Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Native Americans where the first to accept homosexuality weren't they?
'Who are the Elders?"
Hi, Luv. The Elders refers to the elders of the tribe, where Simon was invited to a wedding. I gather that, since Simon himself is an elder (see his website), and a foreign guest, he was invited to sit with the elders.
Interesting wording of your other question. It's not so much that they "accepted" it, which implies that it was a foreign element to their culture. I can't speak for all tribes, but homosexuality has been just a normal part of life, sort of ho-hum, *yawn*, "What is it you white folks are fussing on about?" sort of thing. In terms of gay marriage, that's interesting. When some states passed laws banning gay marriage, one of the Eastern tribes was so mad, they said everyone can come to their tribe and get married there (sorry, I don't remember which tribe). The tribes don't fall under Federal or State law with regard to many things, and marriage is one of them. I don't think all tribes have this policy, but it's an interesting loophole.
Wesley Thomas, co-author of the book I recommended, was researching mores relating to gays on the Navajo Nation (Arizona, New Mexico), when he was unexpectedly approached by some elders who invited him to a certain corner of the rez, where a very old tradition still survives. The people there believe that Two-Spirit people are holy people, and they take the role of spiritual leaders. It is thought that Two-Spirits are unique and highly spiritually-gifted individuals. This has parallels in other parts of the world, where shamans and healers traditionally have been Two-Spirits, or as is the case in Siberian shamanism, the healer used to dress in women's clothing when he did his trance ceremony. This assumes, though, that traditional healers are men; in the past anthropologists have tended to overlook the women healers. I don't know if there's a similar Two-Spirit tradition relating to women healers anywhere.
I guess this still pertains to "Sex in America", though it diverges from the OP's theme
That was a misunderstanding. I said "non-macho guys", meaning hetero guys who are turned off by the macho stereotype. Young hetero men who want to be more gentle, thoughtful sorts have a difficult time finding role models in the US. A couple of young men I spoke to about this said that in college, they hung out with the gay professors. All well and good, but why is there not much "in-between" in US culture?
I thought it might be, hence the ":p". And I don't know, it's a shame :-/
Hi, Luv. The Elders refers to the elders of the tribe, where Simon was invited to a wedding. I gather that, since Simon himself is an elder (see his website), and a foreign guest, he was invited to sit with the elders.
Interesting wording of your other question. It's not so much that they "accepted" it, which implies that it was a foreign element to their culture. I can't speak for all tribes, but homosexuality has been just a normal part of life, sort of ho-hum, *yawn*, "What is it you white folks are fussing on about?" sort of thing. In terms of gay marriage, that's interesting. When some states passed laws banning gay marriage, one of the Eastern tribes was so mad, they said everyone can come to their tribe and get married there (sorry, I don't remember which tribe). The tribes don't fall under Federal or State law with regard to many things, and marriage is one of them. I don't think all tribes have this policy, but it's an interesting loophole.
Wesley Thomas, co-author of the book I recommended, was researching mores relating to gays on the Navajo Nation (Arizona, New Mexico), when he was unexpectedly approached by some elders who invited him to a certain corner of the rez, where a very old tradition still survives. The people there believe that Two-Spirit people are holy people, and they take the role of spiritual leaders. It is thought that Two-Spirits are unique and highly spiritually-gifted individuals. This has parallels in other parts of the world, where shamans and healers traditionally have been Two-Spirits, or as is the case in Siberian shamanism, the healer used to dress in women's clothing when he did his trance ceremony. This assumes, though, that traditional healers are men; in the past anthropologists have tended to overlook the women healers. I don't know if there's a similar Two-Spirit tradition relating to women healers anywhere.
I guess this still pertains to "Sex in America", though it diverges from the OP's theme
It's weird isn't it? That humans clearly naturally don't made a difference between homosexuality and heterosexuality. But then something happened and in many cultures a chasm opened up between the two. Presently it is beginning to heal up again, but its worrying to think it might begin to crack open in the near future :-/
Actually, Jellybean, most traditional cultures did not have a problem with homosexuality and accepted it as just another way of being, not even differentiating it as "homosexuality". In Japan and Greece it was an accepted social institution, as it was amongst Native American tribes. In some tribes all a man had to do was start dressing like a woman and performing women's chores, and he would be accepted as he was. And then the mosaic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) came along to upset the whole thing and introduce sexual discrimination.
Actually, Jellybean, most traditional cultures did not have a problem with homosexuality and accepted it as just another way of being, not even differentiating it as "homosexuality". In Japan and Greece it was an accepted social institution, as it was amongst Native American tribes. In some tribes all a man had to do was start dressing like a woman and performing women's chores, and he would be accepted as he was. And then the mosaic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) came along to upset the whole thing and introduce sexual discrimination.
Palzang
I'm terrified of political Islam myself (no racism intended). And I said about people being naturally non-homophobic. When you say dressing up in women's clothes and doing women's chores, do you mean for homosexuals or transsexuals?
It's nice to see you anyway, where have you been recently?
I don't think the Native Americans differentiated between homosexual and transsexual. It was more a giving up of men's tradition role in the tribe and adopting that of women. The man could be homosexual or transsexual, but those are our terms.
Yes, I know, I've been missing of late. Can't seem to find myself anywhere! No, actually I've been in the process of moving back to Arizona. We're starting a study group here soon. It's been a very difficult move, and I don't have a job yet nor any prospects of one anytime soon as the economy is here is in the toilet. But I was asked to come, so I couldn't say no. It'll work out. It's just getting difficult for this old monk to do this stuff!
It's weird isn't it? That humans clearly naturally don't made a difference between homosexuality and heterosexuality. But then something happened and in many cultures a chasm opened up between the two. Presently it is beginning to heal up again, but its worrying to think it might begin to crack open in the near future :-/
About the "something happened", I'm wondering if you might be able to answer a Q I've had in regard to homosexuality in European history. I saw a film a long time ago that was set around the Medieval era or a little later, and there seemed to be a lot of sexual diversity back then, that was just part of normal human, cultural, and racial diversity. So I'm wondering if the something that happened might not be the Inquisition and later Puritanism. Those events brought radical changes to European culture, so it seems like a good guess. Does anyone know? I gather from comments here that in Europe, things are beginning to get back to "normal".
