« In defense of uncertainty | Main | Celebrate your spiritual independence »

July 01, 2005

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I agree with you Brian. Oops! Let me rephrase that.


Generally, we would agree that it's ... uh-oh. Is the royal "we" (me, myself and I) permitted?


Let us try again.


Perhaps what is happening is that with such a large organization, as one can only imagine the RSSB has become, that a lot of things have to be delegated. It would seem wholly impossible for a single person, even working 24-hours a day and night, traveling through time backwards and forwards, etc. to keep up with everything that must be necessary to keep the wheels turning. I've read somewhere recently that people are practically being told to get to their knees if the Master drives by them while at the Dera. On one hand it might seem ridiculous but on the other hand, from a purely practical standpoint, I bet it sure keeps people from running after him! So maybe someone thought up this as a great idea to reduce that problem, not realizing that it appears some people are being forced to get on their knees if -- maybe they don't really like him that much or don't want to get their clothes dirty.


But back to telling personal stories. I always found personal stories to be among the most interesting. Why can't one say "I was at the grocery store this week when two people were fighting" instead of having to think up something else like "Two people were fighting at the grocery store recently..."


It's this kind of picky stuff that starts to give me a creepy feeling inside. If these kinds of rules keep piling up, can a "speaker's style encyclopedia" be far behind? I happen to find the individual expressions of each speaker to be refreshing and beautiful in their own way. Each speaker has his or her own tone, tempo, pitch, and varying personal history on the path. Even someone relatively jaded should be allowed to talk to liven things up a little. Questioning and doubt are good for us.


Recently a woman gave a wonderful speech from the book of Numbers in the Bible. (Don't panic -- it wasn't at a Satsang.) It had to do with Korach and his cronies being swallowed up by the earth or burned to a crisp by fire--no doubt my eventual fate for writing this post. Anyway, as the Israelites continued to wander in the desert, Korach challenged Moses' authority. Korach's sins resulted from this challenge --"Who went and appointed you God's representative anyway, huh?" Claiming that he instead should be the leader of the Israelites, God took them all out in a fit of anger for a lack of faith. The point being that someone has to be in charge; someone has to be higher and someone has to be lower. We don't necessarily get to decide where we fit into the picture.


The point of the whole universe appears to be diversity. It takes a whole bunch of instruments to make a symphony, and it takes a lot of colors to make a rainbow.


We shouldn't expect everyone to completely divest their personality from whatever talk they are giving, and telling people to stop using the word "I" seems like a step in the direction of turning everyone into a bunch of clones. It seems somewhat Orwellian and even "unnatural" -- (if a homosexual like me may be so bold as to use the word).


But I guess my point -- if I in fact have one at all -- is that I am hoping these kinds of instructions are coming from someone appointed to "mind the speakers" who is perhaps -- retired and bored and who doesn't have anything to do but make up rules to make people feel even more jittery or guilty about doing "something wrong" on the path like screwing up and telling a story by saying "I." Certainly whether one uses the word "I" or not does not speak to the state of a person's ego.


But then, what do I know?

Dear Brian:

I just wanted to say I loved your post on "I" is a humble word.

I find it deeply encouraging to see a satsangi (who still is giving satsangs) to speak out like this.

BRAVO!

Brain,

That's so ironic that you would write about the use of "I" in giving Satsang. I just completed writing up a Satsang from a purely scientific POV using Newton's 3 laws, I mean all 3 of his laws clearly illustrated and not just the third law everyone is so fond of quoting, and moving on. But another Satsangi asked that I submit it for publication as it is basic in that it deals with the four vows. BTW: I've read one of your books and I know you are into physics and its application to spiritual laws which are the same really. Anyway, before I read your post and the comment by Vince I was vigorously taking out all the "I's" from my Satsang.

I thought that it would be better accepted if I did so. This talk was mostly original but I spiced it up with a few quotes to make it sound more authentic, but I also found myself taking out as many of the "I" words and replacing them with "One" and switching to third person as much as possible. So I much appreciate your rescue of that little word "I."

I thank you.

Net

There are conventions that one must follow when dealing with a group of people and when speaking in public. I am a teacher by profession and I can't just get up, unprepared and say whatever the hell pops into my head, although I am wired that way to do so.

With spirituality comes responsibility and seva, or maybe that is over your turban.

