society.

Wasn't it the Illuminati that have it on their agenda to promote casual sex with no string attached to destroy the traditional family? Isn't one of their tools Hollywood?

WanderingRogue
14th November 2012, 19:41
It seems like there is an attempt to link jealousy to fidelity; or to the pain one feels when someone unexpectedly leaves them or cheats on them, almost as if overcoming jealousy will magically make a person impervious to caring about who has sex with whom and when. Maybe its just me, but it also kinda seems like the inference is being made that enlightened spiritually secure people do not need or require committed relationships. Getting over jealousy is one thing...having an open relationship is another...but when two people choose to be in a monogamous relationship, they should honor that commitment. It's not so much about what you choose, it's about being honest with yourself and others. I personally like having a long term committed relationship. I consciously chose it. I would be hurt if it ended. Not because I am jealous, but because I enjoy sharing my life with my partner. I like seeing the world and experiencing life with him because not only do i now enjoy my own unique experiences, but i can share in his unique perspectives as well. I can live alone, experience life alone, have sex alone....but I don't WANT to. I am a reasonably attractive woman who could easily have many partners who I am sure would be physically entertaining to some extent....but I want more than that in my life. I want a best friend, confidant, playmate, and lover. Open free love sex without boundaries would is an easy road to travel. Committing myelf to love my partner throughout life's trials is both a challenge and an adventure. I believe my partner feels the same. This in no way stems from jealousy or a lack of spirituality or maturity or some psycho brainwashing from a church somewhere. It is how I choose to live.

TargeT
14th November 2012, 19:57
I think that a society that practices the "free sex spirit" (which is advertised through film and TV) will in the long run destroy the family and hinder the forming of deep meaningful relationships.
Well call me old fashioned but i still believe in the family as the cornerstone of society.

is a family defined by sex, or is it (much) more?



Wasn't it the Illuminati that have it on their agenda to promote casual sex with no string attached to destroy the traditional family? Isn't one of their tools Hollywood?

yes and no, it's more than just that, there's a definate attitude of "use" attached as well and a disconnect between partners as well as implications that families are "boring" or "stupid" etc... it seems to be a multifront attack.



This in no way stems from jealousy or a lack of spirituality or maturity or some psycho brainwashing from a church somewhere. It is how I choose to live.

I don't think that the purpose of this thread was to attack monogomy, rather state that those who choose to live otherwise should be free to do so free of suppressive social stigma &/or laws to that effect.

I personally can barely handle one & don't see the attraction to multiple partners; though I have explored that path & found it disatisfying and empty, that does not mean I would judge someone who chooses to live that way in any mannor.

Flash
14th November 2012, 20:09
WOW Chester thats a doozy for sure. Crack cocaine is a beast to beat and it's hard to have a relationship when drugs are involved. I've been clean from cocaine now going on 4 years. If you beat the devil once you don't give him a chance to win again.....

To both of you, Truth4me and Chester, very much admiration from me. Beating cocaine addiction is excessively difficult and those who made it are surely of an extraordinary strenght to start with (even is succumbing was looking like lack of strenght, getting out of it means trenght was there all along, unknowingly).

My brother is caught in the circle, a good gentle soul who did things that are not very kosher just to get its addiction going. He just cannot kick it out even if it seems more under control now. I know, by looking at his life, how hard it is to kick it off one's life. My full admiration to you guys.

Now, I would have the flirt police on my back for sure - just imagine what it is in a fundamentalist country for a women to say the words I am saying.... prison for sure.

WanderingRogue
14th November 2012, 20:17
I agree that it would be up to each individual to choose for him/her/shim-self/herm-self to choose the lifestyle that is appropriate for themselves. I do not think it is our choices that cause the problems. It is the way other people choose to view them that does.

Daughter of Time
14th November 2012, 21:44
Religions have been labeling sex "guilty" for so long now that the programming, like all programmings, will be very difficult to undo.

Not all religions. Actually just the religions stemming from Abraham, which is really just one religion. So...One religion has been labelling sex "guilty" is more accurate. Even within these three branches we see some sex-positive teachings and these have increased over the last couple decades. Protestantism in particular has tried to adopt a sex-positive message.

Some religions, such as the Tantra school of Buddhism and some schools of Taoism, believe that a healthy sex life is ultimately necessary for the attainment of enlightenment.

You're absolutely right!

One of my Buddhist acquaintances has orgies on a regular basis. She says her religion condones it.

Sammy
14th November 2012, 23:13
It seems like there is an attempt to link jealousy to fidelity; or to the pain one feels when someone unexpectedly leaves them or cheats on them, almost as if overcoming jealousy will magically make a person impervious to caring about who has sex with whom and when. Maybe its just me, but it also kinda seems like the inference is being made that enlightened spiritually secure people do not need or require committed relationships. Getting over jealousy is one thing...having an open relationship is another...but when two people choose to be in a monogamous relationship, they should honor that commitment.

I agree 100% with this. Two people who agree to and commit to upholding that agreement is the key point here. But also, life happens and so what then? Can people evolve out of one agreement and into another? That seems to be the most difficult thing for human beings to do and it appears to me the reason why is simply unhealthy egos at the core.

Another point raised by several posts is in relationship to the family. Clearly if two people are going to take the responsibility to bring a child into the world and it is important the child's sense of security then it is a no brainer to me the parents must understand their responsibility in their child's emotional health. That the two parents are consistently demonstrating their agreement to be in positive, right relationship with each other provides a critical example to the child and allows the child to feel secure which raises the chances the child grows up emotionally healthy. But again, the world is not ideal and relationships fail. Clearly it is just as important that the parents at least maintain a cooperative parental relationship if at all possible. I hate opinions but I am full of them anyways and this is one opinion I strongly hold and that is, if you bring a soul into this world, you have a responsibility towards that soul that you provide that soul a chance to become a healthy, contributing member to the world.

One of the ways that is done is by shifting society away from the manipulation of weaker souls towards an honest society. If that shift occurs sex becomes less important as it becomes more natural and all the emotional confusion does not transmute to perversions like we have so much of in this world today.



It's not so much about what you choose, it's about being honest with yourself and others. I personally like having a long term committed relationship. I consciously chose it. I would be hurt if it ended. Not because I am jealous, but because I enjoy sharing my life with my partner. I like seeing the world and experiencing life with him because not only do i now enjoy my own unique experiences, but i can share in his unique perspectives as well. I can live alone, experience life alone, have sex alone....but I don't WANT to. I am a reasonably attractive woman who could easily have many partners who I am sure would be physically entertaining to some extent....but I want more than that in my life. I want a best friend, confidant, playmate, and lover. Open free love sex without boundaries would is an easy road to travel. Committing myelf to love my partner throughout life's trials is both a challenge and an adventure. I believe my partner feels the same. This in no way stems from jealousy or a lack of spirituality or maturity or some psycho brainwashing from a church somewhere. It is how I choose to live.

I read a lot more in this second part... it seems difficult to express but I don't have casual sex or sex that was centered in the physical. When I was younger and was involved with drugs I did. But it has been many years now that this has been the case. But yet, if I fear if I attempted to describe my experiences with sex now, it would either be misunderstood or not understood, but I will try.

I view woman as sacred. I also view woman as the most sacred metaphor within creation. In fact, this is called the Sacred Feminine. When I am blessed with the opportunity to enjoin in a sexual encounter with a woman, I perceive that experience a gift from creation itself to experience "Her" directly and I enjoin in every way... through our hearts, our souls... a sacred enjoinment of two (or more) Spirits. I achieve permissions at all levels of the being or I am not interested in experiencing the encounter.

I just read back my words and I am certain almost everyone is laughing but it is true and has been this way with me for years.

I used to have some male friends who no matter what else was going on, if some hot chick walked by, they would stop and mentally rape her and of course make the male to male comment along the lines of WoW... that chick is hot!

But I had always been uncomfortable with that. I found out why. It is because I found it important to have permissions at all levels of a being before I mentally have sex with them and just because I may have those permissions does not mean the physical encounter occurs. That is because sometimes third parties can be effected negatively and that to me is also important. So this is really a complicated matter when we explore these facets.

Still, I had hoped to be able to explore many points, but I note that many here trend towards seeing things as either black or white... and that's the biggest problem in my opinion. The solution I found for myself was when I transcended jealousy. That does not at all imply everyone else must transcend jealousy. As far as hooking up with a partner where you are committed to that partner until death does one part is a wonderful thing. But I have seen many folks make that sort of commitment and achieve upholding that commitment while at the same time releasing each other from sexual monogamy. And this is one of the larger points I hoped to make. Why does partnership for life necessarily have to depend on sexual monogamy? That so many human beings require that is why the PTBs are able to manage the masses, keep them distracted, keep them confused, etc.

The bottom line (and again this is solely my own opinion) but commitment to another for life has zero to do with sex. The requirement of monogamy dooms well over 60% of all these life long commitments. If we did not have the religious hammer over the heads of many, I am sure even more divorces would happen.

Anyways, when we look at the chakras from bottom up and one realizes they are a Spirit being that can has eternal life then they have assumed sovereignty of their first chakra. When one overcomes the problems that come forth from an unhealthy view and practice regarding sex (and this is only ever complicated by mixing sex with relationship requirements of others) then what one finds is sex is no longer such a big deal, perversions go away and the compulsion to have sex also disappears. When one does have the opportunity for a sexual encounter, it is experienced in a healthy way that takes into consideration the entire being which one participates with and the ramifications of having that experience. Well... that has been my experience, maybe I am not the common human being and am too idealistic. justoneman

¤=[Post Update]=¤


I agree that it would be up to each individual to choose for him/her/shim-self/herm-self to choose the lifestyle that is appropriate for themselves. I do not think it is our choices that cause the problems. It is the way other people choose to view them that does.

I write monster posts and perhaps say little - you have written a two sentence post and said everything. Great Post, Thanks - Chester

Ellisa
15th November 2012, 00:41
I cannot see that a person's marital fidelity is anyone's business but the 3 (or perhaps more) people involved.

Next year I will have been married for 50 years. I cannot imagine how my life would have evolved without my partner and our children. We had separations (for work, and not of our choosing), illness (serious in one of us), sadnesses we have shared, but also everyday I have been glad we still have each other to share all those things in our lives that only we know or remember. Sometimes we have had to make sacrifices for each other, sometimes we have been angry, sometimes we have forgiven ourselves and each other. But always we have wanted to stay together, each of us with our best friend, the person we love best. So why would you ever put that at risk. And why would doing so be important to anyone else or any business of theirs?

Sammy
15th November 2012, 01:11
I cannot see that a person's marital fidelity is anyone's business but the 3 (or perhaps more) people involved.

