To: K-list
Recieved: 2000/01/26 04:12
Subject: Re: [K-list] What do truly "straight" people REALLY know about
From: Ville Vainio
On 2000/01/26 04:12, Ville Vainio posted thus to the K-list:
From: Ville Vainio <vvainioATnospamtp.spt.fi>
On Tue, 25 Jan 2000, Jon-Carl Lewis wrote:
> >ascetic, elitistic, airtight versions of spirituality. Psychedelic
> >experience can be extremely heterosexual, the experiencer conjures up all
> >kinds of screwing-the-mother-earth and eternal-flow-of-glowing-flesh-life
> >fantasies. This is the same slot where the interpersonal left-hand-path
> >tantra goes. Two guys buttfucking each other just doesn't have the same
> >place in these sex-is-sacred fantasies.
> Not for you. Which is part of the point I am upset about.
>
> I and most of my "gay" friends have experienced the sacred, numinous
> power of fucking women, to be blunt.
No, no, you got me all wrong (which is probably due to my ultra-ambiguous
statement...). I am not personally advocating the sacredness of even
straight sex. Just being objective, and analyzing the thoughts of "grand
public", which in this case would mean people who are into spirituality,
but not "all the way", to the extent of kundalini... people who are into
the colourful sprit-o-sphere side of spirituality. I have had my periods
of sacred-straight-sex, but am not at present too interested in it. For
me, homosexual relationship are as sacred as hetero ones (even though I
myself am a heterosexual, and live in a common law marriage with a woman).
> It pisses me off when persons with only one-sided experience make
> pronouncements about which side of the fence is preferable, and then
> use your spiritual constructs to justify your own bias.
Again, my ambiguity was a problem here. I was not justifying anything by
my personal spiritual constructs, but imagining what might be the
justification for people that have spiritual constructs of the kind I
described. My personal spiritual constructs don't actually involve sex at
all, and I don't think of k as a sexual/gaia-energy. I have received a
flame or two concerning this topic, that is, being so boring :-).
Whether one is gay or straight, it's entirely up to the Will of Universe.
Fox is a fox and a bat is bat. Whether one is happy being the way (s)he
is, like everything else, again just the Will of the Universe.
> Being proud of one's ignorance or one's limitations is NOT something I
> would go around and trumpet.
Pride in the first place is one of the Deadly Sins, and probably among the
worst ones.
> I respect people's limitations, and I respect my own, but I try not to
> make pronouncements and judgments about things THAT DON'T AFFECT ME of
> which I have no experience.
Ditto.
> Just have some humility won't you about the experiences and spiritual
> practices (and I mean this for everybody so inclined, not just Ville)
> which happen to go beyond your own in certain places.
This is why I did not pronounce my own opinions but was being academical
(which, I assume, is very familiar to you) and analyzing what people MAY
think... and the way I *used* to think several years ago, so it was not
just blind speculation.
> btw, Ville, if you or any of these suspects of "deviant" sex -
> knowledgeable as you are - were to tell me about your experiences with
I used the term "deviant" ironically. I assumed you, having some sense of
self-irony if I remember correctly, would have taken it with a pinch of
salt. I believe that with K, *anything* can happen to thought processes,
including pedophilic/perverse tendencies (ref: Sai Baba).
I must admit that I have always had a weird sense of humour, and wearing a
set of softer gloves would be appropriate at times.
> same sex encounters, that might be an interesting discussion on how
> our PERCEPTIONS of them differed, but NOT on the basis of my version
> of absolute truth vs. your version of absolute truth.
Well, I don't have same-sex encounters.
BTW, just to make things perfectly clear, I respect your homosexuality as
much as I do my heterosexuality. My spiritual bias is with neither of
them. We are all suspect to our personal biology (heck, we *are* our
personal biology).
Ville Vainio - vvainioATnospamtp.spt.fi http://www.tp.spt.fi/~vvainio
Wild geese have no intention to cast a reflection
Water has no mind to assume their form
--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
Looking for the lowest mortgage rate? Whether you're buying,
refinancing or consolidating debt - GetSmart.com can help.
We'll help you find the loan you need - quick, and FREE:
<a href=" http://clickme.onelist.com/ad/GetSmartMortgage ">Click Here</a>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Community email addresses:
Post message: Kundalini-GatewayATnospamonelist.com
Subscribe: Kundalini-Gateway-subscribeATnospamonelist.com
Unsubscribe: Kundalini-Gateway-unsubscribeATnospamonelist.com
List owner: Kundalini-Gateway-ownerATnospamonelist.com
Shortcut URL to this page:
http://www.onelist.com/community/Kundalini-Gateway
DISCLAIMER!
Home | Archive Index | Search the archives | Subscribe
K. List FAQ | Kundalini FAQs | Signs and Symptoms | Awakening Experiences | K. list Polls | Member Essays | Meditations | List Topics | Art Gallery | Cybrary | Sitemap | Email the moderators.
symbol.