Netemara

I deeply appreciate David Lane's comments. I stopped going to the local satsang about 10 years ago due to the stupidity and power-tripping I observed there. Actually I hit this kind of thing 30 years ago and 23 years ago I personally asked Charan Singh about how to view the master's representatives. He told me they were simply there for administrative purposes and I was not to look to them for any spiritual message or advise.

I also could not stomach the stuff I was reading in the monthly literature and stopped receiving them 15 years ago.

However I cannot stop going to see the master and have done this every year for some time now. I try to ignore all the other nonsense folks might say or do, as I am sure many kindly folks have done with my own stuff.

I try to keep busy doing something to make myself useful. I ignore all guesthouse talk and only use the master as my source on what is Sant Mat. The rest is all garbage, I can assure you.

Of course, I have spent my life reading original source material, from a myriad of sources to try and verify that my master Charan was teaching something in the ballpark of what other masters have taught. Lao Tse, Nanak, Plotinus, Ikhnaton, Rumi, Kabir, Thomas, Boddhidharma, Hui Keh, Hui Neng, Dogen and Plato are a few which come to mind at the moment.

Two points I'd like to touch on:

One, I used to give satsangs from more than 30 years ago, but no longer do this due to the politics I personally witnessed. In my last visit to Dera the current master said, "There are no guidelines to give a satsang." This was in response to a gal who was worried about giving a satsang back in her home area and what she could say.

When she heard the above answer she said that others might be upset with the way she gave satsang. The master said, "We are not in some popularity contest. Who cares what others think?"

Right on! (My reaction)

Second point: Please do not take a private answer to a private letter and stretch this to be an Ex-Cathedra Proclamation from the Chair of Charan on Homosexuality. That it was included in a book does not alter the original circumstance of the letter - a private answer to one person's personal problem, set in his own drama taking place in 1960's - 70's. Who knows what that individual needed to hear at that time? I can find twenty different quotes from a half-dozen Sant Mat books which conflict on the matters of sexuality.

I have a (had a) close personal friend who is a Buddhist satsangi. He is very intellectual, a PhD working for the Acedemia Sinica of Taiwan. But because of his Buddhist beliefs he felt one cannot be having sex and "go inside." So about 11 years ago I was at Dera and heard the present master telling one foreigner, "One can still be having a normal sexual relation and at the same time 'go inside.'"

Now when I told this to my buddhist, satsangi friend, he could not believe it. He told me I was twisting Sant Mat. So I found half a dozen quotes from the Sant Mat books and faxed him these quotes which definitely say there is no conflict or proscription to sex and spiritual advancement. He read them, relented and apologized. But this was the last cordial conversation we had.

This does not negate the dozen or more places in the books where there are references to sex being an impediment. These do not however negate that the converse is also included in the books. Or that the present master had not said what I heard him say.

The upshot? Master is speaking to hundreds of folks in a day. In the past (1993) he was personally answering 500 letters/day to a group of a million satsangis with a million interpretations (opinions) of what is Sant Mat.

Each individual has their own individual problems and way to solve these. These may need answers and/or solutions which are directly opposite of others' solutions.

Finally there is the old story of master Sawan telling one father to educate his daughter as in this day and age a daughter must have an education. And a few minutes later he told another father to get his daughter married as an education would be a waste of time for his daughter.

How to cut through the crap? Go to the master with your own personal question and hear your own personal answer. Or just sit and listen in general, directly to what the master has to say. The weeds crop up so fast and thick after that. You will not be able to see through them.

The PhD's tried to use Radha Soami as a model to show the growth of a religion in its infancy. I tell you it begins to grow the minute the answer leaves the master's mouth.

This graphically brings up the need of a living master. You can literally watch the weeds grow.

Perhaps tis best to ignore weeds and find the night-blooming jasmines and follow the scent of any silent one who is doing the practice and not making proclamations. But even this habit takes years to learn. I'm still pulling thistle from about the muzzle.

David, I enjoyed your interesting take on RSSB, especially the comment about there being no guidelines for giving satsang. Whew! Now I can relax.

I understand what you are saying about a guru's answer to a question being personal rather than universal. Often this does seem to be the case.

However, when a guru says something like "Homosexuality is contrary to all laws of Nature and no decent society approves it," that is a decidedly universal pronouncement and should be viewed as such.