Next year I will have been married for 50 years. I cannot imagine how my life would have evolved without my partner and our children. We had separations (for work, and not of our choosing), illness (serious in one of us), sadnesses we have shared, but also everyday I have been glad we still have each other to share all those things in our lives that only we know or remember. Sometimes we have had to make sacrifices for each other, sometimes we have been angry, sometimes we have forgiven ourselves and each other. But always we have wanted to stay together, each of us with our best friend, the person we love best. So why would you ever put that at risk. And why would doing so be important to anyone else or any business of theirs?

You are mixing two things here - is it anyone's business? My opinion is, "No, it is not."


So why would you ever put that at risk?

There is no risk when those involved are able to exist as a partnership where there sexual activities have no bearing nor impact upon that partnership. Rare you find partnerships like that on earth and I attribute that to my conclusion that most folks have no clue how dependent they are on their partner as to the view of their own self worth. I have heard this called co-dependency.

Now I would be lying if I stated I am happily married and that I am 100% free of any form of dependency upon my wife, Cristina, with regards to how that relates to my feeling of security and as that relates to my sense of self worth. What I can say is that the percentage of dependency along those lines is very, very small. For that reason we are capable of having sexual adventures outside of our marriage with no risk of either partner getting upset (we have proven this as we have been married over ten years now). In fact, if you saw us together we would probably make you sick because we act like high school lovers.

19225

I guess we are simply secure that the rest of our relationship is strong and so why would we want to break up a good thing? On that same note, why would we want to hold each other back from being free, sexual beings? But again, this takes two very self secure individuals it seems. My question is... why is humanity as a whole so not like my wife and I? And why have I emerged so healthy and happy in my life? Why is my wife such a healthy, happy, loving human being? Could it be our lifestyle has something to do with it? I don't know, but I suspect it does.

19226

I see two very happy, very in love and very unfrustrated people in these screen shots from a Skype conversation a few weeks ago... what do others see here? She's giving that "look" in the second shot, haha.

Love to All, Chester

Ellisa
15th November 2012, 03:52
Actually justoneman there is a risk if you are a general. Why should it be so? Whether the marriage partners have an agreement or not, if one of them is a soldier they have much more to lose than you or me. They must know that---or--- maybe it is one of those things that people 'know' and promptly ignore.

If it is the former why would they take the risk and if it is the latter then there is much more going on here than appears on the surface in my opinion. Or perhaps the rules are different if you are Spy Chief, not just a soldier. The rules that he and his wife may or may not have had in their marriage are not then taken into consideration. I still think it's none of our business. He took a risk. Should that risk have been there or not?

In this particular case I think the private behaviour and the public behaviour are incompatible, and I think the importance has been exaggerated. I also think he's been incredibly silly.

Actually, reading your post again, I think you and I are not actually too far apart on this topic, apart from the fact that you confuse sharing love and nurturing individuality with a partner with co-dependency and I don't. (PS Your partner looks very happy anyway!)

Flash
15th November 2012, 04:17
You know, when you are in high enough positions, there is ALWAYS someone or some groups that will want to corrupt you in order to have leverage, which may turn into more money, more power, access to other important people, name it, more of something that is thought worthy to have.

Many ways will be used, including bribes that will be indirect at first, direct later on to catch you red handed, threats that are subtle at first, not so later non, potential scandals, anything related to sex scandals will do fine as well. I have witnessed this at times when aware of govenrment dealings. Here there is such a scandal with threats and bribery of political figures and projects managers for cities going on right now. When in Turkey, I had been told, indirectly, who to bribe for government contracts and how, and, believe it or not, I have been submitted to attempt at sexual briberies being put in the presence of very educated and well mannered hunks. (I could not believe it while it was going on, being a woman in a Muslim country - I knew right away what was going on, remained polite, drunk a bit of wine making sure the bottle was opened in front of me, and asked to be driven back, all the while being absolutely p ss ed at my employee manager who brought me there). And I was not at very high levels, but could have had good contracts and contacts.

So the general may have been framed.

On the other hand, if he was a psychopath, all of them have issue related to sex. In this case, he would not have cared cause the issues take the upper hand and all, in his environment, incluiding him, would have known that this makes it a potential to being brought down. But in this case, who would have doubted that a simple CIA chief would have been brought down with a simple sex scandal when all kinds of other officials are not, including most presidents. He may in this case have thought this would never be used.

To understand, we do need to know the underlying stories and make links, which is a task Avalon members are usually quite good at.

May be looking in both these directions would make more sense than hanging on a supposed sex scandal.

The general public is however only happy to hear or read a salacious story, they do not see much further in general.

WanderingRogue
15th November 2012, 06:27
I dunno, there is something here that isn't sitting right with me. I see that a person would have to be very self confident and comfortable with themselves to enter into an open sex relationship. However, I do not see it as any better or worse than a monogamous one. Stating that 60% of marriages are ruined because we do not accept open sex in our relationships is a logical fallacy. Open sexual relationships are in no way superior to a monogamous one. In fact open relationships may be just as likely to fail as open ones. Maybe more so! I couldn't tell you because I have no factual evidence to support it here at the moment. it is more likely that a lack of honesty, experience, maturity...etc etc etc that lead to the marriage or any other relationships break down. infidelity is the resulting behaviour that stems from something else. Wanting monagamy or expecting it within a committed relationship is quite reasonable. Surely no less reasonable than consenting adults wanting to enter into an open relationship. A persons comfort, frustration level, or confidence in their relationship has little to do with whether they will choose an open or monogamous relationship. In fact, a person could easily move from one type to another without changing anything about themselves at all. Different people will bring out different types of feelings. My best girl friend doesn't bring out sexual feelings in me, I prefer men... but my relationship with her is every bit as important to me as my relationship with my chosen partener. I find my partner very desirable mentally, physically, spiritually, and sexually...he satisfies me completely and he is totally irreplaceable. I have absolutely no desire for anything or anyone else. This doesn't mean I am insecure, lack an open mind, I'm uncomfortable or that I lack confidence. It may mean that I'm just selfish and I don't want to share? It may be that I completely satisfy him as he does me, so why go looking elsewhere? Perhaps we are soul mates? Why doesn't really seem to matter. When I met him I was exploring may things sexually...I was open and honest with myself and any partners I had. I knew myself very well; what i do and dont like, where my limits lie. i also had no lack of experience in knowing how to give pleasure to others. i am a feeling sensing person, so the sex game gomes very easily to me. It was enjoyable at times, and at others very dull. Finding a willing sexual partner was never difficult. However, Finding a true soulbound sexual partner was a suprise and also it took a lot of patience waiting to find someone like this, but seems no different that finding a kindrid spirit best friend or discovering a cosmic personal truth. Once you find it looking for something else seems kind of silly. Will we one day decide that we want more? Or that we no longer satisfy one another? Maybe...but wouldn't that also show us an opportunity to grow? To challenge our ability to truly love another unconditionally? Isn't that one of our human goals too? I really don't contemplate those things much because I just don't see myself without seeing him. He is a part of me. I am glad that many of you seem to be able to move past old ways and see that sex is nothing bad or shameful and that exploring your desires won't kill you or suddenly make you evil. But there is also a beautiful depth of intimacy, emotion, personal connection, and spirituality that develops within monogamy that maybe some of you have never experienced. Finding your passion in the arms of another who fits with you completely and naturally leaving you unable to comprehend something more is.... Well, I don't think there is a word for it.

Daughter of Time
15th November 2012, 06:46
I cannot see that a person's marital fidelity is anyone's business but the 3 (or perhaps more) people involved.

Next year I will have been married for 50 years. I cannot imagine how my life would have evolved without my partner and our children. We had separations (for work, and not of our choosing), illness (serious in one of us), sadnesses we have shared, but also everyday I have been glad we still have each other to share all those things in our lives that only we know or remember. Sometimes we have had to make sacrifices for each other, sometimes we have been angry, sometimes we have forgiven ourselves and each other. But always we have wanted to stay together, each of us with our best friend, the person we love best. So why would you ever put that at risk. And why would doing so be important to anyone else or any business of theirs?

You are mixing two things here - is it anyone's business? My opinion is, "No, it is not."


So why would you ever put that at risk?

There is no risk when those involved are able to exist as a partnership where there sexual activities have no bearing nor impact upon that partnership. Rare you find partnerships like that on earth and I attribute that to my conclusion that most folks have no clue how dependent they are on their partner as to the view of their own self worth. I have heard this called co-dependency.

Now I would be lying if I stated I am happily married and that I am 100% free of any form of dependency upon my wife, Cristina, with regards to how that relates to my feeling of security and as that relates to my sense of self worth. What I can say is that the percentage of dependency along those lines is very, very small. For that reason we are capable of having sexual adventures outside of our marriage with no risk of either partner getting upset (we have proven this as we have been married over ten years now). In fact, if you saw us together we would probably make you sick because we act like high school lovers.

19225

I guess we are simply secure that the rest of our relationship is strong and so why would we want to break up a good thing? On that same note, why would we want to hold each other back from being free, sexual beings? But again, this takes two very self secure individuals it seems. My question is... why is humanity as a whole so not like my wife and I? And why have I emerged so healthy and happy in my life? Why is my wife such a healthy, happy, loving human being? Could it be our lifestyle has something to do with it? I don't know, but I suspect it does.

19226

I see two very happy, very in love and very unfrustrated people in these screen shots from a Skype conversation a few weeks ago... what do others see here? She's giving that "look" in the second shot, haha.

Love to All, Chester

Chester,

Your wife is very attractive and she looks very happy. You both look happy as you communicate with each other.

Again, if your open marriage works for both of you, then no one has the right to say it is wrong any more than anyone has the right to say that monogamy is wrong. It's all about what works for the couple.

May your happy marriage become happier and happier with every passing day.

Love,

DoT

Sammy
15th November 2012, 14:02
Actually justoneman there is a risk if you are a general. Why should it be so? Whether the marriage partners have an agreement or not, if one of them is a soldier they have much more to lose than you or me. They must know that---or--- maybe it is one of those things that people 'know' and promptly ignore.

If it is the former why would they take the risk and if it is the latter then there is much more going on here than appears on the surface in my opinion. Or perhaps the rules are different if you are Spy Chief, not just a soldier. The rules that he and his wife may or may not have had in their marriage are not then taken into consideration. I still think it's none of our business. He took a risk. Should that risk have been there or not?

In this particular case I think the private behaviour and the public behaviour are incompatible, and I think the importance has been exaggerated. I also think he's been incredibly silly.

Actually, reading your post again, I think you and I are not actually too far apart on this topic, apart from the fact that you confuse sharing love and nurturing individuality with a partner with co-dependency and I don't. (PS Your partner looks very happy anyway!)

First, I do not personally confuse what you seem to think I have confused - I agree with you that if the relationship is as you describe it has very little if any co-dependency... My words could not communicate what i hoped to communicate.

