Not Really Last Attempt

There are two desires when it comes to sex, for a human.  Please oneself and please one's mate.  So far, throughout almost every sex-based life-form before humanity, the two desires have never converged.  One gains their own pleasure or one gain's their mate's pleasure.  This is fine for witless animals. 

For humanity, the first species that can think things through, this could never work well.  The thought has been grinding away at humanity since our first sentient thought.  It has grown to drive humanity mad in the unsuccessful attempt to make the most crucial form of sex (i.e. that which creates life, coitus) so.

The split personality of humanity that may best be represented by the conservatives and liberals is based on this precarious inconsistency in human life.  It is two disparate and very confused views of the two genders.

Can you see how this defines, in great part, the roles to the two genders?  How do I express it further?  The woman consistently pleases her mate during that most important act of life-creation.  The man consistently pleases himself during the same act.  It affects the personality of both genders, in different ways, as long as that remains true.  It tears them apart and puts them in opposing armed camps.

Man takes, woman gives, and it all starts in bed.  It doesn't need to remain that way.

Can you see how this will drive a sentient race mad?  How the personality of humanity becomes split in an awful, mad manner?

The male gender has been most inclined to blind itself to the realization that he should be able to cause that pleasure during the life-creating act of coitus.  That alone is a long and complicated story that spans millennia.

Worst yet, of course, is, in their failure with which men have not been able to cope.  The befuddlement at puberty, combined with the paradigms of nonsense that have been handed down since the beginning were too much.  They have not been able to face up to the failure.  So, all kinds of impediments have been placed in the way of allowing the thoughts to roam free.  The Garden Of Eden is one such fanciful story developed in reaction to men's feelings of hopelessness and helplessness.  

Long ago, humanity's intelligence had not developed to the extent that they could see past the encumbrances of the animal and realize that a human can think, thereby make coitus a loving act.  That has been handed down and imprinted on each generation.  

It is a complicated enough thought that early human's could not cope.  It is a simple enough thought that modern men can more than cope.  They can succeed with ease.  

Humanity's creativity and inventiveness, in the absence the insight that took much longer to develop, was in fine form to hide from the truth.  

Blame it on some fictitious god and/or devil.  Blame it on women.  Make it all go away.

It is not an act of love until it is mutually fulfilling.  We are not a human, loving, emotionally balanced, sentient race until it is.  We are not yet making love.

While our awareness and intelligence have developed tremendously since that time, because we have forcefully blinded ourselves to this awful aspect of an animal's state, we have never applied our heightened awareness and intellec to the issue. 

Let's try this.  How many women have encountered men that were enjoyable, attractive, interesting, only to find that after having sex with them, they begin to change.  Some (most) men begin to become morose and distant as they realize their failure.  The first experience of it may be the worst for men, but they may also recover to try, again, with another woman.  Rinse, wash, and repeat.  They close up and become someone far different, especially within an intimate relationship.  

    Humanity has learned to settle.  That is not a sentient trait.

Can everyone now see why it happens?  I know!  It's like having blinders ripped from you eyes!  But, that is only the smallest impact on humanity's affairs.

Maybe the correlation is not usually made because it doesn't happen overnight (though maybe it does, in some cases).

It used to mystify me how women can look a man in the eye like there is nothing wrong.  The reason is clear now.  I get into that further in many of the books.  They are completely baffled.  They don't even begin to understand what is grinding away at the man.  Or, do they?

The two genders's views are so very different.  The only commonality is that both genders are baffled.  He knows damn well that something is wrong but due to historical forces of inertia, he can't quite put his finger on it.  

    The woman usually hasn't a clue what is going wrong. (just my guess; I would feel even more awful for women if they knew all along  what was  wrong)  They only see the awful change.  Affection becomes compromised in men.  Even the best are not wholly free of it.

    Worse yet are the men that try to justify it.  That is toxic masculinity in spades.  They disrupt everything.  Even worse, is when the woman goes along with it because she is convinced her pleasure is not important or she deserves the pummelings she takes.  She may tell herself that god just didn't make her that way.  God, or Nature, made us sentient.  For a sentient race (don't think individuals, think race), it will drive it mad.