That is, purported universal statements can be examined for accuracy, consistency, rationality, and so on. Personal statements, much less so.

If someone says, "I don't approve of gays," what can I say except, "Well, that's your opinion." But if someone says, "Homosexuality is contrary to all laws of nature," then the way is open for me to say, "I disagree, and here's why."

You spoke wisely about following the scent of any silent one who is doing the practice and not making proclamations. Nicely said.

Excuse me for breathing and beating down your male ego. That was not my intention. You protesteth too much I fear.

I think it does have to do with convention in a situation where humility is prized. I am not saying I am humble, but "fake it till you make it" comes to mind. I think that humility is overrated as I am a type A personality.

But I too agree with Brian, but you seemed to be critical and not in agreement. So if I misread your post that is not a crime.

The over your turban was a joke. IF you are not a Sikh then you don't wear one, some swamis do. Perhaps it is reference to your "All knowingness?" hmmm.

You take yourself too seriously I fear. As I answered in your private email--been on the path for 25+ years and meditating for over 30. Rarely do people agree with me. Why? Because I am independent and DO speak from experience and not from books or gurus like most do.

Netemara

Why does any church or group have to meet our standards of perfection? There are glaring problems in any church or cult. I thought that Satsangis would be more color blind and "nicer" than the average joe. I was wrong. When I went to Dera I was surprised--no one from the States talked to me or took me in as one of their own. The Europeans did however, and I wanted to leave Sant Mat because I saw so much prejudice along those lines...no different from the general population I thought and what a downer. But I have recovered from that slap and resolved that they don't know any better and accept that they don't accept me and take my place alone without complaining.

Net

I would still be leery of tagging master's comments as "universal." That was the reason I included the story from Sawan's time. One might take as universal the statement that "In this day and age a girl needs to have an education." But this is directly opposed to the statement, "An education is a waste of time for a girl; have your daughter get married."

This story was told cause of the jolt it caused the sevadar who heard the two widely different comments made, just minutes apart.

The upshot? I'd still be leery about boxing the master in and saying he is making "a proclamation." Don't take a snapshot of a statement meant to leave an impression on an individual and expand it to "a universal truth."

Else how to explain:

1. The "4 lifetimes" / "no 4 lifetimes" conflict?

2. The "draw a line somewhere, be practical and accept medicine in gelatin capsules, and d3 in milk", but then "no rennet" conflict?

3. The "sex is an impediment" / "sex is not an impediment" conflict?

4. The "It is as easy to go inside as opening a window" / "It takes a whole lifetime" conflict?

I could go on with these for some time; but I am not rattled by them and do not see them as conflicting "universal truths."

No, I would avoid putting his statements in the Ex-Cathedra category. On occasion I have heard master correct people and tell them not to take his statement as a directive.

Finally along the lines of Charan's comments on homosexuality I'd like to add that when I and other close friends were doing Polarity, one practitioner told me he found all the lesbians he was doing work on finally admitted they were victims of sexual abuse at some earlier time in their lives. So when I was still a practicing midwife I asked this of one lesbian couple I was helping to have a home-birth. The lady told me, yes this is true but all will publicly deny this. I also noted a heavy dependency on drugs and alcohol among the lesbian community.

Then there was one study which found that male homosexuals had something like 250 different partners in a year.

So from the lofty goal Charan was trying to set for folks it is hard to imagine he would accept the habits which went along with this lifestyle. Such things hollywood is want to gloss over, but Americans seem more willing to accept their "truths" and "history" from such a source.

Brian and David Lane,

Not to belabor the point but have one final comment.

In the 1970's and early 80's I was working as a male midwife, in partnership with my wife, who was also a midwife. The midwifery came first, chronologically, then our marriage and children.

I had had some concerns about the legality of midwifery, as California did not provide any licensing for lay midwives. So in the mid-seventies I had asked Roland DeVries what he thought about it. He said it was a time-honored profession and saw no problem in it, don't give it another thought.

However in 1981 I wrote master Charan SIngh about it. His answer:

"Regardless of how good you are as a male midwife, illegal is illegal. Do you expect me to endorse something which is illegal?" (This BTW explains my 1982 question about advice from reps.)

Pretty strong words, no? Could almost be viewed as one of those all encompassing "universal", "ex-cathedra" statements, eh?

