The demonetisation of sex, nudity and the sacred female

[Asguard]

I'm putting this here on purpose so that it doesn't become a religious debate. If tiassa feels it would be better in human science fair enough (as long as it doesn't end up in religion)

I have unfortunately destroyed a debate on sexual relationships because i got side tracked into discussing this.

So firstly i would like to apologise to original for getting his thread so off topic

Now this is to discuss the oppression of women especially through the cultural changes brought about through Emperor Constantine's usurping of the Christan church to satisfy his political power.

In an effort to make sure HE and the church he controlled was the only way to worship he demonised the female and her "ability to bring the male to god" through orgasm. This was his goal and we are still paying for it through laws regarding sex and nudity. Now the main person i have been debating (bells) has constantly pointed out that putting nudity and sex together makes it seem that I cant separate them through a modern view point and i guess she has a point. However they aren't completely separate, because the best way to make worship through the female something evil is to make the female body especially but all parts of the body (male and female) something dirty, wrong and shameful.

Who as a young adult didn't feel some how embarrassed by there own development? why is this? its a natural transition and a natural act
Animals don't view sex as somehow dirty or shameful so why do we?
Why are we embarrassed by our own bodies? our ancestors wernt, there are MANY examples of statues with huge penises, penis graffiti by the Romans etc so where did the penis become something shameful?

It all goes back to the fact that Constantine wanted ALL the power in his own hands. Religion has huge power and if anyone could commune with the divine by having sex with any women (especially priestesses) then he wouldn't have access to that power.

This isn't just an opinion of my own but if people watch "the facts behind the De Vinni code" movie and look at the books those authors have produced it is clear that this isn't how society is naturally

Even the word "prostitute" has been demonised because it originally meant "priestess"

What about the image of the devil?
if you look at the image it bares a remarkable resemblance to the Greek male god of fertility (and wine i THINK). This is the origin of the term "horny",

So some of this tradition has been preserved in spite of his actions

Then there are witches in the original sense. They were originally "evil women who seduced unwilling men into having sex with them to produce demon offspring. Why? why would sex with a women produce a demon?

What about the current church views on contraception? why would condoms and sex be seen as a sin? in both cases the answer is because it allows the original worship of the goddess.

 

[Bells]

Now this is to discuss the oppression of women especially through the cultural changes brought about through Emperor Constantine's usurping of the Christan church to satisfy his political power.

In an effort to make sure HE and the church he controlled was the only way to worship he demonised the female and her "ability to bring the male to god" through orgasm. This was his goal and we are still paying for it through laws regarding sex and nudity. Now the main person i have been debating (bells) has constantly pointed out that putting nudity and sex together makes it seem that I cant separate them through a modern view point and i guess she has a point. However they aren't completely separate, because the best way to make worship through the female something evil is to make the female body especially but all parts of the body (male and female) something dirty, wrong and shameful.

I think you will find that attitudes about women, nudity and sex predate Constantine.

Who as a young adult didn't feel some how embarrassed by there own development? why is this? its a natural transition and a natural act

Teenagers feel embarrassed about how they are developing because it is a new experience to them. That and their viewing adult bodies can result in their feeling they are not developed enough. For example, a young teenage boy may end up feeling anatomically inadequate when he has a shower in an open bathroom surrounded by grown men. Penile comparison is bound to take place.

Animals don't view sex as somehow dirty or shameful so why do we?

No, animals do not view sex as being dirty or shameful. But they are also very selective about sex. Sex is usually relegated to the matriarch or patriarch.

Why are we embarrassed by our own bodies? our ancestors wernt, there are MANY examples of statues with huge penises, penis graffiti by the Romans etc so where did the penis become something shameful?

Statues does not give any indication of the psychological beliefs of each individual. Fertility statues with over enlarged sexual organs does not delve into the individual feelings of people who lived during those times.

It all goes back to the fact that Constantine wanted ALL the power in his own hands. Religion has huge power and if anyone could commune with the divine by having sex with any women (especially priestesses) then he wouldn't have access to that power.