So let me go into my next rant! hahaha (Thanks for your post, I appreciate greatly this level of discussion, Elisa)

The risk Petraeus took was to enter into a relationship with a branch of humanity that can be held hostage and or ruined by another branch of humanity if the puppet masters managing these branches deem it so.

We have no clue what private agreement Petraeus had with his wife regarding his or her sexual activities. One of my points is that what they do in this regard is their own, private and personal business.

What I am attempting to reveal (though for some this isn't new news) is how most of humanity is able to be brought into the judgement of others based on a third party bringing forth activities to the public eye and that an individual would have to give up their official position based on revelations about their private life.

This is to me simply ludicrous - and the fact is that such a thing can happen and does happen is OUR fault. If each of us didn't give a hoot who screws who (regardless of their marital status) as we apparantly agree that is their personal and private business, then a news story such as this would get burried or even better, never see the light of day.

WE are to reason Petraeus lost his job as much as anyone else, including Petraeus and including the puppet masters who decided to pull that string.

But the biggest point of all is that if it were not for US, the general public... the puppet masters could not pull such a stunt.

The man should have the job because of every other reason but the reason he had to resign. because he can get the job done, do so with integrity in all his relationships related to his job... but alas, we are suspicious he works for someone else besides the supposed "We the People."

And "WE" are just as at fault as the PTBs here - we need to get a clue or accept the status quo because nothing will ever change unless we look in the mirror individually, see the lies we told ourselves or bought into and then take the all important step of deciding we are going to undo each and every one of these lies until we emerge a s a whole, complete individual Spirit being where crap like this can no longer hold us hostage or be used against us to hold us hostage.

Anyone who enters into a relationship is placing some degree of expectations upon another OR, if they have escaped their own self imposed prison, then the relationship has no terms - which I call a healthy and honest relationship and I actually make the odds of the relationship continuing far, far higher than all other forms of relationship.

Now for metaphor. When I crossed a certain point along my personal journey in this lifetime, I discovered that everything boiled down to a simple choice and that is to decide I would strive to be in positive, right relationship with all or not.

At the moment I came upon this last necessary decision I met my true bride - The All that Is. I then made my choice and entered into what i call, the Sacred Marriage with the Dragoness which can be known as Sophia (for Gnostic fans) can be known as the Primal Dragon as well, can be known as the Mother of the demiurge if you like, can be known as Isis (to the Illumed and Nutty) and is known in many different traditions by many other names. She is the Material Realms I have chosen to "enter" and I assume you can see the metaphor there (where and when the Sacred Marriage has been and is constantly being consummated).

Because of these steps I discovered I need no one and yet equally desire to be in positive, right relationship with All. Sounds to me like I have done a good job at overcoming my issues with co-dependency but what do I know?

Hopefully I have been able to be clear about my points now. I am very ok if I happen to be the only human being on the planet Earth that has this view point.

If we wanted to solve the PTB problem in earnest, all we have to do individually is reach a point where there is not one single secret about ourselves we require ourselves to hide. I did not say we do not honor the confidences of others for it is solely up to another individual as to what be acceptable to them to be revealed. But I found that I cannot be in full, 100%, positive, right relationship with all unless I have no secrets so I hold nothing back ever anymore.

Perhaps the PTBs say, "Enough of this guy"... sorta like has happened to many who have "gotten over themselves" and broken out of their own, self imposed prison - Sam Kinison being my own personal Jesus Christ along these lines - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Kinison

19251

Or perhaps the PTBs kidnap me and take me to some deep underground facility or even better, to some off world prison, hook me up to an immortality machine so that they can permanently capture my Spirit and then use all sorts of horrific techniques to torture my soul forever - I just do not care. Why? because to live in fear of anything for any reason means I am buying into a lie and I will not do that at all for any reason ever again.

How sex is used to hold humanity in a prison can only occur if we allow it and we do - it is a fact, we need to face it or else remain imprisoned.

And sex is not the only target but it is the second largest target next to one's survivability.

Again, what do I know? Enjoy the Day and Love to All - justoneman, Chester

Sammy
15th November 2012, 17:53
You know, when you are in high enough positions, there is ALWAYS someone or some groups that will want to corrupt you in order to have leverage, which may turn into more money, more power, access to other important people, name it, more of something that is thought worthy to have.

Many ways will be used, including bribes that will be indirect at first, direct later on to catch you red handed, threats that are subtle at first, not so later non, potential scandals, anything related to sex scandals will do fine as well. I have witnessed this at times when aware of govenrment dealings. Here there is such a scandal with threats and bribery of political figures and projects managers for cities going on right now. When in Turkey, I had been told, indirectly, who to bribe for government contracts and how, and, believe it or not, I have been submitted to attempt at sexual briberies being put in the presence of very educated and well mannered hunks. (I could not believe it while it was going on, being a woman in a Muslim country - I knew right away what was going on, remained polite, drunk a bit of wine making sure the bottle was opened in front of me, and asked to be driven back, all the while being absolutely p ss ed at my employee manager who brought me there). And I was not at very high levels, but could have had good contracts and contacts.

So the general may have been framed.

On the other hand, if he was a psychopath, all of them have issue related to sex. In this case, he would not have cared cause the issues take the upper hand and all, in his environment, incluiding him, would have known that this makes it a potential to being brought down. But in this case, who would have doubted that a simple CIA chief would have been brought down with a simple sex scandal when all kinds of other officials are not, including most presidents. He may in this case have thought this would never be used.

To understand, we do need to know the underlying stories and make links, which is a task Avalon members are usually quite good at.

May be looking in both these directions would make more sense than hanging on a supposed sex scandal.

The general public is however only happy to hear or read a salacious story, they do not see much further in general.

I am still unsure I have been able to communicate my primary point and that is - So what what some CIA Chief does in his sex life. That is personal. In addition, what he does regarding sex (as long as it is legal) is between himself and his family. It has zero barring on his effectiveness towards his job responsibility.

But because these things DO matter to the general public, then 3rd parties have the ability to use this type of information to get someone sacked.

Therefore it is clearly just as much the fault of the general public... that in general we DO mix these two things together such that a person's job depends on the adherence to other's standards and most others are... as I tried to demonstrate, sexually frustrated and/or moralists which may also be sexually frustrated but worse, they impose their view regarding sex upon the rest of society when it is a personal matter, when it should be left at that level as it is an individual's choice and it is a partnership's choice as to what a participant in a partnership does sexually.

I keep trying to bring the main point home and yet I wonder if anyone can get past their own conditioning. I know how hard it was for me to get past my own conditioning and so I certainly understand how hard it is to even grasp the concept of separating one's sex life activities from what may be their job responsibilities.

I see zero reason one should have any impact upon the other. I see zero reason that the confidence we should have in an official should be influenced by what may be their sexual habits. Zero. If we could grow out of this particular psychological prison, then 3rd party PTBs would not be able to use it to move their private agendas forward. Take away their weapons and suddenly we are on the same level ground, yes?

modwiz
15th November 2012, 17:59
You know, when you are in high enough positions, there is ALWAYS someone or some groups that will want to corrupt you in order to have leverage, which may turn into more money, more power, access to other important people, name it, more of something that is thought worthy to have.

Many ways will be used, including bribes that will be indirect at first, direct later on to catch you red handed, threats that are subtle at first, not so later non, potential scandals, anything related to sex scandals will do fine as well. I have witnessed this at times when aware of govenrment dealings. Here there is such a scandal with threats and bribery of political figures and projects managers for cities going on right now. When in Turkey, I had been told, indirectly, who to bribe for government contracts and how, and, believe it or not, I have been submitted to attempt at sexual briberies being put in the presence of very educated and well mannered hunks. (I could not believe it while it was going on, being a woman in a Muslim country - I knew right away what was going on, remained polite, drunk a bit of wine making sure the bottle was opened in front of me, and asked to be driven back, all the while being absolutely p ss ed at my employee manager who brought me there). And I was not at very high levels, but could have had good contracts and contacts.

So the general may have been framed.

On the other hand, if he was a psychopath, all of them have issue related to sex. In this case, he would not have cared cause the issues take the upper hand and all, in his environment, incluiding him, would have known that this makes it a potential to being brought down. But in this case, who would have doubted that a simple CIA chief would have been brought down with a simple sex scandal when all kinds of other officials are not, including most presidents. He may in this case have thought this would never be used.

To understand, we do need to know the underlying stories and make links, which is a task Avalon members are usually quite good at.

May be looking in both these directions would make more sense than hanging on a supposed sex scandal.

The general public is however only happy to hear or read a salacious story, they do not see much further in general.

I am still unsure I have been able to communicate my primary point and that is - So what what some CIA Chief does in his sex life. That is personal. In addition, what he does regarding sex (as long as it is legal) is between himself and his family. It has zero barring on his effectiveness towards his job responsibility.

But because these things DO matter to the general public, then 3rd parties have the ability to use this type of information to get someone sacked.

Therefore it is clearly just as much the fault of the general public... that in general we DO mix these two things together such that a person's job depends on the adherence to other's standards and most others are... as I tried to demonstrate, sexually frustrated and/or moralists which may also be sexually frustrated but worse, they impose their view regarding sex upon the rest of society when it is a personal matter, when it should be left at that level as it is an individual's choice and it is a partnership's choice as to what a participant in a partnership does sexually.

I keep trying to bring the main point home and yet I wonder if anyone can get past their own conditioning. I know how hard it was for me to get past my own conditioning and so I certainly understand how hard it is to even grasp the concept of separating one's sex life activities from what may be their job responsibilities.

I see zero reason one should have any impact upon the other. I see zero reason that the confidence we should have in an official should be influenced by what may be their sexual habits. Zero. If we could grow out of this particular psychological prison, then 3rd party PTBs would not be able to use it to move their private agendas forward. Take away their weapons and suddenly we are on the same level ground, yes?

Less words might help. :p

latshaw
15th November 2012, 17:59
Wandering Rouge,
Wanted to add a 'thank you' for this post - but - for some reason there is no icon link for "thanks" showing at the bottom of your reply ( I am a newbie, so maybe reason for its absence is unknown to me?) So I am thanking you in a reply :-)

Flash
15th November 2012, 18:08
your point came across Justonman.

I would add that in some other countries, a mistress is far from putting one on the hanging row. It is rather an honour, nobody would think a man has no mistress (re: Italy, Spain, Turkey, Greece, all Arabs countries, etc). However, the same standards do not apply to women. They have to be faithful (I always wonder how most men have mistresses if some women do not cheat their husband, only a question of numbers, some women have to cheat, but they must make sure it remains hidden). In those countries, it is the decadence that is used, such as sex parties with obvious prostitutes, shame (in Muslims countries) about one's behavior with prostitutes, pedophilia, rape, etc. Why do you think it was rape that was use in Sweden against Assange. Because mistresses or prostitutes would have had no impact at all in the Swedes public view. This is also why in the past it was being gay that was used.