But then when I went to Dera in 1982 I met a fellow from Uganda who told me personally, in a previous visit to Dera, he had brought along an empty suitcase. And the master had asked him to carry Sant Mat books into Uganda (ILLEGAL to do this at the time). Actually Idi Amin would have anyone killed for possessing a Sant Mat book, at that time.

So there you have it. "... illegal is illegal." and "Please smuggle this illegal contraband into your country ... and risk the death penalty." Which one is the ex-cathedra, eh?

If you are trying to read too much into these statements from master you will be befuddled and you will be caught in an irreconcilable conundrum.

Now pay close attention to what I am about to say.

When I wrote my letter to master in the end of 1981 it was a plea for help. Me and my wife were quite good as midwives, respected by the society, trusted by the pediatricians and the one European OB/GYN in the county, along with a few old-time GP's.

BUT ... we had our own newborn son, our own 2 year-old son and an 8 year-old step-daughter. Hard to do justice to these little ones and carry on through a long labor and delivery.

The mother was yanking the 8 year old out of school every time we had a lady go into labor. We had no back-up and even went one year, on 24 hour call, without a break. Could not be out of earshot of a phone in a whole year, day or night.

You ever watch a baby wanting to nurse while its mother was responsible for the lives of two individuals? It doesn't work too well, I can tell you. That's why the traditional granny midwife. And to see an 8 year old, yanked out of a class and plopped down to watch a 2-year old and newborn, hour after hour, while we were dealing with life and death matters was ... heart wrenching.

The topic was broached and discussed ad nauseum with the mother of the children, but she refused to own up to her motherhood. You see, she had bought into the zeitgeist of the 1970's, the Bolshevik-inspired, American-pop-culture idea of every woman needs fulfillment from a career. And kinda forgot her responsibility to her own offspring.

She had personally told me she loved being pregnant. She just didn't like raising kids.

So when I wrote that letter to Charan, in mid 1981, it was seeking a way to solve this problem. The mother was threatening divorce if I pushed our ending midwifery. And I was watching an 8 year old's education and wellbeing suffer, while witnessing an injustice to two babies. How to solve it? I wrote to Charan repeating the question to Roland.

An aside: When we started our practice any court case was going in favor of the lay midwife, if a case was ever brought to court. But by 1981 the Calif. Medical Association and the Board of Medical Quality Assurance (BMQUA) had become aggressive in pursuing these cases. The tide had begun to change and most cases were being decided against the lay midwives.

When I received that strong statement from master Charan ... no doubt, no hesitation, ... I immediately told my wife I was stopping my miwifery practice. She of course went ballistic and refused to quit. But I knew this could not go on for long, as during every birth she relied on me to take over whenever any crisis arose. She would not take the responsibility and always handed the whole affair over to my decision during any crisis situation.

I knew her days as a midwife were numbered, if I quit. The children had a more normal life after that.

Now ... how could anyone, looking from the outside, see the statement from Charan and rightly judge what was going on? What was needed to have what effect, at the time. Even a person on the inside of the situation might want to deny what was happening, or not accept or recognize the need of something till perhaps 10 or 20 years later.

And the fellow from Uganda?

He told me he worked as a customs agent. He said if he had been entering through his own airport he would not worry, as he knew all the agents there. The problem was he was entering through a different airport; one where he didn't know a single customs agent.

He told me he was really sweating it. But when he approached the customs counters who should he see but his old friend and colleague from his home airport. You see, one fellow had been seriously sick and his friend was flown into this airport to fill in for that guy.

Needless to say, the guy just waved him through. What a coincidence, eh?

BTW, MR. Sylvester Kakooza, the current Rep. in Uganda told me personally in 1982 that the previous Rep. of Uganda had been arrested for possession of Sant Mat books and was in prison awaiting death by a firing squad.

The prison warden looked over the list of folks to be executed and happened to recognize the fellow's name as his old childhood friend and classmate. He arranged for the guy to be "executed" on paper but really let him out of prison.

As Elvis might say, "A Whole Lotta Illegal Goin' On!" Eh what?

What's your priority? What's the truth?

Only you can decide that.

But please do not make master into another pope.


Obviously I cannot win or make any headway with you. In my email I directed you to my website. Today, I just posted one of thousands of journal entries in which I do experiment in the laboratory of the body as Gurinder and others have said.