More news from the anthropology front:
The Inca god, Viracocha, was bisexual. Nowadays probably most Quechua-speaking people would deny that, due to very strong influence from the Catholic Church. But it points toward the strong possibility that there was more diversity in Native culture in the Andes at one time, than there is now.
In the Pacific Island nations, "Two-Spirit" men dress as women, and some perform traditional dances as women, including in the revues for tourists. nobody bats an eye, except for the few eagle-eyed tourists, who notice there's something unusual about some of the dancers. Mothers interviewed by anthropologists, and asked how many boys, how many girls they have, have answered something like: "I have 4 girls and 3 boys. No, wait--one of my girls is a boy. I have 3 girls and 4 boys." It's so natural to accept their children in the roles they've chosen for themselves, that even the parents forget who is who.
OK, now we're really off the OP's topic!
P.S. Does it seem to you that the term "homosexual" has become somewhat emotionally loaded? Or is it just me? Or is it just the US? I'm tending toward the term "Two-Spirit", as you've undoubtedly noticed. It seems to carry less baggage.
I'm tending toward the term "Two-Spirit", as you've undoubtedly noticed. It seems to carry less baggage.
Probably because no one would have the slightest idea of what you're talking about!
I think the whole issue of what is the PC term to use for one's sexuality is a little over the top. It really doesn't matter, does it? What's really important is to accept everyone as they are rather than how we think they should be. If we could only accomplish that, what a happier world we would live in!
Yes. I figured that in the context of our discussion, people would understand "Two-Spirits". My point was more that I was a little uncomfortable with the term "homosexual", and I didn't know if that was because society (at least here in the US) had pinned negative connotations on it, or where that sense was coming from. (see: "Is it just me?") Actually, the term seems a little old-fashioned. But your point is probably, "Why quibble?" OK. No more quibbling, Palzang-la.
Homosexual like every other word created doesn't have a substantial meaning. Any negative connatation springs from the basic human habit of shunning the "different".
I see homophobia is no different to any other discrimination out there.
I think perhaps in maybe one, semi-European country homosexuality is illegal, but I'm pretty sure 99.99 percent of the countries in Europe have made homosexuality legal, several have allowed marriage, a couple dozen adoption, many allow homosexual soldiers, over half ban at least some discrimination, and a significant majority allow registered partnerships, so I think Europe is quite liberal.
Does anyone know what caused the transition in Europe from acceptance of sexual diversity (Middle Ages, roughly) to rejection of homosexuality? Was it the Inquisition and subsequent purges?
Does anyone know what caused the transition in Europe from acceptance of sexual diversity (Middle Ages, roughly) to rejection of homosexuality? Was it the Inquisition and subsequent purges?
Sodomy was proscribed long before the Inquisition. It was so abhorred that legend has it that Edward II died after being sodomised with a red-hot poker (1327). The Romans also, in general, despised it.
Sodomy was proscribed long before the Inquisition. It was so abhorred that legend has it that Edward II died after being sodomised with a red-hot poker (1327). The Romans also, in general, despised it.
Yes, I'm glad they made it illegal. We all know how much it turns us all on to stick a red-hot poker up our bottom.
I think perhaps in maybe one, semi-European country homosexuality is illegal, but I'm pretty sure 99.99 percent of the countries in Europe have made homosexuality legal, several have allowed marriage, a couple dozen adoption, many allow homosexual soldiers, over half ban at least some discrimination, and a significant majority allow registered partnerships, so I think Europe is quite liberal.
What's a "semi-European country"? Let me guess: Bulgaria? Serbia? Do I win a prize for guessing correctly?
These homophobic and puritanical attitudes prevail here in South Carolina. Believe me. I've been here for 16 years.
(note: I am heterosexual, always have been, and I plan to remain that way through this life. However, I also feel that people are entitled to their preferences as long as they do not harm others - I detest paedophiles and rapists and misogynists.)
I'm not sure that the attitudes Simon ran into in Oklahoma are representative of the US population at large. And I can't help wondering if the 60's and 70's didn't do away with some of that Puritanism, at least on the more liberal East and West Coast. Are 60's and 70's generation parents more likely to talk to their kids about sex, more comfortable with that?
(note: I am heterosexual, always have been, and I plan to remain that way through this life. However, I also feel that people are entitled to their preferences as long as they do not harm others - I detest paedophiles and rapists and misogynists.)
It's nice to have you on board with these issues, Q, but "detest" seems like a strong word for a Buddhist. Sounds a little like attachment to negative emotions. Not that I don't get a bit worked up about these unpleasant realities myself. (Do I hear raucous laughter in the background? Some of the readers here have been acquainted with my concerns. :rolleyes: ) But what I try to do, whenever possible, is look at the personal history of the perp. Often you'll find some form of child abuse at the root of this type of disturbed behavior. Looking at the perp as a human being, rather than a monster, can help difuse these emotions. Though it can be challenging, especially for vicitims. I think that if child abuse in all forms could be eliminated from the human experience, there would be a lot less crime. (Hey, I can dream, can't I?)
Often you'll find some form of child abuse at the root of this type of disturbed behavior... I think that if child abuse in all forms could be eliminated from the human experience, there would be a lot less crime. (Hey, I can dream, can't I?)
Yes! Please dream on Dakini, and give all of us a draught of what you're drinking! Inculcating in members of society the importance of raising children in safe and loving environments is paramount. As Wordsworth said:
My heart leaps up when I behold
A rainbow in the sky:
So was it when my life began;
So is it now I am a man;
So be it when I shall grow old,
Or let me die!
The Child is father of the Man;
I could wish my days to be
Bound each to each by natural piety.
It must surely be a great, great sin to ruin a young life by imposing a malevolent will or worse on them. There must surely be the worst sort of karma attached to that, too. Surely, any additional condemnations we might add will accomplish nothing for the victims. Short-term it riles up attitudes that a few would-be perpetrators might possibly take as warnings to clean up their acts, but long-term such second-hand lessons will be forgotten.
Only by accepting our fallen brothers as tragic figures in need of some compassion can we address any real solutions. Without compassion there can be no possibility of the dialogue needed to flush out the pertinent facts and arrive at the understandable country where these foul or merely vicious deeds fermented. Once having crossed the boundaries our assumptions would make uncrossable, we can then scout that country for the mines and factories where these unskillful artifacts were extracted and refined.