Firstly, men did not just have sex with any woman he happened to see. Women and sex were deemed to be part of a rite of passage for young men in particular. Virginity and pureness was also held in high esteem in pagan times... think about the male wanting security in the passage of his genes and his being sure that the child he was helping to care for was his own.

This isn't just an opinion of my own but if people watch "the facts behind the De Vinni code" movie and look at the books those authors have produced it is clear that this isn't how society is naturally

There is a lot of literature about sex in ancient history. But again, even they all admit that they can only go on the archaeological finds they have made and are not able to know the individual beliefs or psychology of each person in those tribal communities.

Then there are witches in the original sense. They were originally "evil women who seduced unwilling men into having sex with them to produce demon offspring. Why? why would sex with a women produce a demon?

It was never about sex with the woman as such. More about having sex with a woman who the community had viewed as being tainted by Satan, for whatever reason.

What about the current church views on contraception? why would condoms and sex be seen as a sin? in both cases the answer is because it allows the original worship of the goddess.

Incorrect. The Church's stance on contraception is based on the belief that it prevents human life from taking hold. It is seen as a direct conflict with what they view as being "God's Law" or natural law, in the sense that it is seen as being a violation of God's design and intent. Read the link for a general overview of why the Church is against contraception.

 

[Asguard]

bells i will take you on on the last one in paticular. WHY do you think sex is only viewed as a method of conciving?

We know that contriception was used in the roman empire and before and we are the only animals apart from dolphins who have sex for plesure so where does this view point come from?

Look under the surface
"interfering with gods law"? which law in paticluar?

Even the jews used to use sex as worship so it cant origionate there so where does it come from?

 

[Asguard]

bells i really think you would be interested in story behind de vinci code. In a quick google seach i found ALOT of books on the subjects.
some of them were:

The Sacred Feminine
The Goddess in the Gospels: Reclaiming the Sacred Feminine
and lots more

Edit to add:
here is an interesting site i havent had time to read yet
http://www.gotquestions.org/sacred-feminine.html

 

[Bells]

bells i will take you on on the last one in paticular. WHY do you think sex is only viewed as a method of conciving?

Conception is but one byproduct of sex. If you read the link, you would also see that the Church views pleasure through intimacy between a husband and wife as also being a gift from God.

We know that contriception was used in the roman empire and before and we are the only animals apart from dolphins who have sex for plesure so where does this view point come from?

And?

Catholics do use contraception.. just not something external or man made, such as the pill or a condom. And no, humans and dolphins are not the only animal species who have sex for pleasure.

Look under the surface
"interfering with gods law"? which law in paticluar?

God's plan... Life.. (Emphasis added for necessity).

External contraception methods is seen as being an interference with God's plan.. it interferes with life and the creation of life.

Even the jews used to use sex as worship so it cant origionate there so where does it come from?

Jews in ancient times also valued pureness and virginity, especially in the "woman" about to be married. Where do you think that comes from? If you researched properly, Judaism, as well as Christianity, view sex in a positive light, if the couple are married that is.

If you want to research the notions of the "sacred female", I'd suggest you start researching Lilith (as a starting point).

 

[Xev]

Patriarchy didn't exist until about 1500 years ago. Before then, we all frolicked in the woods singing songs and having mutually respectful sex with each other.

 

[greenberg]

What exactly is this thread about - "The demonetisation of sex, nudity and the sacred female"?

Demonetisation?

 

[Xev]

Oh, and I'm seriously confused by the implication that women, especially sex workers, had some sort of status in Roman and Greek society.

 

[Bells]

Patriarchy didn't exist until about 1500 years ago. Before then, we all frolicked in the woods singing songs and having mutually respectful sex with each other.

What the?!?

You left out the flowers in the hair?

Heathen!:bawl:

 

[Myles]

What exactly is this thread about - "The demonetisation of sex, nudity and the sacred female"?