But sex and culturally agreed upon deviances are always used.

I hope my point is clear as well.

So, in USA mistresses are used, elsewhere real decadency will be used.

Sammy
15th November 2012, 18:11
I dunno, there is something here that isn't sitting right with me. I see that a person would have to be very self confident and comfortable with themselves to enter into an open sex relationship. However, I do not see it as any better or worse than a monogamous one.

I agree 100% - never did I state otherwise. What I stated was that these are choices made by individuals and if there are two individuals within a partnership arrangement such that they agree that each other can have sex outside of their partnership then besides that component of their agreement being a personal, private matter between them, but that no one outside of that partnership should judge them for whatever agreement they make.

That we, society, are so quick to impose the way we, individually, think it should be upon others is, to me, totally improper. Then, to take it to the next level where we, society, can justify the removal of an official because their sexual behavior does not fit into our model of correct behavior... where we mix a person's sexual activities together with their job suitability is even MORE ridiculous.

You don't see this sort of behavior in France, do you? Haha Sarkozy was never effected in any significant way by his sexual exploitations. And Berlusconi from Italy - never did a sex scandal have any real effect on him. But in the US and also to some extent, the UK, screwing around can cost you your job. And is done via a third party controlled media but would NEVER EVER work if we, the people, did not buy into the mind manipulation.

This is the point I am trying to make - WE are just as responsible. How I was able to overcome my own brainwashing (as I was born in Texas and raised much of my life there), was to transcend jealousy altogether. That was how I did it. That does not at all say anyone else has to do that.

What I am trying to point out though is that as long as we have issues with jealousy OR the next level up which we label "relationship security" and then impose our views as to the way it should be (where a relationship is considered safe as long as each partner mutually honors each others rules in relation to their sexual conduct) then a 3rd party controlled media can accomplish the agenda of this 3rd party regardless of whether a person merits expulsion from an official position based on their lack of ability to meet exceptable performance criteria.

Utterly ridiculous to me that we, the people, are so freaking easily manipulated and we wanna blame it on the PTBs. We need to look in the mirror in my opinion and grow up.

Sammy
15th November 2012, 18:16
You know, when you are in high enough positions, there is ALWAYS someone or some groups that will want to corrupt you in order to have leverage, which may turn into more money, more power, access to other important people, name it, more of something that is thought worthy to have.

Many ways will be used, including bribes that will be indirect at first, direct later on to catch you red handed, threats that are subtle at first, not so later non, potential scandals, anything related to sex scandals will do fine as well. I have witnessed this at times when aware of govenrment dealings. Here there is such a scandal with threats and bribery of political figures and projects managers for cities going on right now. When in Turkey, I had been told, indirectly, who to bribe for government contracts and how, and, believe it or not, I have been submitted to attempt at sexual briberies being put in the presence of very educated and well mannered hunks. (I could not believe it while it was going on, being a woman in a Muslim country - I knew right away what was going on, remained polite, drunk a bit of wine making sure the bottle was opened in front of me, and asked to be driven back, all the while being absolutely p ss ed at my employee manager who brought me there). And I was not at very high levels, but could have had good contracts and contacts.

So the general may have been framed.

On the other hand, if he was a psychopath, all of them have issue related to sex. In this case, he would not have cared cause the issues take the upper hand and all, in his environment, incluiding him, would have known that this makes it a potential to being brought down. But in this case, who would have doubted that a simple CIA chief would have been brought down with a simple sex scandal when all kinds of other officials are not, including most presidents. He may in this case have thought this would never be used.

To understand, we do need to know the underlying stories and make links, which is a task Avalon members are usually quite good at.

May be looking in both these directions would make more sense than hanging on a supposed sex scandal.

The general public is however only happy to hear or read a salacious story, they do not see much further in general.

I am still unsure I have been able to communicate my primary point and that is - So what what some CIA Chief does in his sex life. That is personal. In addition, what he does regarding sex (as long as it is legal) is between himself and his family. It has zero barring on his effectiveness towards his job responsibility.

But because these things DO matter to the general public, then 3rd parties have the ability to use this type of information to get someone sacked.

Therefore it is clearly just as much the fault of the general public... that in general we DO mix these two things together such that a person's job depends on the adherence to other's standards and most others are... as I tried to demonstrate, sexually frustrated and/or moralists which may also be sexually frustrated but worse, they impose their view regarding sex upon the rest of society when it is a personal matter, when it should be left at that level as it is an individual's choice and it is a partnership's choice as to what a participant in a partnership does sexually.

I keep trying to bring the main point home and yet I wonder if anyone can get past their own conditioning. I know how hard it was for me to get past my own conditioning and so I certainly understand how hard it is to even grasp the concept of separating one's sex life activities from what may be their job responsibilities.

I see zero reason one should have any impact upon the other. I see zero reason that the confidence we should have in an official should be influenced by what may be their sexual habits. Zero. If we could grow out of this particular psychological prison, then 3rd party PTBs would not be able to use it to move their private agendas forward. Take away their weapons and suddenly we are on the same level ground, yes?

Less words might help. :p

Yes - unfortunately I have not been able to achieve the art of using few words. It is my greatest character defect.

Flash
15th November 2012, 18:18
i follow suit for few words, very difficult indeed

read my previous post justoneman pls. I am hand in hand with you.

modwiz
15th November 2012, 18:20
Less words might help. :p

Yes - unfortunately I have not been able to achieve the art of using few words. It is my greatest character defect.

Except here. Funny how that works.

¤=[Post Update]=¤


i follow suit for few words, very difficult indeed

read my previous post justoneman pls. I am hand in hand with you.

Except when you don't.

Sammy
15th November 2012, 18:22
i follow suit for few words, very difficult indeed

Hi Flash - I have greatly appreciated your interactions in this thread. I seem to recall you are from France? If I am correct, please, elaborate as to whether or not my impression as to how the French (in general) view the mixing of one's sex life with that person's suitability to hold an official position in government which I perceive to be, they could care a less what a person does in their private sex life (as long as it is legal).


ahhhhh I see the posts - I was reading the posts and responding in order! Yes, we are on the same page and thanks for the comments again - Same to ya Modwiz. Thanks, bro.

Sammy
15th November 2012, 18:25
Wandering Rouge,
Wanted to add a 'thank you' for this post - but - for some reason there is no icon link for "thanks" showing at the bottom of your reply ( I am a newbie, so maybe reason for its absence is unknown to me?) So I am thanking you in a reply :-)

Hi - this happens when you aren't logged in... take care, Chester

Flash
15th November 2012, 18:25
I am from Quebec, French Canadian. Raised in the French language, work in French, live in French, studied in French, learned English only at undergraduate level by going to an English University (this is why my English mastery is somewhat weak). But already there is cultural differences with the English speaking world and the American and Canadians English. We are more liberal, mistresses would be deemed incorrect, but never enough to fire someone. In France, it would be deemed normal, the reverse being abnormal.

There was a politician minister of Justice who was going out with a very well supplied woman who had definite links to mafia. The French side were only talking about the potential leaks to mafia and that she had nice boobs. See.

modwiz
15th November 2012, 18:31
i follow suit for few words, very difficult indeed

Hi Flash - I have greatly appreciated your interactions in this thread. I seem to recall you are from France? If I am correct, please, elaborate as to whether or not my impression as to how the French (in general) view the mixing of one's sex life with that person's suitability to hold an official position in government which I perceive to be, they could care a less what a person does in their private sex life (as long as it is legal).

Like Flash, my mother was a French Speaking Canadian. First generation USA born though and English was her primary language. She impressed upon me her very frank (Franks=France, LOL) "It's none of anybody's business who your doing" as long as it is adults doing it. The whole prude thing is very childish to me. Emotionally retarded too.

¤=[Post Update]=¤


I am from Quebec, French Canadian. Raised in the French language, work in French, live in French (this is why my English mastery is somewhat weak). But already there is cultural differences with the English speaking world and the American and Canadians English. We are more liberal, mistresses would be deemed incorrect, but never enough to fire someone. In France, it would be deemed normal, the reverse being abnormal.

There was a politician minister of Justice who was going out with a very well supplied woman who had definite links to mafia. The French side were only talking about the potential leaks to mafia and that she had nice boobs. See.

Talking about boobs is just milking it, IMO. :P I hope that pun works in translation.

WanderingRogue
15th November 2012, 18:43
I like what you touched on Flash...I think that it male infidelity is viewed much less harshly than a woman's in all of the cultures I know of.

modwiz
15th November 2012, 18:47
I like what you touched on Flash...I think that it male infidelity is viewed much less harshly than a woman's in all of the cultures I know of.

That's because women are less hypocritical about it, LOL. Men want the right only for themselves, and be sloppy about it. Women are much better at being discreet. Unless it is done for revenge. :p

latshaw
15th November 2012, 18:48
Have read all the comments here regarding legality of affairs, personal choice, etc and all have valid perspectives, as each individual is entitled to in relation to the permissive will - however - I went back to the yahoo post and reread its contents in conjunction with some recent updates. The more I think about it, along with the more than 144 missels fired on Israel as of early this AM (by the way, the "iron dome" curtailed all but one)....and....the Bengazi mess that the Gen'l was to testify about seems to be attached to the diversion of a "sex scandal". It seems to me that the media and the powers that be are accomplishing their mission.

This is a good thread...however, with all due respect, I think it took off to include personal love/sex practices and opinions where individuals are basically defending their beliefs on love/sex. Perhaps a spin-off thread thread asking opinions on love /sex/relationships would be a better format -- and-- this one for determining why the Gen'l love-life (so to speak) is supposed to be a national security issue. I personally think it is being overblown because there is a magic bullet theory being conived which will ultimately lead back to the Bengazi issue. I think this bullet is going to hit a lot of targets before it lands on the ground and someone is going to end up the "scapegoat"!

Since I studied Psychology and love and sex addiction was my thesis in college, I find the various viewpoints on "relationships / marriage, etc. very interesting too because of the different cultural aspects, and because each person, in accordance with experiences and personal growth, age, and religious aspects add to the mix.

Thanks again for the Thread and all the comments - latshaw

Buck
15th November 2012, 18:48
Justoneman you are awesome.
I have to respectfully disagree with your assessment of your greatest character defect....

