Thursday, October 22, 2009


Human cultures normally find a conceptual place in their scientific and/or technological understanding of the universe - whether primitive or advanced - for a supernatural entity such as 'God'. (In the Jewish tradition, such a name should not be voiced and, although not a Jew, I shall sometimes use the designation 'G-d' that, without a vowel, cannot really be spoken. Also, 'G-d' de-emphasizes the aspect of existence and points to, rather, a function.)

[In what follows (and other Posts) this blogger makes reference to "God", "the heavens and the earth" and "Adam and Eve" as described in the first few pages of the Judaeo-Christian "Bible". However, the Philosophy of Heterosexuality that is elaborated here does not depend on these classical references. It stands or falls on its own merits.

Nonetheless, it turns out that many elements of the beginning of the first Biblical book, "Genesis", can readily be read in a heterosexual way that corresponds quite nicely with this blogger's heterosexual thesis.

In addition, of course, my earlier 'non-sexual' education about Genesis may well have paradoxically cued my own heterosexual formulations. I may have (sub-consciously) 'heard' and 'read' this part of the Bible heterosexually from an early age.]


A. Aristotle's model of a cosmos composed of concentric spheres wherein the outer spheres determine the movement of inner spheres suggested the placement of an "unmoved Mover" (viz, 'God') in the outermost locale.

B. With the technological development of such mechanisms as clocks, 'God' was conceptualized as a kind of clock-maker and/or the one who wound up the clock.

C. The traditional reading of the very beginning of the Judaeo-Christian Bible (Genesis 1) has conceptualized a 'free-standing' and independently-existing "God" who, as a supernatural entity, creates the universe out of nothing. 'His', 'Her' or 'Its' productive capacity is perceived as non-sexual or 'uni-sexual' or, virtually, hermaphroditic.

Although no personal pronoun referring to "God" appears in early chapters of the Bible, male pronouns are used to identify God later, and Jesus certainly refers to God as "Father".

In the traditional Judaeo-Christian 'cosmos', then, God (more or less a male) is given the place of a free-standing and independently existing fabricator with, evidently, supernatural powers.

During thousands of years of reading/reciting Genesis 1, many men have conflated the concepts of (i) a non-sexual or uni-sexual or hermaphroditic God and (ii) a free-standing male creator God -- with the result that a male human being has often similarly thought of himself as independent and not really having want of a female co-creator other than as a womb/uterus to gestate and give birth to HIS children.

Contemporary 'political-correctness' conflates maleness and femaleness and, thus, reinforces the concept of hermaphroditic uni-sexuality, if not non-sexuality.


The extensively foot-noted edition of The New Jerusalem Bible (the authoritative contemporary Roman Catholic version) [ISBN 9780385142649] offers the following translation of the best Hebrew and Greek sources: "In the beginning God created heaven and earth. Now the earth was a formless void, there was darkness over the deep, with a divine wind sweeping over the waters. God said, 'Let there be light, . . ."

This is an essentially traditional phrasing; and it is ambiguous regarding whether "God" made the "formless void" out of nothing or whether G-d acted on a pre-existing "formless void".

Then, The New Jerusalem Bible (in its foot-notes) also offers this translation: "When God began creating heaven and earth, the earth being then a formless void, with darkness over the deep, and a divine wind sweeping over the waters, God said, . . ." etc.

In this latter phrasing, it is evident that "the earth", as a "formless void" was already present when G-d began G-d's pro-creative endeavour. ('Creation' can be carried out by an individual alone; whereas 'procreation' requires interaction between a male entity and a female entity.)

The New Jerusalem Bible notes: "Both translations are grammatically possible: the one we retain here, with all the ancient versions, gives a more coherent rendering of the text."

This blogger perceives that the "coherent rendering" espoused by these editors involves an overlapping and mystifying uni-sexual or hermaphroditic 'coherence' between male and female functioning so that male human beings (whether identifying themselves as 'he', 'she', 'father' and/or 'mother') remain the 'be-all and end-all' of creation and procreation.

Without the latter editorial bias, it seems that the person who composed Genesis 1 perceived the universe as being the off-spring of G-d (male) and nature (female) with G-d's words, "Let there be light", etc. being the analogical equivalent of male genetic/chromosomal input that informed (ie, impregnated) the laws and possibilities provided by 'mother' nature so that She could give birth to light, etc.!

In this heterosexual formulation 'God' entirely lacks the female capacities to conceive, gestate, and give birth. He functions merely/exactly/only as an 'impregnating' male. (It can be noted that Genesis 1 does not state that G-d exists - only that G-d spoke.)

In summary, it seems evident that Judaeo-Christianity it founded on a scripture/writing that is (i) ambiguous regarding the 'sexual' character of G-d or (ii) clearly describes G-d as a male entity participating in procreative endeavour that requires complementary existence and power provided by "the heaven and the earth" (ie, nature and her power/laws).

God presents as the (archetypal) progenitor/sire/father (but not mother) to the universe. While composing/speaking data autonomously, He lacks independent existence- a mystery!
Accurately, Genesis 1 identifies God as a principle (not principal) of creation-procreation.

Monday, October 12, 2009

XII. The POWER of POSITIVE/CONSTRUCTIVE WORDS ADDRESSED to FEMALES and YOUTH is only dimly appreciated by most contemporary men.

When I was young, my mother, Kathryn, read and appreciated Norman Vincent Peale's "The Power of Positive Thinking". While not minimizing the significance of this book (indeed, Peale, a male, was addressing words to my female mother, albeit impersonally), this blogger here describes an overt heterosexual and inter-generational formulation of a similar but more potent and all-inclusive concept.

A 'higher power' is frequently cited as an explanation for events (often positive) that a person experiences but cannot fit into his/her usual concepts of cause and effect.

Such, then, are perceived as the manifestation and evidence of the functioning of 'God', 'the gods', 'a guardian angel', 'karma', 'spirituality', 'lady luck' or some other kind of supernatural (as contrasted with naturally explainable) power and influence.

As noted in previous posts, I perceive that reality is generated (i.e., procreated) by male-female interaction - with the paradigm of this being the interaction between

(i) the spermatocyte and the ovum


(ii) "God" and "the heavens and the earth" as described in Genesis 1 - i.e., God (the mere male element) addressed the words, "Let there be light...etc." to "the heavens and the earth" (the female element).

If a male (especially an older male) addresses positive/constructive words to a female, she can 'give birth to' a favorable reality that seems unexplainable in terms of natural 'cause and effect' mechanisms. Thus, She is the source of the apparently supernatural phenomena. (This phenomenon, then, is directly analogous to the interaction between "God" and "the heavens and the earth".

[The latter (perhaps best conceptualized as the mathematical 'laws of nature') were/are virtually supernatural and magical in terms of their power to 'conceive' and 'give birth to' a new reality but could/can not do this without being effected/informed/defined (see previous posts) by a merely naturally-functioning (i.e., speaking) male element that is represented in Genesis 1 by "God". Yes, 'God'-function is here perceived as natural whereas 'nature' is seen as having apparently super-natural qualities.]

A female does not have to practice 'magic'; She is, in Her very being, 'magic' itself. And this not unlike the famous 'Genie in the bottle'. A man must be careful what he says to a female.

All to often, a man simply negatively complains (e.g., Adam complaining about Eve in 'The Garden of Eden') and, so, the reality the she can 'give birth to' by/with him is negative.

To a more limited extent the older generation may 'impregnate' or 'program' the younger generation by addressing positive/constructive or negative/destructive words to them.