Demonetisation?

Blessed are the poor for they shall have sex

 

[greenberg]

And they won't pay for it!

 

[Myles]

And they won't pay for it!

That's because the US government gives then sex stamps.

 

[whitewolf]

I'm putting this here on purpose so that it doesn't become a religious debate. If tiassa feels it would be better in human science fair enough (as long as it doesn't end up in religion)

I have unfortunately destroyed a debate on sexual relationships because i got side tracked into discussing this.

So firstly i would like to apologise to original for getting his thread so off topic

Now this is to discuss the oppression of women especially through the cultural changes brought about through Emperor Constantine's usurping of the Christan church to satisfy his political power.

In an effort to make sure HE and the church he controlled was the only way to worship he demonised the female and her "ability to bring the male to god" through orgasm. This was his goal and we are still paying for it through laws regarding sex and nudity. Now the main person i have been debating (bells) has constantly pointed out that putting nudity and sex together makes it seem that I cant separate them through a modern view point and i guess she has a point. However they aren't completely separate, because the best way to make worship through the female something evil is to make the female body especially but all parts of the body (male and female) something dirty, wrong and shameful.

Who as a young adult didn't feel some how embarrassed by there own development? why is this? its a natural transition and a natural act
Animals don't view sex as somehow dirty or shameful so why do we?
Why are we embarrassed by our own bodies? our ancestors wernt, there are MANY examples of statues with huge penises, penis graffiti by the Romans etc so where did the penis become something shameful?

It all goes back to the fact that Constantine wanted ALL the power in his own hands. Religion has huge power and if anyone could commune with the divine by having sex with any women (especially priestesses) then he wouldn't have access to that power.

This isn't just an opinion of my own but if people watch "the facts behind the De Vinni code" movie and look at the books those authors have produced it is clear that this isn't how society is naturally

Even the word "prostitute" has been demonised because it originally meant "priestess"

What about the image of the devil?
if you look at the image it bares a remarkable resemblance to the Greek male god of fertility (and wine i THINK). This is the origin of the term "horny",

So some of this tradition has been preserved in spite of his actions

Then there are witches in the original sense. They were originally "evil women who seduced unwilling men into having sex with them to produce demon offspring. Why? why would sex with a women produce a demon?

What about the current church views on contraception? why would condoms and sex be seen as a sin? in both cases the answer is because it allows the original worship of the goddess.

This is all wonderful and rings truth, but only for people of Judeo-Christian background. What about the rest of us?

People started covering up to protect themselves from the environment. Exposure of some bodyparts is indeed associated with sex in our minds. What, it shouldn't be? That's indeed the source of shyness. We're not used to being naked in public, because we usually need to be clothed. People begin having sex only later on in their lives, it's new to them at puberty, so when they realise that nudity might be provocative they become shy.

Prostitution is "demonised" because it is insulting to women.

Consider a different perspective: the Earth is very densely populated and if we all had sex like in the old days we'd be in trouble today, much like China and India. But even India and China don't support promiscuity.

 

[Asguard]

How is it insulting to women though?

Im trying to dig back through centuries of propergander at the hands of the most politically powerful organisation and find the truth (not an easy thing to do)

there is another thread i have running about the demonization of judas and antisemitisam in christan sociaty as well BTW

Your right that clothing DID start off as a thing of nessasity with our fur being as patchy as it is but concider the romans. They wore clothes but were quite happy to bath in multisex baths so where did "modesty" come from. Its not the clothes themselves but the "modesty" thats the problem.

As for the rest it could simply have had to do with the exchange of ideas and war that spread the virus around the world. To be honest i dont know, i have an interest in the TRUE history of the catholic church and how it has effected our world. As part of that i have had exposure to jeudasim and other christan religions but my knowlage is lacking when it comes to the easten religions so i just dont know

 

[Exhumed]

Did this topic come from a Dan Brown novel?