Getting into the mind of an abusive parent or a genocidal maniac can only be done with compassion. Those who want to know the facts must be prepared to have their hearts broken.
It's nice to have you on board with these issues, Q, but "detest" seems like a strong word for a Buddhist. Sounds a little like attachment to negative emotions. Not that I don't get a bit worked up about these unpleasant realities myself. (Do I hear raucous laughter in the background? Some of the readers here have been acquainted with my concerns. :rolleyes: ) But what I try to do, whenever possible, is look at the personal history of the perp. Often you'll find some form of child abuse at the root of this type of disturbed behavior. Looking at the perp as a human being, rather than a monster, can help difuse these emotions. Though it can be challenging, especially for vicitims. I think that if child abuse in all forms could be eliminated from the human experience, there would be a lot less crime. (Hey, I can dream, can't I?)
Yes! Please dream on Dakini, and give all of us a draught of what you're drinking! Inculcating in members of society the importance of raising children in safe and loving environments is paramount. As Wordsworth said:
My heart leaps up when I behold
A rainbow in the sky:
So was it when my life began;
So is it now I am a man;
So be it when I shall grow old,
Or let me die!
The Child is father of the Man;
I could wish my days to be
Bound each to each by natural piety.
It must surely be a great, great sin to ruin a young life by imposing a malevolent will or worse on them. There must surely be the worst sort of karma attached to that, too. Surely, any additional condemnations we might add will accomplish nothing for the victims. Short-term it riles up attitudes that a few would-be perpetrators might possibly take as warnings to clean up their acts, but long-term such second-hand lessons will be forgotten.
Only by accepting our fallen brothers as tragic figures in need of some compassion can we address any real solutions. Without compassion there can be no possibility of the dialogue needed to flush out the pertinent facts and arrive at the understandable country where these foul or merely vicious deeds fermented. Once having crossed the boundaries our assumptions would make uncrossable, we can then scout that country for the mines and factories where these unskillful artifacts were extracted and refined.
Getting into the mind of an abusive parent or a genocidal maniac can only be done with compassion. Those who want to know the facts must be prepared to have their hearts broken.
Yes, those are strong words. In my day-job in computer security (I left clinical practice years ago because I was tired of insurance company nurses trying to tell me, a physician, how to practice) doing computer forensics I have seen things that I strongly suspect would make most of you physically ill. Yes, obviously have attachment problems. I prefer to think of them as an attachment to preventing young girls from being raped by 50+ year old men and then other perverts watching videos of the event.
Yes, these people have serious problems. I will agree that I could have worded it a little more gently. I detest rape, paedophilia, and misogyny (and mysandry for whoever brought that up). I also have some strong feelings against racism.
All people should be treated with respect and dignity. To paraphrase the Declaration of Independence of the United States, all people are created equal. I just want people to treat others appropriately.
It's nice to have you on board with these issues, Q, but "detest" seems like a strong word for a Buddhist. Sounds a little like attachment to negative emotions. Not that I don't get a bit worked up about these unpleasant realities myself. (Do I hear raucous laughter in the background? Some of the readers here have been acquainted with my concerns. :rolleyes: ) But what I try to do, whenever possible, is look at the personal history of the perp. Often you'll find some form of child abuse at the root of this type of disturbed behavior. Looking at the perp as a human being, rather than a monster, can help difuse these emotions. Though it can be challenging, especially for vicitims. I think that if child abuse in all forms could be eliminated from the human experience, there would be a lot less crime. (Hey, I can dream, can't I?)
Yes, I push the point of heterosexuality. Sorry. It's a side-effect of living down here in Homophobia central - South Carolina. If you say anything in defense of homosexuality, you're automatically assumed to be a homosexual unless you quickly offer a disclaimer.
I'm sorry if my rapid disclaimer offended anyone. I think of homosexuality like Resses cups - perfectly fine, but just not my preference.
With regard to mysandry, I never encountered that in school, but that was a long time ago for me. I'm sorry that you're encountering that. It is just as wrong as misogyny, but not as widely recognized.
Detesting and strong vindictive lashing out against perpetrators of these crimes that prey on others has to be balanced with compassionate caring. That is what I firmly believe.
I think that strong taboos —even when justified on moral grounds— get in the way of people being able and willing to face their problems head-on. I think this is because people cannot address all their psychosexual problems alone and either need a willing sexual partner or a therapist of sorts. But if a therapist is duly bound to report anything of a "serious nature" that comes to his attention in the private encounters, there can be no progress. If the attorney-client relationship is safeguarded by law, why can't the counselor/priest/psychologist-client relationship also be inviolate? Without help, Jeffrey Dahmer and people like him can turn into real monsters.
Condemning others solves nothing. It only aggravates the core problem, which is essentially that people are lonely and do not have much insight into ways they can better pursue the art of living. That is why taking a compassionate approach is necessary, so that we can first understand the scope of the loneliness, secondly get some idea of the nature of the "depravity," and lastly apply our knowledge and love to some kind of solution. In time, we can then have better charts and graphs of what things people living in loveless environments can do, and we can then educate each other to be better stewards of our environments and more keen greeters and embracers of our lonely brethren.
It's scandalous how we allow things to fester by having such punishing hearts in the first place. If we are to know the truth, we must not approach things with our defenses all drawn up around us like a clam in its shell. When we condemn we do just that: we shut the other out and say that the world is simply not big enough for the two of us. That attitude is not only arrogant, but unrealistic; indeed, it's incapable of meeting the challenge justly. Just because people might seem radically different and even inferior on some levels does not mean we are entitled to have different ways of dealing with them.
In the days when, in London, I was getting counselling referrals from the courts, I saw a number of paedophiles. Apart from one, who simply wanted to stop feeling guilty, all the others wanted to find ways of keeping children and themselves safe.
Involved as I am in discussions about child protection in our churches, it strikes me that the apparently visceral hatred expressed towards the perpetrators is a real barrier to finding enduring solutions, both for the haters and the objects of the aversion.
If we are to view all sentient beings with the compassion of a parent for their only child, this must challenge us in our attitude towards paedophiles, however much we rationalise our disgust.