I have/had a huge male ego, I know all about them if nothing else.

If the hat don't fit then you must acquit. :?

Netemara

I am not surprised that the issue of homosexuality has appeared here. On my last visit to Dera I really noticed a couple from Spain in which the woman was quite masculine in dress and appearance and was with her girlfriend. I think I thought it odd but not really. It made me notice that there were quite a few gay people who were also Satsangis. What about people who are just oversexed and not gay? Are they any higher or better than those who are?

I check and post meditation experiences often on my blog as I did today and one thing I usually make a note of when recording them for my journals is that when one is in a deep state of meditation or about to go "inside" one will register sexual arousal...still haven't figured out why completely, but there must be some sort of energy that is being transmuted. Thus sex is a part of life and death.

Then after much study of what is really going on in that lifestyle one has to conclude what David J. has mentioned two things: Lots of sex and accompanied by lots of drugs and more sex... It is a choice, a huge libido is involved and lots of practice from past lives.

Maybe people have been abused in this life but that is only because it is a repeat of how they abused others for their own gratification in past lives.

I was never a midwife but did deliver my son at home by myself after reading up on it. It is a natural state and lawmakers are out for the money in trying to ban in it so many places. It is a doctor lobby most likely. Many MDs are leaving due to huge medical malpractice suits and insurance premiums.


Netemara

Two thoughts that came to mind while reading this post and the comments:

1. Various thoughts of George Orwell's Animal Farm came to mind. But the one that persisted in sticking in my brain was the "rule" that ended up being amended to: "All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others". This thought was prompted by the topic of the "perfect master" in relation to others. Maybe it's just my quirky way of looking at things! :)

2. I find it incredibly amusing that so many people on this site (or maybe it's just the same ones posting a lot...) are very offended and protest today's "christians" being so adamantly opinionated about what they believe and the belief that their leaders are correct; yet many of those same people are behaving in a very similar way to those that they protest against. :) Again, maybe just my quirky way of seeing the world!

Anyway, that leads to my final opinion for this response: Ultimately, it doesn't matter what the "master", "pastor", "leader", "guru" (or any other title we add to someone who is greatly respected by anyone for their views) says. *gasp* Those people may have great insight and actually be correct on many things, but it's my prerogative to agree or not. And it is my "right" to have a personal journey into the spiritual without having to rely soley on what/how someone else says it should/should not be done. And, if we are all part of the universe and the universe is a part of us, then we know as much as the "perfect master". Now, whether or not we (I) accept that, or can easily get at that information, is, ultimately, up to us (me).

In this, I know I am right. For me.

:)

And *then* I read the "Basics of our faithless faith" ... here I thought I had some "profound" knowledge that I would be sharing with others here in the church of the churchless!!
:P
:D

Re: Netamaras post:

I have been gay my entire life and although I have several close lesbian friends, including my own sister, I don't know any who were abused as children--unless of course you consider the fact that I picked on her as abuse.

I also know dozens of gay men, none of whom have 250 partners a year. In fact, most of the ones I know have been in multi-year monogamous relationsips.

Please don't lump people into these wild and unsubstantiated categories. It's not nice and it's just plain ignorant.

I am not making "wild and unsubstantiated claims" but merely reporting what I have heard and seen.

This is from my own personal experience and in my circle of friends.

The study I cited was probably from pre-1978. But a quick perusal of the net brings up these not insubstantial facts:

Prior to the AIDS epidemic, a 1978 study found that 75 percent of white, gay males claimed to have had more than 100 lifetime male sex partners: 15 percent claimed 100-249 sex partners; 17 percent claimed 250-499; 15 percent claimed 500- 999; and 28 percent claimed more than 1,000 lifetime male sex partners. Levels of promiscuity subsequently declined, but some observers are concerned that promiscuity is again approaching the levels of the 1970s. The medical consequence of this promiscuity is that gays have a greatly increased likelihood of contracting HIV/AIDS, syphilis and other STDs. 