As a fellow traveler who also suffers from excessive verbosity and admires the terse Hemingwayesque clarity of so many of the members here- I would like to interject most respectfully the energy that you dedicate to holding yourself down to absolutely ensure that your ego never again wrenches the steering wheel away from your higher self is admirable, yea it is indeed noble, but it is also perhaps, perhaps, time for you to consider shedding this potentially outdated tool that has served you so well. And, I may surprise you (and I may not) when I suggest that this specific brand of humility is exactly what I see as your current most formidable roadblock on the journey. Also could be and I see it is most likely is connected with the excess verbosity you reference- a sort of physical manifestation of the disonance -----

Take a page, if you will, from Fred. He has shifted focus and intent (or maybe more accurate to say in the process of shifting intent) from student to master. How dare he do that! :) Who the H- is Fred to say he is in possession of his faculties and proclaim as such. What hubris, what colossal delusion. It is very dangerous to see ourselves as divine, as having any potential of that sort. That is how people end up in the nuthouse. If any of these statements stir some dark resonance with the force that is guarding your own 'self' (that in your own tremendous struggle to freedom you have chronicled endless proof of betrayal and backsliding so therefore your 'guardian self' considers it only just and appropriate that you keep a stern (and sober by god) hand on the tiller.

But, consider that you have made great progress. Perhaps greater than 'you' realize... Consider that you may have or may soon be, succeeding in making that shift and opening to connection with your authentic self. And if that has come to pass, or when it does....

Consider that the humility of the student is not appropriate for the master.

It becomes false humility, it can evolve or mutate into another tool (SO ironic, isn't it) that the ego can use to prevent our true (as in 'higher' or overall, or gigantic universal being of light form oceanic love potential) self from resonance with the N O W

As always, I do not intend to patronize, I know you know, I know we all know these simple thoughts. Carry on being you, Justoneman ! Yes, you are a long winded fellow. But I for one see it as perfection. For what it is worth I have gotten a lot from your posts, from your willingness to be so open and candid with all of us. I say don't stop for a moment. Use whatever tools you have to break free!! We are all together in this effort, my friend.

Cheers,

Buck

modwiz
15th November 2012, 18:52
Justoneman you are awesome.
I have to respectfully disagree with your assessment of your greatest character defect....

As a fellow traveler who also suffers from excessive verbosity and admires the terse Hemingwayesque clarity of so many of the members here- I would like to interject most respectfully the energy that you dedicate to holding yourself down to absolutely ensure that your ego never again wrenches the steering wheel away from your higher self is admirable, yea it is indeed noble, but it is also perhaps, perhaps, time for you to consider shedding this potentially outdated tool that has served you so well. And, I may surprise you (and I may not) when I suggest that this specific brand of humility is exactly what I see as your current most formidable roadblock on the journey. Also could be and I see it is most likely is connected with the excess verbosity you reference- a sort of physical manifestation of the disonance -----

Take a page, if you will, from Fred. He has shifted focus and intent (or maybe more accurate to say in the process of shifting intent) from student to master. How dare he do that! :) Who the H- is Fred to say he is in possession of his faculties and proclaim as such. What hubris, what colossal delusion. It is very dangerous to see ourselves as divine, as having any potential of that sort. That is how people end up in the nuthouse. If any of these statements stir some dark resonance with the force that is guarding your own 'self' (that in your own tremendous struggle to freedom you have chronicled endless proof of betrayal and backsliding so therefore your 'guardian self' considers it only just and appropriate that you keep a stern (and sober by god) hand on the tiller.

But, consider that you have made great progress. Perhaps greater than 'you' realize... Consider that you may have or may soon be, succeeding in making that shift and opening to connection with your authentic self. And if that has come to pass, or when it does....

Consider that the humility of the student is not appropriate for the master.

It becomes false humility, it can evolve or mutate into another tool (SO ironic, isn't it) that the ego can use to prevent our true (as in 'higher' or overall, or gigantic universal being of light form oceanic love potential) self from resonance with the N O W

As always, I do not intend to patronize, I know you know, I know we all know these simple thoughts. Carry on being you, Justoneman ! Yes, you are a long winded fellow. But I for one see it as perfection. For what it is worth I have gotten a lot from your posts, from your willingness to be so open and candid with all of us. I say don't stop for a moment. Use whatever tools you have to break free!! We are all together in this effort, my friend.

Cheers,

Buck

I agree about justonechapter, er, justoneman. Who's Fred? :rolleyes:

Flash
15th November 2012, 18:56
As a fellow traveler who also suffers from excessive verbosity and admires the terse Hemingwayesque clarity of so many of the members here- I would like to interject most respectfully the energy that you dedicate to holding yourself down to absolutely ensure that your ego never again wrenches the steering wheel away from your higher self is admirable, yea it is indeed noble, but it is also perhaps, perhaps, time for you to consider shedding this potentially outdated tool that has served you so well. And, I may surprise you (and I may not) when I suggest that this specific brand of humility is exactly what I see as your current most formidable roadblock on the journey. Also could be and I see it is most likely is connected with the excess verbosity you reference- a sort of physical manifestation of the disonance -----


Excuse my French, please give me a break this is extensive English for me, do not expect me to reach that level, so long posts with low level english will be me. LOL Mais en français, là, je vous ai tous. Sauf Buckminster Fuller et Auracaria.

modwiz
15th November 2012, 18:59
As a fellow traveler who also suffers from excessive verbosity and admires the terse Hemingwayesque clarity of so many of the members here- I would like to interject most respectfully the energy that you dedicate to holding yourself down to absolutely ensure that your ego never again wrenches the steering wheel away from your higher self is admirable, yea it is indeed noble, but it is also perhaps, perhaps, time for you to consider shedding this potentially outdated tool that has served you so well. And, I may surprise you (and I may not) when I suggest that this specific brand of humility is exactly what I see as your current most formidable roadblock on the journey. Also could be and I see it is most likely is connected with the excess verbosity you reference- a sort of physical manifestation of the disonance -----


Excuse my French, please give me a break this is extensive English for me, do not expect me to reach that level, so long posts with low level english will be me. LOL Mais en français, là, je vous ai tous. Sauf Buckminster Fuller et Auracaria.

It must be tough to show off your intelligence and nobody (almost nobody) knows what you're saying. I hate when that happens.:doh:

Flash
15th November 2012, 19:04
In fact, you can't show off your intelligence. It is a good practice into humility and putting the ego in its right place. Often, I would have comments but it takes so much time to correct the grammar that I just do not say it. My reparti is definitely faster and better orally, and yet much more in French.

It also helps me understand my daughter who has partial aphasia and always have problems with languages (she is a bilingual partial aphasic)

So here, I may play blonde sometimes - wow , what a neat excuse for when I am truly dum, as it happens to everyone of us at times. "I am blonde and French" hi hi hi!!!

And I type 110 words a minute and skip words inadvertently sometimes...

Buck
15th November 2012, 19:12
As a fellow traveler who also suffers from excessive verbosity and admires the terse Hemingwayesque clarity of so many of the members here- I would like to interject most respectfully the energy that you dedicate to holding yourself down to absolutely ensure that your ego never again wrenches the steering wheel away from your higher self is admirable, yea it is indeed noble, but it is also perhaps, perhaps, time for you to consider shedding this potentially outdated tool that has served you so well. And, I may surprise you (and I may not) when I suggest that this specific brand of humility is exactly what I see as your current most formidable roadblock on the journey. Also could be and I see it is most likely is connected with the excess verbosity you reference- a sort of physical manifestation of the disonance -----


Excuse my French, please give me a break this is extensive English for me, do not expect me to reach that level, so long posts with low level english will be me. LOL Mais en français, là, je vous ai tous. Sauf Buckminster Fuller et Auracaria.

Dearest Flash,

The message I posted was not intended for you :) but rather, for Justoneman.

If I had a desire to share something similar with you, I promise you I would be speaking a different language (on a different frequency, channel, etc) :)

most humbly yours,
Buck

Flash
15th November 2012, 19:18
As a fellow traveler who also suffers from excessive verbosity and admires the terse Hemingwayesque clarity of so many of the members here- I would like to interject most respectfully the energy that you dedicate to holding yourself down to absolutely ensure that your ego never again wrenches the steering wheel away from your higher self is admirable, yea it is indeed noble, but it is also perhaps, perhaps, time for you to consider shedding this potentially outdated tool that has served you so well. And, I may surprise you (and I may not) when I suggest that this specific brand of humility is exactly what I see as your current most formidable roadblock on the journey. Also could be and I see it is most likely is connected with the excess verbosity you reference- a sort of physical manifestation of the disonance -----


Excuse my French, please give me a break this is extensive English for me, do not expect me to reach that level, so long posts with low level english will be me. LOL Mais en français, là, je vous ai tous. Sauf Buckminster Fuller et Auracaria.

Dearest Flash,

The message I posted was not intended for you :) but rather, for Justoneman.

If I had a desire to share something similar with you, I promise you I would be speaking a different language (on a different frequency, channel, etc) :)

most humbly yours,
Buck

I was pulling your leg, I do have a dry humour. Thanks for considering though.

Buck
15th November 2012, 19:27
LOL :)

What I wrote is, believe it or not, unfiltered and definitely not a conscious affectation. To be perfectly candid, sometimes (okay oftentimes ) I hold myself back- especially here. I have this crazy concern (fear :) that if I am truly relax and show myself, it might trigger some negative reactions. Go figure.

I dropped pretense for a moment and took the risk to speak openly with Justoneman in my "native" tongue :)

Buck
15th November 2012, 19:39
Thank you for that clarification - I love your posts and now I must encourage that I step aside and let the thread move back on point- you and so many others have brought great insight to this topic. And so back to Justoneman's OP

my 2cents; it requires a certain level of conscious intelligence to be able to appreciate complexity. Relationship issues such as this are a great litmus test for gauging an individual's overall awareness level, and when it is a large public event such as this it is also very revealing in terms of our cultural and national awareness level. My read is that the US as a nation-culture is currently at the emotional awareness level of a typical American 12 year old boy going through the first stages of puberty. And as a nation we are currrently at the spiritual awareness level of a Baptist tele-evangelist who is struggling to contain the "beast within" while simultaneously getting enormously wealthy presenting himself as a paragon of Christian virtue.

Sammy
15th November 2012, 20:05
I like what you touched on Flash...I think that it male infidelity is viewed much less harshly than a woman's in all of the cultures I know of.

I TOTALLY agree with this additional facet of the bigger picture - and in fact in most parts of the world there are double standards where the woman gets the short end of the stick (did I have a tiny pun in that?)

That point, unfortunately, complicates the specific points I was hoping we could cover in this thread but the fact is that it totally overlaps. One of the most impacting ways I was able to overcome my own culturally implanted, brainwashed views of supposed "male superiority" was achieved through my sexual experiences and since this forum is a bit PG I will not explain the details. I emerged long ago from that perception, in part because I was taught by someone I highly respect that a Queen can be a Queen alone but that a King cannot be a true King without a Queen. I was also taught by my wife, Cristina, that the man is "the head" but the woman is "the spine" - something she learned from her Colombian culture.