Yes, those are strong words. In my day-job in computer security (I left clinical practice years ago because I was tired of insurance company nurses trying to tell me, a physician, how to practice) doing computer forensics I have seen things that I strongly suspect would make most of you physically ill. Yes, obviously have attachment problems. I prefer to think of them as an attachment to preventing young girls from being raped by 50+ year old men and then other perverts watching videos of the event.
Yes, these people have serious problems. I will agree that I could have worded it a little more gently. I detest rape, paedophilia, and misogyny (and mysandry for whoever brought that up). I also have some strong feelings against racism.
All people should be treated with respect and dignity. To paraphrase the Declaration of Independence of the United States, all people are created equal. I just want people to treat others appropriately.
Out of curiosity, what year was that declaration made?
Despise really isn't inappropriate on this discussion.
I'd like to extend a bit of compassion to Querist, recognizing that he or she is in a really stressful job, emotionally stressful. I would think that viewing the type of material he/she does, week after week, year after year, could take a toll. I can't help but ask if Q is taking measures to handle the stress, self-care measures. Stress can accumulate for those who are on the front lines of fighting crime or injustice, and can lead to burnout. You'd be surprised what an effect getting massage regularly can have; it shuts off the stress hormones, stimulates the production of feel-good endorphines, and can make like look rosy, or at least, cope-able again. (Your job sounds anything but rosy.) Or maybe talking to a professional who could advise as to how to manage the stress of the job. Maybe you've already thought of all this, Q. I'm glad you're with us, and I understand your feelings about these issues. Hopefully, you're taking care of yourself. Sorry to hear that we lost a good physician due to the insurance bureaucracy, or whatever it was that caused you to quit.
Misandry in the schools? Boys used to be favored in school, though I've read articles in the last decade that say things have changed. Could you elaborate, Luv?
July 4, 1776 for the Declaration of Independence. That's the "official" date, anyway, though technically it was written earlier and passed around for signatures.
The hardest time was the first time I saw child porn because it happened to be some 50+ year old pervert raping a girl who was the same age as my daughter at the time. That took a bit of counseling, but I'm mostly past that now.
The good thing about this job is that if I do everything properly, people who deserve to be in prison end up in prison. People who hurt children do not do well in prison because the other inmates tend to react poorly to such individuals. It's interesting how Karma works out in this life some times.
This kind of thing pushes me more and more toward Buddhism because of the peace there is there. I can only change myself. I can do my job to the best of my ability and hope that the information that I gather will incriminate the guilty and exculpate the innocent. I need to be sure that I can end the day and know that I did as little harm as possible, and ideally that I did more good than harm.
Small steps... one step at a time.. that's all we can do.
I'd like to extend a bit of compassion to Querist, recognizing that he or she is in a really stressful job, emotionally stressful. I would think that viewing the type of material he/she does, week after week, year after year, could take a toll. I can't help but ask if Q is taking measures to handle the stress, self-care measures. Stress can accumulate for those who are on the front lines of fighting crime or injustice, and can lead to burnout. You'd be surprised what an effect getting massage regularly can have; it shuts off the stress hormones, stimulates the production of feel-good endorphines, and can make like look rosy, or at least, cope-able again. (Your job sounds anything but rosy.) Or maybe talking to a professional who could advise as to how to manage the stress of the job. Maybe you've already thought of all this, Q. I'm glad you're with us, and I understand your feelings about these issues. Hopefully, you're taking care of yourself. Sorry to hear that we lost a good physician due to the insurance bureaucracy, or whatever it was that caused you to quit.
Misandry in the schools? Boys used to be favored in school, though I've read articles in the last decade that say things have changed. Could you elaborate, Luv?
Querist: It sounds like you have a sense of mission about your work. Everyone hopes for "meaningful work", and you've got it. What people don't realize about meaningful work, is that it can be a sort of trap, a double-edged sword. One can end up devoting more to it either emotionally or in terms of time and energy, than one can handle, if one doesn't take care to try to reach a balance. A Middle Way approach is best, but not always possible. I sense that you find it rewarding to know that you're helping to put sleaze in jail. Still, it's a difficult calling, having to face life's dark underbelly daily. I can't imagine doing that long-term, having those images and facts as a steady diet. I imagine one would have to somehow detach oneself from it, at least partially. Not to the point of indifference, of course, but ... what a tough assignment. Good luck, take care. I hope Buddhism helps.
Fortunately, it is not one hundred percent of my time. It is the most interesting thing I do, though. I'm in the "corporate" world, so the porn is one aspect of the forensics. I just wrapped up a huge fraud case (huge as in huge amounts of money involved) which involved absolutely no porn whatsoever.
Yes, the Middle Way is a good approach. Thank you for your concern.
Querist: It sounds like you have a sense of mission about your work. Everyone hopes for "meaningful work", and you've got it. What people don't realize about meaningful work, is that it can be a sort of trap, a double-edged sword. One can end up devoting more to it either emotionally or in terms of time and energy, than one can handle, if one doesn't take care to try to reach a balance. A Middle Way approach is best, but not always possible. I sense that you find it rewarding to know that you're helping to put sleaze in jail. Still, it's a difficult calling, having to face life's dark underbelly daily. I can't imagine doing that long-term, having those images and facts as a steady diet. I imagine one would have to somehow detach oneself from it, at least partially. Not to the point of indifference, of course, but ... what a tough assignment. Good luck, take care. I hope Buddhism helps.
July 4, 1776 for the Declaration of Independence. That's the "official" date, anyway, though technically it was written earlier and passed around for signatures.
"All of us are made equal," was created in the days when black people were slaves, women had no right and homosexuality was illegal? lolish....
Misandry in the schools? Boys used to be favored in school, though I've read articles in the last decade that say things have changed. Could you elaborate, Luv?
Well, I was exaggerating a bit, but some teachers do prefer girls do boys, and/or, not necessarily to do with that, don't teach things that are "appropriate for the present day." One teacher dresses inappropriately, but she got a warning and isn't allowed to wear a skirt shorter than a certain length. She still wears stuff though that makes you want to say, "your teaching children woman!"