 

[Asguard]

partually, partually from other books, partually from a TV acheology program and partually from my own studies on the catholic church

 

[Fraggle Rocker]

No, animals do not view sex as being dirty or shameful. But they are also very selective about sex. Sex is usually relegated to the matriarch or patriarch.

That only applies to some pack-social species. Solitary animals find a mate through happenstance like most felines, or through courtship rituals like most birds, and pretty much everybody finds one mate. In canids every bitch goes out of her way to copulate with every male, so they each think all of the pups are theirs and will protect them. Some pack-social species like horses and gorillas have a patriarch. Others are like dolphins and bonobos, for whom sex is a social bonding ritual that keeps the pack running smoothly. Herd-social species may mate indiscriminately. Other pack-social species, like humans and some birds, are monogamous more or less for life.

There are no warm-blooded animals that practice sexual matriarchy because it does not serve the survival of the species for one female to get all the sex. Hive-social insects like ants and bees can do it that way because there is only one fertile female per hive and she can lay a gazillion eggs.

 

[iceaura]

There are no warm-blooded animals that practice sexual matriarchy because it does not serve the survival of the species for one female to get all the sex.

Mole rats, some wolves, hyenas, people in Nepal, and a few others.

It is rare.

Prostitution is "demonised" because it is insulting to women.

Or the other way around.

The "demonetisation" of sex altogether has been an interesting concept to explore since money was invented.

 

[whitewolf]

*BUMP* Nobody can contribute info on how the East switched from matriarchal to patriarchal societies?

How is it insulting to women though?

Your right that clothing DID start off as a thing of nessasity with our fur being as patchy as it is but concider the romans. They wore clothes but were quite happy to bath in multisex baths so where did "modesty" come from. Its not the clothes themselves but the "modesty" thats the problem.

You are right. They also had public restrooms and the great Venus was most likely a great slut. They were more free with sexuality, but it wasn't a matriarchal society, not as far as we know.

Now this is to discuss the oppression of women especially through the cultural changes brought about through Emperor Constantine's usurping of the Christan church to satisfy his political power.

In an effort to make sure HE and the church he controlled was the only way to worship[etc.]

By Constantine's time, Rome was already a patriarchal society. Ancient Greece was also patriarchal. Women did not own businesses and did not participate in the democratic process, they didn't even vote. They passed most of their times indoors and had slaves do chores outside the home. Also, because sports competitions and general fitness games were traditionally done in the nude, men and women did not exercise together and women did not compete in sports competitions.

Prostitution.... A man pays to have sex with a woman, she has no right to reject him because he pays -- that's the insult and statement of man's authority. On the flip side, if a man has to pay to have sex and can't get it for free, he has nothing to be proud of; but most men don't consider this flip side, at least not out loud.

 

[heavyarms]

In an effort to make sure HE and the church he controlled was the only way to worship he demonised the female and her "ability to bring the male to god" through orgasm. This was his goal and we are still paying for it through laws regarding sex and nudity. Now the main person i have been debating (bells) has constantly pointed out that putting nudity and sex together makes it seem that I cant separate them through a modern view point and i guess she has a point. However they aren't completely separate, because the best way to make worship through the female something evil is to make the female body especially but all parts of the body (male and female) something dirty, wrong and shameful.

I'm not entirely sure what your getting at (that's my fault!) but it seems that you are trying to say that the naked body is nothing to be angered by. And that I do agree with. I think that women should be happy about thier bodies. And not to sound like a pig but women have a body that is a gift. To give birth and provide nurishment from the same body that's a gift. However I'm selfconscios about my body. I'm a little on the chubby side. But even men have to think once in a while that women are important to life. And women should not be looked at as a piece of meat. That's why we have cows!!!! And being naked has nothing to do with sex only the act of sex is SEX!!! Hell if it weren't for the fact that I have other people living with me I would lay naked on the couch all the time. BUT I DON'T! And that's because I have my nephew that comes over and friends and family. But there is nothing wrong about nudity. You were born naked and you'll die and evetualy be naked agian.