The San Francisco Public Health Department recently reported that syphilis among the city's gay and bisexual men was at epidemic levels. According to the San Francisco Chronicle:
"Experts believe syphilis is on the rise among gay and bisexual men because they are engaging in unprotected sex with multiple partners, many of whom they met in anonymous situations such as sex clubs, adult bookstores, meetings through the Internet and in bathhouses. The new data will show that in the 93 cases involving gay and bisexual men this year, the group reported having 1,225 sexual partners."15

Lesbians were three to four times more likely than heterosexual women to have sex with men who were high-risk for HIV disease-homosexual, bisexual, or IV drug-abusing men.66 The study "demonstrates that WSW [women who have sex with women] are more likely than non- WSW to engage in recognized HIV risk behaviours such as IDU [intravenous drug use], sex work, sex with a bisexual man, and sex with a man who injects drugs, confirming previous reports."67
Bacterial vaginosis, Hepatitis B, Hepatitis C, heavy cigarette smoking, alcohol abuse, intravenous drug use, and prostitution were present in much higher proportions among female homosexual practitioners.68 Intravenous drug abuse was nearly six times as common in this group.69
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:ok7JMMPUXiwJ:www.catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0075.html+Gay+promiscuity+multiple+partners&hl=en

“A 1981 study found that only 2% of homosexual could be classified as monogamous or even semi monogamous (having ten or fewer lifetime sexual partners). Source: Bell, A.P., Weinberg, M.S., Hammersmith, S.E., Sexual Preference, 1981, pp.308-9.

In a 6-month long daily sexual diary, gay men were averaging somewhere around 110 different sex partners per year. Source: Corey, L. and Holmes, K.K., " Sexual transmission of Hepatitis A in homosexual men," New England Journal of Medicine, 1980; Vol. 302, pp. 435-38.


Dr. Martin Dannecker, a homosexual German Sexologist, studied 900 homosexuals in 1991 living in "steady relationships". 83% of males had numerous sexual encounters outside their partnerships over a one-year period. Dr. Dannecker observed "clear differences in the manner of sexual gratification" between single and non-single gay men that were the reverse of what he expected. Of the homosexual men in steady relationships, he wrote, " the average number of homosexual contacts per person was 115 in the past year." In Contrast, single gay men had only 45 sexual contacts. Source: Wittmeier, Carmen, " Now they know the other half," Alberta Report, 1999 06 07, p.27.

In 1978, a study done by two homosexual doctors revealed staggering statistics. Of 685 homosexual men, 589 (83%) had 50+ partners in their lifetime, 497 (73%) had 100+, 394 (58%) had 250+, 284 (41%) had 500+, 182 exceeded 1000 partners, an astonishing 26%. And 79% noted that over half their sexual contacts were total strangers. Source: Bell, A.P. and Wienberg, M.S. " Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women " (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1978.)
50% of homosexual men over the age of 30, and 75% of homosexual men over the age of forty, experienced no relationships that lasted more than one year. Source: M. T. Saghir and E. Robins, Male and Female Homosexuality: A Comprehensive Investigation (Baltimore: Williams Wilkins, 1973), pp. 56-57.

According to the American Psychological Association, after the AIDS epidemic the average number of male homosexual partners only dropped from 70 to 50 per year. Source: Sally Ann Stewart, " AIDS Aftermath: Fewer Sex Partners among Gay Men," USA Today, 21 November 1984.

Actor Woody Harrelson admits: " Every (acting) business I ever entered into in New York seemed to have a casting couch...I've seen so many people sleep with people they loathe in order to further their ambition." Source: Stephanie Mansfield, " Wild and Woody," Chicago Sun-Times, USA Weekend section, July 5-7, 1996, p. 5.

A Los Angeles Study of young homosexual males in 1996 revealed that about 50% of those between 15 to 22 years of age had engaged in " high-risk, unprotected sex" during the previous 6 months. Source: Bettina Boxall, " Young Gays stray from Safe Sex, New Data Shows," Los Angeles Times, September 3, 1996, sec. A.

In the July 1999 issue of " Out Magazine ", there was an article about a lesbian and a gay guy who decide to get married. The lesbian, Lisa, explains the limitations of their relationship, " I had huge performance anxieties, I mean, the total number of men whose bodies I'd touched and tried to please was, you know, 9. That was, like, the total number of men Bro (her gay husband) would try to please in a weekend...We'd drive out to the Palisades in the evening and talk and talk and talk, then I'd drop him off to go have sex in bathrooms." Source: Miles, Sara, " He kissed a girl," Out Magazine, July 1999, pp.51-53.