Another teacher doesn't let boys and girls sit together, and even goes as far as making the excess boys sit on tables alone, which makes work difficult. Once there were two boys and two girls sitting together and she made the boys move and shouted at them, and although because they were on the same table the girls had to move too, she never told them too, she seems shocked at the thought of two boys sitting together. It isn't even effective. Lots of boys and girls are friends, in my own group at school half are boys and half are girls, and there's only about one couple. It just makes people shout further anyway, usually the people who are most likely to shout are those with friends of the same gender, and just same-gender friends.
The hardest time was the first time I saw child porn because it happened to be some 50+ year old pervert raping a girl who was the same age as my daughter at the time. That took a bit of counseling, but I'm mostly past that now.
The good thing about this job is that if I do everything properly, people who deserve to be in prison end up in prison. People who hurt children do not do well in prison because the other inmates tend to react poorly to such individuals. It's interesting how Karma works out in this life some times.
This kind of thing pushes me more and more toward Buddhism because of the peace there is there. I can only change myself. I can do my job to the best of my ability and hope that the information that I gather will incriminate the guilty and exculpate the innocent. I need to be sure that I can end the day and know that I did as little harm as possible, and ideally that I did more good than harm.
Small steps... one step at a time.. that's all we can do.
it must be so horrible, I had a friend and she was molest years ago. And when she said we weren't even teenagers. It's disgusting, I'm glad there's people out there who sort the internet out. Thanks, small steps...
If you look at the act of sex in a very objective way, it is merely a chemical matter, a way in which nature gets us to reproduce. You can express love for another in the act of sex yes, but this has only been something cultivated within our race and over time.
There was an experiment conducted where they took some guys and showed them some pictures. They monitored activity in the brain and realized when they gazed upon what is commonly known to be a 'sexy woman', there was a lot of activity in the reward section of the brain, the same location opium sparks off huge activity.
Well, if you're going to get like that on us, I will point out that the USA beat the UK by 8 years in allowing women to vote.
The original idea, if my memory serves, was to eliminate the concept of royalty. Fortunately, it is currently interpreted in a much broader sense to indicate that all people are considered equal.
Black people as slaves: It happened, and it was made illegal. At the time, the prevailing thought was that blacks were not fully human. It was more of an excuse than a reason, but that was the rationale behind it.
Women not voting. I honestly never understood that one.
Homosexuality illegal: straight out of the Bible. Fortunately, that has been corrected in the legal system, but you must remember that the USA was founded largely by people who were fleeing the UK because they had religious beliefs that were not compatible with the majority beliefs in the UK. "Freedom of Religion" was a lie. They did not want true freedom of religion. They wanted freedom to enforce THEIR religion rather than what was taught by the Church of England. These puritans were the same jovial, fun-loving folks who brought you the Salem Witch Trials (I grew up not too far from there) and serious punishments (stocks, tar-and-feather, etc) for not going to church all day on Sunday or for daring to do anything USEFUL on a Sunday.
We won't get into the UK's atrocities against my people, since this is not the proper place for it. Suffice to say that these things have been addressed and corrected, and while both of our nations have unfortunate pasts, we have both moved past much of it and are still making progress mostly in the correct direction.
In the days when, in London, I was getting counselling referrals from the courts, I saw a number of paedophiles. Apart from one, who simply wanted to stop feeling guilty, all the others wanted to find ways of keeping children and themselves safe.
Involved as I am in discussions about child protection in our churches, it strikes me that the apparently visceral hatred expressed towards the perpetrators is a real barrier to finding enduring solutions, both for the haters and the objects of the aversion.
If we are to view all sentient beings with the compassion of a parent for their only child, this must challenge us in our attitude towards paedophiles, however much we rationalise our disgust.
Simon, as always, well said.
However, as much as I would like to be able to do what you say, I think I would instinctively draw the line when someone was harming MY child.
"All of us are made equal," was created in the days when black people were slaves, women had no right and homosexuality was illegal? lolish....
"All men are created equal" at the time that phrase was drafted referred only to people who owned land (Thomas Jefferson was really into that, as I recall; also into taking land away from Native people), which was white males, not counting Indigenous people, who also at the time, weren't considered to be part of what was then the US/13 (ex-)colonies. Anyway, fortunately, the power structure eventually got over that, and now everyone has an equal vote, except when they're cheated out of it during elections, as we saw during the Bush Jr. regime. Oh well...nothing's perfect.
The teachers you described sound a little strange. Is there any complaint mechanism, or a parent's association that could raise their concerns?
That is precisely why our codes of ethics would stop us treating or counselling such a one.
It can be extremely difficult for victims (or parents thereof) to look compassionately at perpetrators. I think this is the ultimate test of compassion--to be able to look at a disgusting sicko and see him (or her) as a human being, especially when he/she has harmed a loved one or oneself. I think there is something about the way that trauma affects the brain that makes this especially challenging. Maybe doing those meditation exercises where one meditates on love for one's loved ones, then progressing to love for strangers, then love for enemies, and so forth, practiced over years, possibly, might help. Meditation can help rewire the brain, so...it would be a good experiment. But let's acknowledge that this is an almost insurmountable challenge for victims and their loved ones. I said "almost"--that means there's hope.
If you look at the act of sex in a very objective way, it is merely a chemical matter, a way in which nature gets us to reproduce. You can express love for another in the act of sex yes, but this has only been something cultivated within our race and over time.
There was an experiment conducted where they took some guys and showed them some pictures. They monitored activity in the brain and realized when they gazed upon what is commonly known to be a 'sexy woman', there was a lot of activity in the reward section of the brain, the same location opium sparks off huge activity.
Well, if you're going to get like that on us, I will point out that the USA beat the UK by 8 years in allowing women to vote.
The original idea, if my memory serves, was to eliminate the concept of royalty. Fortunately, it is currently interpreted in a much broader sense to indicate that all people are considered equal.
Black people as slaves: It happened, and it was made illegal. At the time, the prevailing thought was that blacks were not fully human. It was more of an excuse than a reason, but that was the rationale behind it.
Women not voting. I honestly never understood that one.
Homosexuality illegal: straight out of the Bible. Fortunately, that has been corrected in the legal system, but you must remember that the USA was founded largely by people who were fleeing the UK because they had religious beliefs that were not compatible with the majority beliefs in the UK. "Freedom of Religion" was a lie. They did not want true freedom of religion. They wanted freedom to enforce THEIR religion rather than what was taught by the Church of England. These puritans were the same jovial, fun-loving folks who brought you the Salem Witch Trials (I grew up not too far from there) and serious punishments (stocks, tar-and-feather, etc) for not going to church all day on Sunday or for daring to do anything USEFUL on a Sunday.