I tried both of those points of view and found that they appeared to be true for me. My point about these two statements is that men and women are different and they both play a vital role in creating a special type of "whole."

Trying to stay 300 words or less in my posts - justone

Kimberley
15th November 2012, 20:11
This is still a great thread... always a favorite topic for me :-)

I thought I would clear a few things up here and add one thing into the mix that has not been talked about and that is that 23 states in the US have laws that Adultery is a crime, although rarely prosecuted (thank goodness)...I'll get back to this in a minute.


***********************************************
First off in today's Boston Globe there are several articles worth noting:

Scandal did not imperil US security, Obama says
http://bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2012/11/15/obama-responds-warily-sex-scandal-fbi-inquiry/UrkWrfQJEQXEUBiz087oTK/story.html

David Petraeus to testify on Benghazi attacks
http://bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2012/11/15/dianne-feinstein-david-petraeus-testify-benghazi-attacks/uy5ePCv4xy0uNl7mT07FAP/story.html

*************************************************

Now I see this is a NY Times article posted in the Globe. I have highlighted a few things.


Mass. among 23 states where adultery is a crime, but rarely prosecuted


By Ethan Bronner
| New York Times November 15, 2012


http://bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2012/11/15/adultery-still-crime-states-including-mass/KiIPGRcFnAeT4CGmenFTKM/story.html

NEW YORK — When David H. Petraeus resigned as CIA director because of adultery, he was widely understood to be acknowledging a misdeed but not a crime. Yet in his state of residence, Virginia, as in 22 others including Massachusetts, adultery remains a criminal act, a vestige of the way US law has anchored legitimate sexual activity within marriage.

In most of those states, including New York, adultery is a misdemeanor. But in others — Massachusetts, Idaho, Michigan, Oklahoma, and Wisconsin — it is a felony, though rarely prosecuted. In the armed forces, it can be punished severely, although usually in combination with greater wrongdoing.

In nearly all the rest of the industrialized world, adultery is not covered by criminal code.

Like other US state laws related to sex — sodomy, fornication, rape — adultery laws date to the Old Testament, onetime capital offenses stemming at least partly from a concern about male property. Peter Nicolas of the University of Washington Law School said the term stemmed from the notion of ‘‘adulterating’’ or polluting the bloodline of a family when a married woman had sex with someone other than her husband and ran the risk of having another man’s child.

Linda C. McClain, who teaches family law at Boston University, likes to give her students two decisions from New Jersey courts, the first from 1838 and the second from 1992, to demonstrate how things have changed.

In the 1838 decision, the court said that the harm of adultery lay not in ‘‘the alienation of the wife’s affections, and loss of comfort in her company,’’ but in ‘‘its tendency to adulterate the issue of an innocent husband, and to turn the inheritance away from his own blood, to that of a stranger.’’

In the 1992 civil case, the court said that ‘‘adultery exists when one spouse rejects the other by entering into a personal intimate sexual relationship with any other person.’’

Most states have purged their codes of laws regulating cohabitation, homosexual sodomy, and fornication — sex between unmarried adults — especially after the 2003 Supreme Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas that made sexual activity by consenting adults in private legal across the country. But the question of how that ruling affects adultery remains unanswered because others may be harmed by adultery — a spouse and children. Several courts have alluded to the constitutionality of adultery laws since the Lawrence decision.

But Melissa Murray, a University of California Berkeley law professor, said she thought ‘‘most courts in light of Lawrence are going to give adultery a wide berth.’’ She added: ‘‘It is an open question whether adultery continues to be viable as criminal law even though it remains on the books.”

Some law professors, including Joanna L. Grossman of Hofstra University, said one reason that adultery laws remain on the books is that getting rid of them would require politicians to declare their opposition to them, which few would do. In addition, many like the idea of the criminal code serving as a kind of moral guide even if certain laws are almost never applied.

Petraeus is a retired four-star general who gets a military pension and remains subject to military codes of conduct that prohibit adultery. But Diane H. Mazur, a professor of law at the University of Florida and a former Air Force officer, said that the chances of the Army calling Petraeus back to active service in order to court-martial him in an adultery case are zero, as are any chances of state criminal charges being brought.

Even within the military code, she added, adultery is charged as a criminal offense only when ‘‘the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces,’’ she read from the manual for courts-martial. That meant something larger than seemed at stake here.

End of article...

**************************************

So times have changed though the Law in almost half of the US is still on the books. Still there to keep us under control or our relationships.

Like Justoneman said



And "WE" are just as at fault as the PTBs here - we need to get a clue or accept the status quo because nothing will ever change unless we look in the mirror individually, see the lies we told ourselves or bought into and then take the all important step of deciding we are going to undo each and every one of these lies until we emerge a s a whole, complete individual Spirit being where crap like this can no longer hold us hostage or be used against us to hold us hostage.


How sex is used to hold humanity in a prison can only occur if we allow it and we do - it is a fact, we need to face it or else remain imprisoned.

So I too have taken personal responsibility to be as honest about everything as I can be in all relationships with others and it is then up to the other person to decide if they can accept me for who I am or not in their eyes. I describe this way of being as being as if we are already telepathic.

I look forward to the day when we have all of our freedom back.

Much love to us all, always and in all ways!!! :grouphug:

TargeT
15th November 2012, 20:55
How sex is used to hold humanity in a prison can only occur if we allow it and we do - it is a fact, we need to face it or else remain imprisoned.

So I too have taken personal responsibility to be as honest about everything as I can be in all relationships with others and it is then up to the other person to decide if they can accept me for who I am or not in their eyes. I describe this way of being as being as if we are already telepathic.

I look forward to the day when we have all of our freedom back.

Much love to us all, always and in all ways!!! :grouphug:

The bolded concepts apply to SO MUCH more than this threads topic; I see this type of "non-compliance" attitude spreading and this means much for "our" collective ability to break the shakles of fear and oppression.

I don't see this change as a signular event, more of a sign wave progression, and I think we are on the slope of change as we speak, ( I like to envision it as the upward slope out of a valley "that was")

latshaw
15th November 2012, 23:58
Buck,
Thank you for your posts.

Found the banter and attempt at circular reasoning interesting - however - one must be so-o-o careful as not to think big words can hide what is really being said....too many use big words to hide how they really feel in what they term "joking". Old adage: "Many a truth was said in a joke." PS. I was raised Baptist (and consider my self a Christ-man vs a Christian), I am conscious, and intelligent. So, again - thank you for your post.;)

Sammy
16th November 2012, 02:01
So I too have taken personal responsibility to be as honest about everything as I can be in all relationships with others and it is then up to the other person to decide if they can accept me for who I am or not in their eyes. I describe this way of being as being as if we are already telepathic.

I look forward to the day when we have all of our freedom back.

Much love to us all, always and in all ways!!! :grouphug:

You nailed it Kimberley. You are such a breath of the freshest air... Love to You, Chester

Kimberley
16th November 2012, 02:35
So I too have taken personal responsibility to be as honest about everything as I can be in all relationships with others and it is then up to the other person to decide if they can accept me for who I am or not in their eyes. I describe this way of being as being as if we are already telepathic.

I look forward to the day when we have all of our freedom back.

Much love to us all, always and in all ways!!! :grouphug:

You nailed it Kimberley. You are such a breath of the freshest air... Love to You, Chester

As I have said time and time again judge not lest you be judged and if you do not judge there is nothing to forgive. Another way is to say live and let live...come on my friends please stop judging and we will be living peace on earth!!!

Chester you too and many are all "the freshest air." Thank you, thank you, Thank you to all of my relations for who you are!!!!!!!!!!! And congratulations for who you are!!!

Much love to us all!! :grouphug:

gripreaper
16th November 2012, 02:45
Energy is energy, which is amplified in the second chakra. To label this amplification as sexual, when two join in sacred union, illustrates the potential outcomes. One would be to amplify this energy and move it up the central column and activate the celestial chakras through the heart, and share astral travel together, as well as visions, higher truths, and extacy.

The Hollywood version, is to immediately dissipate this energy and do not challenge the discordant energy in the other chakras because that would lead to awakening, and also lead to the knowledge of how powerful we are as spiritual beings.

So, the last "Age" of Pisces was to share in relationships, where the other person brought to the relationship the vibratory frequencies which you were lacking, and vise versa, and one complete nervous system between the two in relationship was mirrored for both, challenging any stuck energies.

Now, why do you suppose that the divorce rate is upwards of 60% and most are living single? It is a cleansing time, a movement away from the co-dependent mirror relationship, to open up to all of these energies internally, and not look to a partner to mirror them for you anymore.

The new twin flame union, is two souls who have cleared their chakras, know how to generate, amplify, and focus this energy internally, and access their higher chakras themselves without a partner. Then, when two souls are fully actuated, the two full and complete nervous systems join in union, without the need to co-dependently mirror for the other, and the possibilities of accessing the other galactic planes in unison, just like we all did when we first split off from source and became an individuated fractal of light, becomes possible.

This is the highest form of union. It's not about sex, but the highest form of energetic amplification, without any blockages in the chakras, as well as the ability to honor and intention this sexual energy, then becomes the new relationship paradigm, the Twin Flame relationship of the golden age.

For those who have not read "The Magdalene Manuscript" by Tom Kenyon, I recommend it. Magdalene explains how she and Yeshua seeded this energy two thousand years ago. For myself, I'm single, and know that one day my twin flame will show up. Yes, I still have a few blockages in my chakras, but not for long.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znZCse46fp4&feature=related

Kimberley
16th November 2012, 14:51
Gripreaper, I agree with what you wrote and am bumping this thread! :bump:

Sammy
16th November 2012, 16:23
This is certainly one special dude and I am certain one special "partner" is out there and that they will cross paths and soon. Love to You, gripreaper - awesome post... truly awesome. A practitioner of Sexual Tantra you sound to be.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neotantra


Teachers of this version of tantra frequently have the belief that sex and sexual experiences are a sacred act which is capable of elevating its participants to a higher spiritual plane. They often talk about raising Kundalini energy...

http://www.goddesstemple.com/index.php

and to understand Tantra in general, this link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tantra

Love to You, Chester

GrnEggsNHam
16th November 2012, 19:43
For me, an open marriage would not work. And even if it's not a marriage, a committed relationship is just as sacred, imo. If I fall in love with someone then I want to be with him and him only. I want to be encased in a cocoon of love and pleasure which is impenetrable by anyone else. In our intimate times together, I want to be in a world where only he and I exist. The thought that another person may be entering that sacred space in which we have our own little universe, would break the strong bond I'd have with him.

I hope you find someone to share this rather concrete thought with. My definition of LOVE is ever changing and evolving with my varied perception. There are just too many factors in this life equation to block myself in such a way. My long time(6 years) SO knows how I feel about this and she definitely does not agree. However she can easily admit to having "crushes" or whatever on movie/TV actors. I find it rather ironic but then again I don't pretend to be like her.