Dr. Martin Dannecker, a homosexual German Sexologist, studied 900 homosexuals in 1991 living in "steady relationships". 83% of males had numerous sexual encounters outside their partnerships over a one-year period. Dr. Dannecker observed "clear differences in the manner of sexual gratification" between single and non-single gay men that were the reverse of what he expected. Of the homosexual men in steady relationships, he wrote, " the average number of homosexual contacts per person was 115 in the past year." In Contrast, single gay men had only 45 sexual contacts. Source: Wittmeier, Carmen, " Now they know the other half," Alberta Report, 1999 06 07, p.27.

Men's Health magazine reported in June that (heterosexual) men, on average, have 12.4 sex partners (in a lifetime), and have sex 1.5 times per week. These numbers may seem low to many gay men, who generally exercise greater sexual freedom than their heterosexual counterparts. But for a person who is sexually compulsive these numbers may seem shockingly low. Frequent sexual encounters may be accompanied by feelings or guilt and minor consequences. Ken (a gay man) suffers from Sexual Addiction, "It's just so much easier to have anonymous sex with someone I don't know. There is this buildup of excitement and a sexual rush, hoping the other guy will notice me...want me. After we connect, I just lose myself in the sex. It's really not about knowing the guy. I rarely even want to know his name. When it's over, I can simply walk away, " said Ken. Among the problems caused by sexual addiction in "gay" men is one of the most common of contracting frequent and/or multiple sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) ( i.e., HIV, syphilis, chlamydia, gonorrhea, etc.). Source: Shaun Bourget, M.A., M.F.T., " Sexual Addition: On a Road to Nowhere," GayHealth.com; July 26,2000.”

Above quotes from:
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:aYaD3aguI08J:www.cprmd.org/Myths/Myth_Fact_002.htm+Number+of+partners+year+Gay+males&hl=en


“ … there is no real scientific evidence of a gay gene or any other physical characteristic. There is, however, credible evidence linking it to environmental and abuse factors. The infamous twin studies tend more to prove environmental factors, according to Dr. William Byne in Scientific American (5/94), where he also reported no credible evidence at all that there were any physical or genetic factors causing homosexuality. He was viciously criticized for this and he responded, "I'm told my criticism is not politically correct... What they're saying, therefore, is that I should subjugate scientific rigor to political expediency. This is precisely what has happened today in our media and schools where none of this evidence is mentioned or allowed. Any who bring it up are shouted down or expelled.


A 1997 International Journal of Epidemiology study of gay men in Vancouver, British Columbia found the average lifespan for gay men to be between 40 and 50 years old. Recent critics of this study have attempted spin control by lamenting that it came out before protease inhibitors began to cut the AIDS death rate. This is true, but, it is equally true that since then protease inhibitors have become much less effective as the AIDS virus adapted and gay men's behavior veered back to high risk activity that caused the problem in the first place. Reports now show a frightening increase in AIDS death rates among gay men.

Also taboo from any modern media reports are details of exactly what this high risk behavior entails. Small wonder when one considers that having dozens of sexual partners in a weekend and hundreds or more over a lifetime is part of it for a large number of gay men (Journal of Sex Research 34 1997). This is anything but "safe" or "normal". Are promiscuous gay couples like this fit to adopt children?) Research also shows only 2% of gays are monogamous, the rest have multiple partners, and they say they have the right to adopt? (A book ought to be written; "Johnny has 80 Daddies"). A 1997 CDC report found 68% of those who reported having "unprotected" gay sex and multiple partners did not know the HIV status of their partners. Research finds that this unprotected, often violent sex, makes matters very risky.

There is also much evidence that homosexual activists are working to lower or eliminate age of sexual consent laws. The liberal media has chosen to ignore this and the statistical link between homosexuality and pedophilia, but the Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy (Spring, 1992), showed that homosexuals are 15 to 35 times more likely to become pedophiles than heterosexuals. It reported that homosexuals abuse an average of 7.5 times more victims (150 victims vs. 20) than do heterosexual pedophiles. No wonder the Boy Scouts disallow gay leaders or scouts. They've dealt with well over 1000 cases of boys being abused by gay scout leaders.”

http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:RBXbRpWJHmcJ:www.samizdat.qc.ca/vc/sexe/c_facts_rr.htm+Gay+promiscuity+multiple+partners&hl=en&lr=&strip=1

Sorry, but the above post should be in my name "David Johnson"

Obviously you feel very strongly about this issue.