We won't get into the UK's atrocities against my people, since this is not the proper place for it. Suffice to say that these things have been addressed and corrected, and while both of our nations have unfortunate pasts, we have both moved past much of it and are still making progress mostly in the correct direction.
Well, let me tell you :rant: Nah, soz, I just automatically want to have a go at America :o But I have many wonderful American friends on here, and it's supposed to be a very nice place to live?
"All men are created equal" at the time that phrase was drafted referred only to people who owned land (Thomas Jefferson was really into that, as I recall; also into taking land away from Native people), which was white males, not counting Indigenous people, who also at the time, weren't considered to be part of what was then the US/13 (ex-)colonies. Anyway, fortunately, the power structure eventually got over that, and now everyone has an equal vote, except when they're cheated out of it during elections, as we saw during the Bush Jr. regime. Oh well...nothing's perfect.
The teachers you described sound a little strange. Is there any complaint mechanism, or a parent's association that could raise their concerns?
One only has to complain, but my particular points would be casually dismissed. Once we saw a video on "the perfect family" which featured a well-off, Caucasian straight couple who meet and get on with each other's nephews, get married and then the woman becomes pregnant. The baby falls out of the sky in a nappy But it was a bit, "puritan" or whatever :hrm: She also mentioned, last lesson, on same-sex soul mates, which she dismissed as "good friends", rather than partners.
Well, let me tell youBut I have many wonderful American friends on here, and it's supposed to be a very nice place to live?
Well, it's a nice place to live if you have a job/economic security. The economic crisis hasn't worked out for some people, who have lost their homes. Life in the US is much more corporate-driven than in Europe, but that's the subject for another thread, or whatever.
Sounds like the educational materials haven't been updated since the 1950's. Since there was a "diversity" drive in the US toward the end of the last century, I think there's been some updating, inclusion of people of color, etc. in educational materials, but I couldn't say for sure. But I bet the "etc." doesn't include sexual minorities. Not yet.
Comments
Hi, Luv. The Elders refers to the elders of the tribe, where Simon was invited to a wedding. I gather that, since Simon himself is an elder (see his website), and a foreign guest, he was invited to sit with the elders.
Interesting wording of your other question. It's not so much that they "accepted" it, which implies that it was a foreign element to their culture. I can't speak for all tribes, but homosexuality has been just a normal part of life, sort of ho-hum, *yawn*, "What is it you white folks are fussing on about?" sort of thing. In terms of gay marriage, that's interesting. When some states passed laws banning gay marriage, one of the Eastern tribes was so mad, they said everyone can come to their tribe and get married there (sorry, I don't remember which tribe). The tribes don't fall under Federal or State law with regard to many things, and marriage is one of them. I don't think all tribes have this policy, but it's an interesting loophole.
Wesley Thomas, co-author of the book I recommended, was researching mores relating to gays on the Navajo Nation (Arizona, New Mexico), when he was unexpectedly approached by some elders who invited him to a certain corner of the rez, where a very old tradition still survives. The people there believe that Two-Spirit people are holy people, and they take the role of spiritual leaders. It is thought that Two-Spirits are unique and highly spiritually-gifted individuals. This has parallels in other parts of the world, where shamans and healers traditionally have been Two-Spirits, or as is the case in Siberian shamanism, the healer used to dress in women's clothing when he did his trance ceremony. This assumes, though, that traditional healers are men; in the past anthropologists have tended to overlook the women healers. I don't know if there's a similar Two-Spirit tradition relating to women healers anywhere.
I guess this still pertains to "Sex in America", though it diverges from the OP's theme
I thought it might be, hence the ":p". And I don't know, it's a shame :-/
It's weird isn't it? That humans clearly naturally don't made a difference between homosexuality and heterosexuality. But then something happened and in many cultures a chasm opened up between the two. Presently it is beginning to heal up again, but its worrying to think it might begin to crack open in the near future :-/
Palzang
I'm terrified of political Islam myself (no racism intended). And I said about people being naturally non-homophobic. When you say dressing up in women's clothes and doing women's chores, do you mean for homosexuals or transsexuals?
It's nice to see you anyway, where have you been recently?
Yes, I know, I've been missing of late. Can't seem to find myself anywhere! No, actually I've been in the process of moving back to Arizona. We're starting a study group here soon. It's been a very difficult move, and I don't have a job yet nor any prospects of one anytime soon as the economy is here is in the toilet. But I was asked to come, so I couldn't say no. It'll work out. It's just getting difficult for this old monk to do this stuff!
How are you doing?
Palzang
About the "something happened", I'm wondering if you might be able to answer a Q I've had in regard to homosexuality in European history. I saw a film a long time ago that was set around the Medieval era or a little later, and there seemed to be a lot of sexual diversity back then, that was just part of normal human, cultural, and racial diversity. So I'm wondering if the something that happened might not be the Inquisition and later Puritanism. Those events brought radical changes to European culture, so it seems like a good guess. Does anyone know? I gather from comments here that in Europe, things are beginning to get back to "normal".
More news from the anthropology front:
The Inca god, Viracocha, was bisexual. Nowadays probably most Quechua-speaking people would deny that, due to very strong influence from the Catholic Church. But it points toward the strong possibility that there was more diversity in Native culture in the Andes at one time, than there is now.
In the Pacific Island nations, "Two-Spirit" men dress as women, and some perform traditional dances as women, including in the revues for tourists. nobody bats an eye, except for the few eagle-eyed tourists, who notice there's something unusual about some of the dancers. Mothers interviewed by anthropologists, and asked how many boys, how many girls they have, have answered something like: "I have 4 girls and 3 boys. No, wait--one of my girls is a boy. I have 3 girls and 4 boys." It's so natural to accept their children in the roles they've chosen for themselves, that even the parents forget who is who.
OK, now we're really off the OP's topic!
P.S. Does it seem to you that the term "homosexual" has become somewhat emotionally loaded? Or is it just me? Or is it just the US? I'm tending toward the term "Two-Spirit", as you've undoubtedly noticed. It seems to carry less baggage.