A good question you should ask yourself is this:
Why have you linked the activity of sexual intercourse with monogamy in the first place?

Nature does not give laws on sexual activity, however we humans feel we need to? For what purpose can this be?

I'll let everyone answer those for themselves, using their own brain.

Sammy
16th November 2012, 19:55
For me, an open marriage would not work. And even if it's not a marriage, a committed relationship is just as sacred, imo. If I fall in love with someone then I want to be with him and him only. I want to be encased in a cocoon of love and pleasure which is impenetrable by anyone else. In our intimate times together, I want to be in a world where only he and I exist. The thought that another person may be entering that sacred space in which we have our own little universe, would break the strong bond I'd have with him.

I hope you find someone to share this rather concrete thought with. My definition of LOVE is ever changing and evolving with my varied perception. There are just too many factors in this life equation to block myself in such a way. My long time(6 years) SO knows how I feel about this and she definitely does not agree. However she can easily admit to having "crushes" or whatever on movie/TV actors. I find it rather ironic but then again I don't pretend to be like her.

A good question you should ask yourself is this:
Why have you linked the activity of sexual intercourse with monogamy in the first place?

Nature does not give laws on sexual activity, however we humans feel we need to? For what purpose can this be?

I'll let everyone answer those for themselves, using their own brain.

How cool this post... from GrnEggsNHam... Sam I am, Sam I am (happens to be my first name!) And we appear to come from quite the same point of view as well. I found true freedom when I was able to separate sex from marriage and the bi-product has been a fantastic sex life both with my current life partner and beyond. I have no doubt the youthful love for life both Cristina (age 47) and I (age 55) have is correlated with our wonderful sex life when we get together in that way.

I am always happy to learn when I am not alone... Love to You, GrnEggsNHam, Sam I am ... but I go by my middle name, Chester

And to the most Excellent DoT... There's zero wrong with your requirements and expectations regarding intimate relationships. Hopefully, if you seek one like that or are in one like that, both of you share this requirement. I know tons of super happy couples that choose to be and expect each other to be monogamous. Love to You, Chester

modwiz
16th November 2012, 19:56
I think that a society that practices the "free sex spirit" (which is advertised through film and TV) will in the long run destroy the family and hinder the forming of deep meaningful relationships.
Well call me old fashioned but i still believe in the family as the cornerstone of society.

Wasn't it the Illuminati that have it on their agenda to promote casual sex with no string attached to destroy the traditional family? Isn't one of their tools Hollywood?

Not only do I disagree with this premise I think it is the cornerstone of many problems. Community is the cornerstone, IMO. It can call upon the healthy members to keep it sound. Families are too small, energetically incestuousness and dysfunctional to be a cornerstone of anything worthy of bearing weight. One organ alone is not the cornerstone of a body. A family is more akin to an organ, even a connective tissue, in the body of community.

Sammy
17th November 2012, 00:08
I think that a society that practices the "free sex spirit" (which is advertised through film and TV) will in the long run destroy the family and hinder the forming of deep meaningful relationships.
Well call me old fashioned but i still believe in the family as the cornerstone of society.

Wasn't it the Illuminati that have it on their agenda to promote casual sex with no string attached to destroy the traditional family? Isn't one of their tools Hollywood?

Not only do I disagree with this premise I think it is the cornerstone of many problems. Community is the cornerstone, IMO. It can call upon the healthy members to keep it sound. Families are too small, energetically incestuousness and dysfunctional to be a cornerstone of anything worthy of bearing weight. One organ alone is not the cornerstone of a body. A family is more akin to an organ, even a connective tissue, in the body of community.

I think what destroys families in the US is that the US culture imposes upon human beings an unrealistic expectation, has the general public there mind screwed enough to buy into the garbage, creates the scenarios where parents become enemies and the children suffer for it far, far worse then if parents of children lived in the reality of who/what they are as physical beings. That being, amongst many other things, sexually expressive beings.

I have seen more children grow up with severe emotional issues from parents who "stayed together for the children" totally disregarding the effect of their energies on their children. Conversely, I have seen many a cases where the two parents separated but remained friends and worked together regarding their children and the children grew up much more emotionally sound.

Its all about the attitude of the individuals involved. Choose to get over yourselves, allow your personal paths to move in the directions you are pulled and at the same time maintain positive relationships with each other with regards to children who have been gifted to you along the way. If your love for your children is more important than resentments against the partner, which to me should be, then the children benefit... but hey, what do I know? justoneman

Flash
17th November 2012, 00:19
I think that a society that practices the "free sex spirit" (which is advertised through film and TV) will in the long run destroy the family and hinder the forming of deep meaningful relationships.
Well call me old fashioned but i still believe in the family as the cornerstone of society.

Wasn't it the Illuminati that have it on their agenda to promote casual sex with no string attached to destroy the traditional family? Isn't one of their tools Hollywood?

Not only do I disagree with this premise I think it is the cornerstone of many problems. Community is the cornerstone, IMO. It can call upon the healthy members to keep it sound. Families are too small, energetically incestuousness and dysfunctional to be a cornerstone of anything worthy of bearing weight. One organ alone is not the cornerstone of a body. A family is more akin to an organ, even a connective tissue, in the body of community.

It takes a village to raise a child, so goes the saying.

I cannot agree more than this. The mono family is much to small to give a wide experience of life and adapted answers to needs for most kids. Exposure to all kind of situations is what make humans flexible and allows to exploit ones potential. This cannot be reached in small families and actual school system in daytime.

However, it could be reached within a community. Within a community, the impact of parents divorce is much less severe, because the children can rely on the community. Also, you would not have all those kids handicaped for not having fathers around, because at a minimal rate, they would be in contact with sound men, having a fatherly figure.

I raised my daughter mostly alone. As a mother, I would have greatly benefitted to be around and with a community as well. It would have made my own life much easier. A community that respects the individuals would have been great, for me and for my daughter.

Finally, there were decent adult men that she could safely relate to in the teenager hood in her music school (the owners are really great men). Would have been so much better if she would have had the contact with the same kind of men much younger.

Even for a two heads family, it is much better to have an extended community to rely on.

In my opinion.

modwiz
17th November 2012, 08:49
It takes a village to raise a child, so goes the saying.

I cannot agree more than this. The mono family is much to small to give a wide experience of life and adapted answers to needs for most kids. Exposure to all kind of situations is what make humans flexible and allows to exploit ones potential. This cannot be reached in small families and actual school system in daytime.

However, it could be reached within a community. Within a community, the impact of parents divorce is much less severe, because the children can rely on the community. Also, you would not have all those kids handicaped for not having fathers around, because at a minimal rate, they would be in contact with sound men, having a fatherly figure.

I raised my daughter mostly alone. As a mother, I would have greatly benefitted to be around and with a community as well. It would have made my own life much easier. A community that respects the individuals would have been great, for me and for my daughter.

Finally, there were decent adult men that she could safely relate to in the teenager hood in her music school (the owners are really great men). Would have been so much better if she would have had the contact with the same kind of men much younger.

Even for a two heads family, it is much better to have an extended community to rely on.

In my opinion.

I see this thread has low traffic, but I am glad to see that my idea has been well received. TV was the breaker of community. It took us inside to sit with our families while we were programmed. Before TV people used to gather in parks, weather permitting. When TV was introduced to England, the government made sure, even subsidized, that a TV was in every household. The once full parks emptied out and evenings were dominated by the glow of windows illuminated by the TV screens in every living room.

I believe this is no accident and represents a strategy. Now most have their own TV's and sit being programmed without even one dissenting voice in the room. Canceling cable subscriptions and turning our TV's into DVD monitors is the only way to begin the unraveling of this unholy arrangement. The idea of family being the center of everything is strongly enforced by TV and the media. They might seem to encourage other behaviors, but they are just teases and taunts. The real moral of any plot comes down to the power of family. The ultimate formation of tiny tribes with no power.

Just as "they" like it.

Daughter of Time
17th November 2012, 09:46
For me, an open marriage would not work. And even if it's not a marriage, a committed relationship is just as sacred, imo. If I fall in love with someone then I want to be with him and him only. I want to be encased in a cocoon of love and pleasure which is impenetrable by anyone else. In our intimate times together, I want to be in a world where only he and I exist. The thought that another person may be entering that sacred space in which we have our own little universe, would break the strong bond I'd have with him.

I hope you find someone to share this rather concrete thought with. My definition of LOVE is ever changing and evolving with my varied perception. There are just too many factors in this life equation to block myself in such a way. My long time(6 years) SO knows how I feel about this and she definitely does not agree. However she can easily admit to having "crushes" or whatever on movie/TV actors. I find it rather ironic but then again I don't pretend to be like her.

A good question you should ask yourself is this:
Why have you linked the activity of sexual intercourse with monogamy in the first place?

Nature does not give laws on sexual activity, however we humans feel we need to? For what purpose can this be?

I'll let everyone answer those for themselves, using their own brain.

I have not linked sex with monogamy.

I have linked being in love and in a committed relationship with monogamy.

Monogamy with someone one is not in love with nor committed to would not make much sense.

Sex just for the pleasure of it has nothing to do with being in love with someone and committing to that person.

One can be powerfully attracted to someone and have fully satisfying sex with that person without ever falling in love or wanting to commit. This is a completely different thing and not what I was referring to in my post. I was not referring to casual, sexual, non committed relationships.

I was referring to the type of love where there is a union of the bodies, hearts, minds and souls.

DNA
17th November 2012, 10:04
To each their own. I was married 13 years and my wife left me and our kids behind. The emotional damage was devastating and lingered to me for 10 years and my children still won't talk to their mom. Now you better be on the same page when the two of you decide to marry and that still could be a problem.One spouse might fall deeper in love then the other no matter the agreement before hand . You bring kids in the mix wanted or by accident then you compound the problem. I've been ask a few times to join in with married couples and I will not cross that line now thats me but each their own......

A true story- my brother got involved with a married couple now as long as the husband was there watching he felt like his wife wasn't "cheating" and he was pleasing her by letting my brother do his thing with the wife then the husband over heard my brother and the wife talking about"hooking" up without the husband being there WRONG! the husband came in the room and hit my brother over the head with a bottle and it was a mess.....the husband felt like his wife was "cheating then".....:suspicious:


Serious mind game.......I date women from time to time but they are single and avoid any problems dealing with spouses.


I could tell you another true story about a man his wife and a man with a gun in a fantasy game but I let it pass for its pretty wierd......unless you like that type of thing of course...... I absolutely agree with you truth. You have hit the nail on the head for me. Different soul ages and soul types are capable of different depths of love.