As a personal observation over the years, what I have noticed time and again, is that men who have the biggest problem with homosexuality often feel the most threatened by their own attraction to men.

When I worked at an Oregon radio station in the early 1980's, it wasn't the typical "gay" guy who came on to me, it was the 60-something "straight" man who was one of the most conservative talk show hosts in all of Oregon.

A more recent example would be the mayor of Spokane who was outed by the Spokane Review--one of those "liberal media" I'm sure you refer to. The mayor was chatting up and trying to get internships for young boys in his office on a gay internet site. Naturally, this "straight" man had a history of voting against gay rights and campaigning against gay issues.

These stories appear all the time.

I've found throughout my life that where extreme homophobia exists, it's usually by someone who still needs to come to grips with their own sexuality and the fact that it is a scientific fact (read any major magazines and scientific studies lately?) that it's a nature issue, not a nurture issue.

In my experience, straight men who aren't threatened by gay men are generally more comfortable with their own sexuality and don't have to make issues over what other adults are doing in their bedrooms.

Steve,

First I felt your post to Netmara was indirectly pointing to my comments since it included the 250 partners/yr reference. Basically mine was a response to your statement inferring I was ..." lump[ing] people into these wild and unsubstantiated categories. It's not nice and it's just plain ignorant."

If these were not directed to me, then my mistake, sorry.

However, my experience and recollection of figures was pretty well born out by the list of facts from studies I provided.

Also I was responding to an indirect attack (seen in this thread and others) on my master, Charan Singh, trying to infer his ideas are somehow outmoded or totally ridiculous.

Again I think my short list of quotes/facts puts things, including Charan's views, in a more balanced view.

BTW your conclusions of the last post would have to lead one to believe that Charan himself was a closet homo. The idea is ludicrous. And as for the mini psycho-analysis of myself, it couldn't have been further off the mark. One of the main obstacles of treading the spiritual path, for me, has always been a strong attraction to the ladies.

I'm happy to say that after years of experience and meditation, this has lessened considerably. And not to be replaced by an attraction to men, but a general feeling of love for everyone, not singling out any particular person. Kinda a slow-burn, general feeling of warmth for most anyone I meet. And it is far from that gnawing passion of lust to have and briefly posses a raving beauty.

For now those raving beauties appear with all the warts of grasping greed, the disfigurement of anger and raw ego becoming more apparently visible. I gotta tell ya, It just breaks through the "magic" vaneer of "the chase" personality and painted "beauty."

And no I don't think Charan was asexual or I am "avoiding my sexuality," it just naturally occurs that another avenue appears. One more warm and which produces more happiness. Kinda a transmutaion of that old energy. No denials.

So I sincerely wish you the best in your life and just want to say, in general(because I am not saying you did this) to not judge a master like Charan nor try to lump him into some wild, unsubstantiated category.

LOL. No, I would be the last one to judge Charan Singh. I've had enough experiences in my life to have faith that God is with me through Charan Singh, and also through my Reform Judaism and through my Southern Baptist upbringing. I have found God in all these religions, and things about each of them are beautiful.

I would like to see statistics from the current century, including comparative statistics of heterosexual single men alongside gay men who are obviously mostly single -- because society forces them to be.

I think that if one expects gay men to act like "married" men and not like single men, then they should be allowed to get married.

Soon and for the very first time in history, in a few countries in Europe and all across Canada, actual meaningful role models will be allowed to appear without fear of reprisal, with full knowledge that their partnerships will be accorded all the appropriate legal rights.

And we will see things begin to change. I have faith in that, too.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Welcome


  • Welcome to the Church of the Churchless. If this is your first visit, click on "About this site--start here" in the Categories section below.
  • HinesSight
    Visit my other weblog, HinesSight, for a broader view of what's happening in the world of your Church unpastor, his wife, and dog.
  • BrianHines.com
    Take a look at my web site, which contains information about a subject of great interest to me: me.
  • Twitter with me
    Join Twitter and follow my tweets about whatever.
  • I Hate Church of the Churchless
    Can't stand this blog? Believe the guy behind it is an idiot? Rant away on our anti-site.