Probably because no one would have the slightest idea of what you're talking about!
I think the whole issue of what is the PC term to use for one's sexuality is a little over the top. It really doesn't matter, does it? What's really important is to accept everyone as they are rather than how we think they should be. If we could only accomplish that, what a happier world we would live in!
Palzang
I see homophobia is no different to any other discrimination out there.
Sodomy was proscribed long before the Inquisition. It was so abhorred that legend has it that Edward II died after being sodomised with a red-hot poker (1327). The Romans also, in general, despised it.
Yes, I'm glad they made it illegal. We all know how much it turns us all on to stick a red-hot poker up our bottom.
What's a "semi-European country"?
I think Turkey and a part of Cyprus and maybe something else. Bulgaria is in Eastern Europe, gosh :rolleyes:
These homophobic and puritanical attitudes prevail here in South Carolina. Believe me. I've been here for 16 years.
(note: I am heterosexual, always have been, and I plan to remain that way through this life. However, I also feel that people are entitled to their preferences as long as they do not harm others - I detest paedophiles and rapists and misogynists.)
It's nice to have you on board with these issues, Q, but "detest" seems like a strong word for a Buddhist. Sounds a little like attachment to negative emotions. Not that I don't get a bit worked up about these unpleasant realities myself. (Do I hear raucous laughter in the background? Some of the readers here have been acquainted with my concerns. :rolleyes: ) But what I try to do, whenever possible, is look at the personal history of the perp. Often you'll find some form of child abuse at the root of this type of disturbed behavior. Looking at the perp as a human being, rather than a monster, can help difuse these emotions. Though it can be challenging, especially for vicitims. I think that if child abuse in all forms could be eliminated from the human experience, there would be a lot less crime. (Hey, I can dream, can't I?)
Yes! Please dream on Dakini, and give all of us a draught of what you're drinking! Inculcating in members of society the importance of raising children in safe and loving environments is paramount. As Wordsworth said:
A rainbow in the sky:
So was it when my life began;
So is it now I am a man;
So be it when I shall grow old,
Or let me die!
The Child is father of the Man;
I could wish my days to be
Bound each to each by natural piety.
It must surely be a great, great sin to ruin a young life by imposing a malevolent will or worse on them. There must surely be the worst sort of karma attached to that, too. Surely, any additional condemnations we might add will accomplish nothing for the victims. Short-term it riles up attitudes that a few would-be perpetrators might possibly take as warnings to clean up their acts, but long-term such second-hand lessons will be forgotten.
Only by accepting our fallen brothers as tragic figures in need of some compassion can we address any real solutions. Without compassion there can be no possibility of the dialogue needed to flush out the pertinent facts and arrive at the understandable country where these foul or merely vicious deeds fermented. Once having crossed the boundaries our assumptions would make uncrossable, we can then scout that country for the mines and factories where these unskillful artifacts were extracted and refined.
Getting into the mind of an abusive parent or a genocidal maniac can only be done with compassion. Those who want to know the facts must be prepared to have their hearts broken.
T'is du common thought... What about misandry? That's very common in our school from some teachers I've found :-/
EDIT-And you do push the point of heterosexuality a bit, we don't mind you being straight, just don't flaunt it.
Soz- joke I found somewhere
NO! You can't dream! *THHHHHWACK!!!!!!!!!*
poetic
No. No prizes. *raises hand threateningly*
Yes, those are strong words. In my day-job in computer security (I left clinical practice years ago because I was tired of insurance company nurses trying to tell me, a physician, how to practice) doing computer forensics I have seen things that I strongly suspect would make most of you physically ill. Yes, obviously have attachment problems. I prefer to think of them as an attachment to preventing young girls from being raped by 50+ year old men and then other perverts watching videos of the event.
Yes, these people have serious problems. I will agree that I could have worded it a little more gently. I detest rape, paedophilia, and misogyny (and mysandry for whoever brought that up). I also have some strong feelings against racism.
All people should be treated with respect and dignity. To paraphrase the Declaration of Independence of the United States, all people are created equal. I just want people to treat others appropriately.
Yes, I push the point of heterosexuality. Sorry. It's a side-effect of living down here in Homophobia central - South Carolina. If you say anything in defense of homosexuality, you're automatically assumed to be a homosexual unless you quickly offer a disclaimer.
I'm sorry if my rapid disclaimer offended anyone. I think of homosexuality like Resses cups - perfectly fine, but just not my preference.
With regard to mysandry, I never encountered that in school, but that was a long time ago for me. I'm sorry that you're encountering that. It is just as wrong as misogyny, but not as widely recognized.
Detesting and strong vindictive lashing out against perpetrators of these crimes that prey on others has to be balanced with compassionate caring. That is what I firmly believe.
I think that strong taboos —even when justified on moral grounds— get in the way of people being able and willing to face their problems head-on. I think this is because people cannot address all their psychosexual problems alone and either need a willing sexual partner or a therapist of sorts. But if a therapist is duly bound to report anything of a "serious nature" that comes to his attention in the private encounters, there can be no progress. If the attorney-client relationship is safeguarded by law, why can't the counselor/priest/psychologist-client relationship also be inviolate? Without help, Jeffrey Dahmer and people like him can turn into real monsters.
Condemning others solves nothing. It only aggravates the core problem, which is essentially that people are lonely and do not have much insight into ways they can better pursue the art of living. That is why taking a compassionate approach is necessary, so that we can first understand the scope of the loneliness, secondly get some idea of the nature of the "depravity," and lastly apply our knowledge and love to some kind of solution. In time, we can then have better charts and graphs of what things people living in loveless environments can do, and we can then educate each other to be better stewards of our environments and more keen greeters and embracers of our lonely brethren.
It's scandalous how we allow things to fester by having such punishing hearts in the first place. If we are to know the truth, we must not approach things with our defenses all drawn up around us like a clam in its shell. When we condemn we do just that: we shut the other out and say that the world is simply not big enough for the two of us. That attitude is not only arrogant, but unrealistic; indeed, it's incapable of meeting the challenge justly. Just because people might seem radically different and even inferior on some levels does not mean we are entitled to have different ways of dealing with them.
