As It Is ~ SEX
THIS ARTICLE WILL
probably be the first one that some people will pick
out from the Contents to read; fascinating subject,
The principal religions of the World?Hinduism,
Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam?have always
been, and still are, male dominated; they consider
women inferior to men, and give them lower positions.
Some changes are slowly taking place to this attitude
in Christianity, largely because it is a 'Western'
religion, and women in the West are much more aware
of their 'rights' than women in other parts, but they
are minor changes, and we can never imagine a female
Pope. In the other religions, there is little evidence
of even this much change, however, and this is especially
surprising in the case of Buddhism, which advocates
but does not always practice equality.
Why women do not question more the treatment
they have received and suffered under male-made religion,
and demand nothing less than equal treatment is a
mystery, for without their vital role, the human race
would soon become extinct. It would be well for the
Popes and other leaders of religion?and in fact men
generally?to recall that their mothers are/were all
women, and that women form half the total population
of the world.
Now, anyone who suggests that men and women
are equal is severely deluded; they are not equal,
but different and each has roles to play that the
other cannot play. There is no question about being
equal. However, we can, with a little understanding,
try to treat each other equally and fairly, be we
male or female, just as we like others to treat us.
And if religions were firmly based on this principle,
and it were widely observed instead of believed, there
would be far less conflict and confusion in the world
than there is; that's for sure.
But before we can bring about some change
in this direction, we must understand something of
how the existing state of things has come into being.
Are there any valid natural reasons why women should
be regarded as in any way inferior to men? If anything,
childbearing should make them superior, because although
the part of the male in this is indispensable, his
contribution is very brief, and the woman is left
to carry the burden.
Superstition and male fear and envy of women's
unique ability to bring forth new life have caused
women to be relegated to a lower position and sadly,
most of them have accepted this with little more than
an occasional whimper until now. Is there nothing
they can do about it short of abandoning religion
altogether, as many women as well as men have already
done? Of course there is! Men need women, do they
not? I don't mean in just a sexual sense, and for
the sake of reproduction, but without women?who are,
in general, the main supporters? organized religion
would soon wither away. Anyone who has been to Thailand,
for example, and gone out in the early morning, will
probably have noticed that it is the women rather
than the men who wait outside their homes to offer
food to the monks as they come along with their alms-bowls.
No women, no monks; it's as simple as that.
Now, let us talk a little about sex. In
this time of AIDS, the facade from behind which we
used to view it has been rudely torn away, and we
cannot afford to be coy about it now. We are sexual
beings, and the sexual or creative urge is very strong.
People do it; we've all come through it; thank goodness
the old taboos about the subject have gone?or largely
gone?and we can talk about it today.
Oh, we have always talked about it, but
mostly as a secret or dirty thing, something to joke
about, and not as a thing to be discussed in polite
company. In the Victorian era, it was unmentionable,
but large families were the rule rather than the exception;
obviously action was more important than the word.
And it is now being said?and written?which gives it
more credence, though we certainly should not believe
everything that is written or said, and that is why
I have qualifyingly written "it is said"?that
Queen Victoria, Empress of India and the Dominions,
and titular head of the largest empire the world has
ever seen, had several lovers after the death of her
husband, including one of her Indian servants. She
is also said to have requested to be buried with a
lock of hair and a photograph of her Scottish attendant,
her final beau!
It is claimed of Mary, the mother of Jesus
of Nazareth, that she conceived her son without help
from his father. Well, knowledge of biology and anatomy
was scant in ancient times, and claims of supernatural
births were quite common; Mary was not unique in this.
Mahamaya, the mother of Prince Siddhartha, who later
became the Buddha, was also said to have conceived
in a miraculous way, and? one up on Mary? to have
given birth to her son from her side, instead of in
the ordinary manner!
In spite of what I might say about this,
many people will continue to cling onto these 'gilded
lily’ stories. Well, I don't remember it, but
my mother told me that I was brought by a stork. Does
that make me a storkling? No wonder I have a long
The Jewish/Christian Bibles? and the Hindu
scriptures, too? have certified childbirth as something
dirty, impure, and therefore shameful. In the book
of Leviticus of the Old Testament, Chapter 12, it
1. And the Lord spoke
unto Moses, saying:
2. Speak unto the Children
of Israel, saying: If a woman have conceived seed,
and born a man-child, then she shall be unclean seven
days; according to the days of her separation for
her infirmity shall she be unclean.
3. And in the eighth
day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised.
4. And she shall then
continue in the blood of her purifying three and thirty
days; she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come
into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying
shall be fulfilled.
5. But if she bare
a maid-child, then she shall be unclean two weeks,
as in her separation; and she shall continue in the
blood of her purifying three score and six days.
6. And when the days
of her purifying are fulfilled, for a son, or for
a daughter, she shall bring a lamb of the first year
for a burnt offering, and a young pigeon, or a turtledove,
for a sin offering, unto the door of the tabernacle
of the congregational, unto the priest:
7. Who shall offer
it before the Lord, and make an atonement for her;
and she shall be cleansed from the issue of her blood.
This is the law for her that hath born a male or a
8. And if she not be
able to bring a lamb, then she shall bring two turtles,
or two young pigeons; the one for the burnt offering,
and the other for a sin offering; and the priest shall
make an atonement for her, and she shall be clean."
How many points of gross and cruel superstition
can you, dear reader, find here? How strange? how
ridiculous! ? that even after 4,000 years, we are
still being affected by them! They have conditioned
our collective attitude towards women, for one thing;
for another, they have instilled in people the baseless
and horrific belief that sin can be washed away by
blood; they also show Dracula in a more favorable
light as compared with the bloodthirsty God of the
Bible, Jehovah. There are other points, too; do some
homework yourself, and try to find them.