Sammy
17th November 2012, 12:45
It takes a village to raise a child, so goes the saying.

I cannot agree more than this. The mono family is much to small to give a wide experience of life and adapted answers to needs for most kids. Exposure to all kind of situations is what make humans flexible and allows to exploit ones potential. This cannot be reached in small families and actual school system in daytime.

However, it could be reached within a community. Within a community, the impact of parents divorce is much less severe, because the children can rely on the community. Also, you would not have all those kids handicaped for not having fathers around, because at a minimal rate, they would be in contact with sound men, having a fatherly figure.

I raised my daughter mostly alone. As a mother, I would have greatly benefitted to be around and with a community as well. It would have made my own life much easier. A community that respects the individuals would have been great, for me and for my daughter.

Finally, there were decent adult men that she could safely relate to in the teenager hood in her music school (the owners are really great men). Would have been so much better if she would have had the contact with the same kind of men much younger.

Even for a two heads family, it is much better to have an extended community to rely on.

In my opinion.

I see this thread has low traffic, but I am glad to see that my idea has been well received. TV was the breaker of community. It took us inside to sit with out families while we were programmed. Before TV people used to gather in parks, weather permitting. When TV was introduced to England, the government made sure, even subsidized, that a TV was in every household. The once full parks emptied out and evening were dominated by the glow of windows illuminated by the TV screens in every living room.

I believe this is no accident and represents a strategy. Now most have their own TV's and sit being programmed without even one dissenting voice in the room. Canceling cable subscriptions and turning our TV's into DVD monitors is the only way to begin the unraveling of this unholy arrangement. The idea of family being the center of everything is strongly enforced by TV and the media. They might seem to encourage other behaviors, but they are just teases and taunts. The real moral of any plot comes down to the power of family. The ultimate formation of tiny tribes with no power.

Just as "they" like it.

WoW! Modwiz - this is one of you most brilliant, accurate, penetrating and important posts ever. Yet the low traffic demonstrates there are few... very very few brave enough to consider these possibilities, much less to see the truth of what you are saying.

Its my opinion that a truly good thread has low viewership and is a reflection of the work of Herrnstein and Murray known as the Bell Curve -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bell_Curve


Its central argument is that human intelligence is substantially influenced by both inherited and environmental factors and is a better predictor of many personal dynamics, including financial income, job performance, chance of unwanted pregnancy, and involvement in crime than are an individual's parental socioeconomic status, or education level. The book also argues that those with high intelligence, the "cognitive elite", are becoming separated from those of average and below-average intelligence, and that this is a dangerous social trend with the United States moving toward a more divided society similar to that in Latin America.

It is interesting I am married to a Colombiana and have lived in Latin America and the Caribbean for the last 15 years and I never consciously considered this about where I live.

I see it as a Live and Let Live attitude - those who want to sleep... let them sleep, those who enjoy being awake, good for them too.

Love to You, Chester

Sammy
17th November 2012, 13:10
For me, an open marriage would not work. And even if it's not a marriage, a committed relationship is just as sacred, imo. If I fall in love with someone then I want to be with him and him only. I want to be encased in a cocoon of love and pleasure which is impenetrable by anyone else. In our intimate times together, I want to be in a world where only he and I exist. The thought that another person may be entering that sacred space in which we have our own little universe, would break the strong bond I'd have with him.

I hope you find someone to share this rather concrete thought with. My definition of LOVE is ever changing and evolving with my varied perception. There are just too many factors in this life equation to block myself in such a way. My long time(6 years) SO knows how I feel about this and she definitely does not agree. However she can easily admit to having "crushes" or whatever on movie/TV actors. I find it rather ironic but then again I don't pretend to be like her.

A good question you should ask yourself is this:
Why have you linked the activity of sexual intercourse with monogamy in the first place?

Nature does not give laws on sexual activity, however we humans feel we need to? For what purpose can this be?

I'll let everyone answer those for themselves, using their own brain.

I have not linked sex with monogamy.

I have linked being in love and in a committed relationship with monogamy.

Monogamy with someone one is not in love with nor committed to would not make much sense.

Sex just for the pleasure of it has nothing to do with being in love with someone and committing to that person.

One can be powerfully attracted to someone and have fully satisfying sex with that person without ever falling in love or wanting to commit. This is a completely different thing and not what I was referring to in my post. I was not referring to casual, sexual, non committed relationships.

I was referring to the type of love where there is a union of the bodies, hearts, minds and souls.

Everyone has the right to explore their own view points, to create and explore their own assumptions. What we tend to do is impose what's right for ourselves upon each other. I see those who do that as possessing unhealthy egos. The ego is threatened and so it does what it can only do to feel loved, and cared for and accepted and that is to insist others see things their way.

Based in the posts I have read in this controversial thread, I am experiencing a great deal of healthy egos expressing their views and doing so without getting their panties (well... I don't wear underwear but anyways) in a wad and I am very proud of us.

Your view, DoT is wonderful for those who chose to enter into agreement on the terms you describe. It is understandable that most folks fear the breakdown of the commitment if one or the other or both is able to enter into sexual contact with a third party. It is my opinion that relationships that break apart are not caused by the extramarital events but by the nature of the extramarital events.

What I mean by the nature is that so many people experience "being in love" as a form of possession. Few are aware of this but that is what most on our planet in the north western culture do at this time. They think they are in a healthy "in love" state when within their subconscious (which for most is 95% of their entire consciousness) they are actually in a mutual possession dynamic.

This is a first level symptom of an unhealthy ego.

So it is understandable how many within our north western culture have developed the opinion that monogomy should be a requirement and an agreement in order that each one can feel comfortable about their commitment.

Unfortunately this appears to place the Spirit being into a prison where there is no escape and few places to go. They are supposed to be in relationship with their world which bombards them day and night with sexual material in advertising, TV shows, the fashion trends, the makeup that women are obsessed with wearing, the buff bodies both women and men are obsessed with possessing and yet we are not supposed to be effected? Get real. And so then what does one do with the thoughts? Suppress them? Shut the natural desires down? Deny a part of you? Where does that lead some? To perversion and rape and pedophilia and other sexually deviant activities.

What a brilliant plan! Reminds me of one of Icke's most important points - WE... yes, we are the prison guards. "They" don't have to do a thing other than to continue to blast us the dual message.

As "Lucifer" said in the Devil's Advocate -
Let me give you a little inside information about God. God likes to watch. He's a prankster. Think about it. He gives man instincts. He gives you this extraordinary gift, and then what does He do, I swear for His own amusement, his own private, cosmic gag reel, He sets the rules in opposition. It's the goof of all time. Look but don't touch. Touch, but don't taste. Taste, don't swallow. Ahaha. And while you're jumpin' from one foot to the next, what is he doing? He's laughin' His sick, f***n' arse off! He's a tight-arse! He's a SADIST! He's an absentee landlord! Worship that? NEVER!

Gotta admit, Lucy has a point, heh?

Note I had to adjust the above quote and adopted 9's method a bit by using the word, "arse" (again, give my regards... haha)

Sammy
17th November 2012, 13:26
moments after my last post, I go to fill my coffee and was gifted by the All that Is with this beautiful sight... the pic is not as brilliant as the actual vista

19292

and another great quote from the DA -


A woman's shoulders are the front lines of her mystique, and her neck, if she's alive, has all the mystery of a border town. A no-man's land in that battle between the mind and the body.

Tell me this isn't true...

Love to All, Chester

Sammy
17th November 2012, 13:34
I was referring to the type of love where there is a union of the bodies, hearts, minds and souls.

I have this experience with other partners outside of my marriage and I am "permitted" to do so. In addition... though I do not see it as "permission," my life partner can do the same. In fact she has and in fact I was allowed to be there. It was an amazing experience "to watch."

These "outside of our marriage" experiences did not then include any further requirements. Through these experiences, true friends have emerged. In some cases these friends may have needs arise in which I or my wife might be able to assist. In some cases a sexual event occurred only once and never again, yet we have all remained friends since.

Feels like a community has emerged. Feels healthy. Emulates healthy actions. Interesting all this. I hope my next incarnation is on Venus... "Hear that God??" Love to All, justone

Daughter of Time
17th November 2012, 19:36
I was referring to the type of love where there is a union of the bodies, hearts, minds and souls.

I have this experience with other partners outside of my marriage and I am "permitted" to do so. In addition... though I do not see it as "permission," my life partner can do the same. In fact she has and in fact I was allowed to be there. It was an amazing experience "to watch."

These "outside of our marriage" experiences did not then include any further requirements. Through these experiences, true friends have emerged. In some cases these friends may have needs arise in which I or my wife might be able to assist. In some cases a sexual event occurred only once and never again, yet we have all remained friends since.

Feels like a community has emerged. Feels healthy. Emulates healthy actions. Interesting all this. I hope my next incarnation is on Venus... "Hear that God??" Love to All, justone

I hear you Justone.

I hope I have been clear in stating what I consider ideal has nothing to do with what you or anyone else may consider ideal. We are individuals with different needs and different sensitivities.

Provided that the people involved are in agreement with the type of relationship they wish to have, then all is well.

As I said before, an open marriage is not any more right nor any more wrong than a monogamous one. It's all about what works for the couple. And no one should judge another for having different needs and desires.

You and your lovely wife are in agreement therefore all is well. You both want the same thing. It sounds to me like you are soul mates.

Live and let live!

Love,

Dot

Sammy
17th November 2012, 20:43
Thanks DoT - at least some of us can have peaceful discussion... does that mean there's hope for this place?

If no one cared what anyone else did in this regard nor cared about the religion (or not) that anyone chooses or the sex someone prefers to have sex with or the skin color of their friends and on and on then "they" could no longer manipulate us, but alas, I am preaching to the choir here on Avalon.


anyways - relevant

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?30405-Here-and-Now...What-s-Happening&p=585042&viewfull=1#post585042

when we turn off "their movie" we can rediscover how to make our own on our own terms - justone

Sammy
20th November 2012, 14:00
an interesting excerpt from Peter Moon's - The Pyramids of Montauk -

found at this link http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/cienciareal/cienciareal28.htm

and applicable to this thread.


Bast's legacy gives us at least two words in our modem lexicon. The word "bastard" was derived from the Pandora's Box that opened with the unrestricted breeding practices that were common during her reign. During the reign of the goddess, paternity was not an issue. Marriage came into being in large part due to the need to preserve a patriarchal structure for inheritance and succession purposes. When the father god took over, he made parentage an issue and punished women who bore children outside of the established tradition of wedlock. This is not so much a moral issue as a power issue.

justoneman's conclusion?

"My" insecurity is directly proportional to "their" ability to retain power over me.

I also suspect this may be true for the rest of us, but that is for each of us to decide for ourselves.

Enjoy the Day and Love to All - Chester