Involved as I am in discussions about child protection in our churches, it strikes me that the apparently visceral hatred expressed towards the perpetrators is a real barrier to finding enduring solutions, both for the haters and the objects of the aversion.
If we are to view all sentient beings with the compassion of a parent for their only child, this must challenge us in our attitude towards paedophiles, however much we rationalise our disgust.
Out of curiosity, what year was that declaration made?
Despise really isn't inappropriate on this discussion.
Misandry in the schools? Boys used to be favored in school, though I've read articles in the last decade that say things have changed. Could you elaborate, Luv?
(for the record, I'm male.)
The hardest time was the first time I saw child porn because it happened to be some 50+ year old pervert raping a girl who was the same age as my daughter at the time. That took a bit of counseling, but I'm mostly past that now.
The good thing about this job is that if I do everything properly, people who deserve to be in prison end up in prison. People who hurt children do not do well in prison because the other inmates tend to react poorly to such individuals. It's interesting how Karma works out in this life some times.
This kind of thing pushes me more and more toward Buddhism because of the peace there is there. I can only change myself. I can do my job to the best of my ability and hope that the information that I gather will incriminate the guilty and exculpate the innocent. I need to be sure that I can end the day and know that I did as little harm as possible, and ideally that I did more good than harm.
Small steps... one step at a time.. that's all we can do.
Fortunately, it is not one hundred percent of my time. It is the most interesting thing I do, though. I'm in the "corporate" world, so the porn is one aspect of the forensics. I just wrapped up a huge fraud case (huge as in huge amounts of money involved) which involved absolutely no porn whatsoever.
Yes, the Middle Way is a good approach. Thank you for your concern.
"All of us are made equal," was created in the days when black people were slaves, women had no right and homosexuality was illegal? lolish....
Well, I was exaggerating a bit, but some teachers do prefer girls do boys, and/or, not necessarily to do with that, don't teach things that are "appropriate for the present day." One teacher dresses inappropriately, but she got a warning and isn't allowed to wear a skirt shorter than a certain length. She still wears stuff though that makes you want to say, "your teaching children woman!"
Another teacher doesn't let boys and girls sit together, and even goes as far as making the excess boys sit on tables alone, which makes work difficult. Once there were two boys and two girls sitting together and she made the boys move and shouted at them, and although because they were on the same table the girls had to move too, she never told them too, she seems shocked at the thought of two boys sitting together. It isn't even effective. Lots of boys and girls are friends, in my own group at school half are boys and half are girls, and there's only about one couple. It just makes people shout further anyway, usually the people who are most likely to shout are those with friends of the same gender, and just same-gender friends.
There was an experiment conducted where they took some guys and showed them some pictures. They monitored activity in the brain and realized when they gazed upon what is commonly known to be a 'sexy woman', there was a lot of activity in the reward section of the brain, the same location opium sparks off huge activity.
The original idea, if my memory serves, was to eliminate the concept of royalty. Fortunately, it is currently interpreted in a much broader sense to indicate that all people are considered equal.
Black people as slaves: It happened, and it was made illegal. At the time, the prevailing thought was that blacks were not fully human. It was more of an excuse than a reason, but that was the rationale behind it.
Women not voting. I honestly never understood that one.
Homosexuality illegal: straight out of the Bible. Fortunately, that has been corrected in the legal system, but you must remember that the USA was founded largely by people who were fleeing the UK because they had religious beliefs that were not compatible with the majority beliefs in the UK. "Freedom of Religion" was a lie. They did not want true freedom of religion. They wanted freedom to enforce THEIR religion rather than what was taught by the Church of England. These puritans were the same jovial, fun-loving folks who brought you the Salem Witch Trials (I grew up not too far from there) and serious punishments (stocks, tar-and-feather, etc) for not going to church all day on Sunday or for daring to do anything USEFUL on a Sunday.
We won't get into the UK's atrocities against my people, since this is not the proper place for it. Suffice to say that these things have been addressed and corrected, and while both of our nations have unfortunate pasts, we have both moved past much of it and are still making progress mostly in the correct direction.
Simon, as always, well said.
However, as much as I would like to be able to do what you say, I think I would instinctively draw the line when someone was harming MY child.
That is precisely why our codes of ethics would stop us treating or counselling such a one.
"All men are created equal" at the time that phrase was drafted referred only to people who owned land (Thomas Jefferson was really into that, as I recall; also into taking land away from Native people), which was white males, not counting Indigenous people, who also at the time, weren't considered to be part of what was then the US/13 (ex-)colonies. Anyway, fortunately, the power structure eventually got over that, and now everyone has an equal vote, except when they're cheated out of it during elections, as we saw during the Bush Jr. regime. Oh well...nothing's perfect.
The teachers you described sound a little strange. Is there any complaint mechanism, or a parent's association that could raise their concerns?
It can be extremely difficult for victims (or parents thereof) to look compassionately at perpetrators. I think this is the ultimate test of compassion--to be able to look at a disgusting sicko and see him (or her) as a human being, especially when he/she has harmed a loved one or oneself. I think there is something about the way that trauma affects the brain that makes this especially challenging. Maybe doing those meditation exercises where one meditates on love for one's loved ones, then progressing to love for strangers, then love for enemies, and so forth, practiced over years, possibly, might help. Meditation can help rewire the brain, so...it would be a good experiment. But let's acknowledge that this is an almost insurmountable challenge for victims and their loved ones. I said "almost"--that means there's hope.
Interesting...
Well, let me tell you :rant: Nah, soz, I just automatically want to have a go at America
One only has to complain, but my particular points would be casually dismissed. Once we saw a video on "the perfect family" which featured a well-off, Caucasian straight couple who meet and get on with each other's nephews, get married and then the woman becomes pregnant. The baby falls out of the sky in a nappy
Well, it's a nice place to live if you have a job/economic security. The economic crisis hasn't worked out for some people, who have lost their homes. Life in the US is much more corporate-driven than in Europe, but that's the subject for another thread, or whatever.
Sounds like the educational materials haven't been updated since the 1950's. Since there was a "diversity" drive in the US toward the end of the last century, I think there's been some updating, inclusion of people of color, etc. in educational materials, but I couldn't say for sure. But I bet the "etc." doesn't include sexual minorities.