    At first, when the man attempts to love a woman, he may attempt to shrug it off, he has been taught all his life that, when the moment comes (pun intended), that he just closes his eyes and shuts down his brain.  But, over a lifetime, it begins to eat away at him at a subconscious level.  The reason it stays in the subconscious and the reason it may drive him mad is because men have been so unwilling to think or talk about it because that is how they are trained from birth.

   The best adaptation I have seen is the man that finds some other way to bring the same pleasure that he attains to the woman.  Still, it's an adaptation.

  The reason we don't talk about it is a little more complicated and insidious because its beginnings are lost in the annals of our history.  The disaster that this has caused is monumental.  Not only have we avoided the realization that there is no reason that a man cannot achieve loving coitus, but we have also avoided the full panoply of love by substituting distractions in the form of chaos that distort the sentient state.  We shut down the distinctly human physical act of love, thus, also, shutting down our conscious awareness and crippling reason.  It ripples outward.

    We are far more than animals.  We think.  In this one, most critical case, we have not thought at all.

You want to know what mid-life crisis is all about?  It is reality, age, and experience that comes crashing down in conflict with all of the paradigms of nonsense.  The shock that has been gnawing away at the subconscious finally begins to intrude on the conscious awareness as life continues without the fulfillment as the end approaches.

    There is another point I never realized before that applies to why this is finally becoming so very evident.  Age.  When humanity's average lifespan was forty years, lousy sex was probably not nearly as important while we struggled with just staying alive.  Men achieving all of the pleasure while women got pregnant was probably enough.  Especially while we were breeding like rabbits.  

    I can't believe that it never crossed a person's mind but it certainly never drilled deep enough over the normal lifespan of some forty years to achieve breakthrough regarding the gibberish that we have spent the last three millennia developing and encouraging.  Remember, it took me close to sixty years to begin to make the connections.  

I can only attest for myself that I was not content ever, from the first experience with the way things turned out , happy with coitus.  Substitutes were just that.  I despised the whole setup.

We outgrew our animal perspective long ago.  I peg it at about three thousand years ago for a few reasons.  Pandora's Box and the Kama Sutra are two of those reasons.  They both occurred about three millennia ago.  I've written about both extensively, so I don't feel the need to go into them here.  

The other reason is that coherent thought began about the same time.  I peg coherent thought beginning in the Ancient Greek Classical period.   The corollary holds true in China, as well.  I think the biggest difference is that they had pot.  

    In the west, it began around the time of Socrates.  I once read some pre-socratic gibberish.  It really was gibberish and nothing more.  It  was offensively incoherent.  Which is one of the reasons I settled on the Ancient Greek Classical as the beginning of (somewhat) coherent thought.

Uncanny

 It's uncanny how it works.  Both "you can't see the forest for the trees" and "you can't see the trees for the forest" apply.

I was just pondering again, after rereading Labyrinth (from Human).  The forest and trees became even clearer.

1. We are completely dependent on coitus for our existence.  Without it, we go extinct.

2. No one, man nor woman, is satisfied with the results of the act of coitus when the loving is not mutual.  Oh, yes!  Men are relieved but not satisfied.  Only a male animal would be satisfied.

3. Being sentient, we know better.  We know that the human race is not just an animal.  Whether we like it or not.  We know we should be able to do better.  We created the word love but never created the circumstances to fulfill it.

4.  We became convinced we can do no better because of the paradigms of nonsense a group of prehumans with no experience, knowledge, or insights regarding being sentient adopted millennia ago.  We have clung to those outdated concepts since the beginning.  Do you see the beginnings of our confusion?  It was too much for early humans to handle, so they buried as deeply as possible behind a smear campaign.  That is where the confusion came into being.

5.  We never stumbled on the fact (until now) that, for a sentient race, there can be so much more to coitus.  It can become a loving act, not just the rutting of animals.  Until that happens, love corrodes into lust.  It is stripped bare of all of its tremendous and essential human potential.  Loving coitus is human and magnificently fulfills both the love and the lust that we all desire.

To summarize: we can't live with coitus in its animal form and we certainly cannot live without it.

That pretty much sums up our confusion, the ongoing stupour caused by the confusion, the paradigms of nonsense that we developed to cover our confusion, why men are so whacked out (they really do want to love), why women are so stable (they do love, since they fulfill their partner during coitus consistently and without hesitation), and so much more.  The evidence is everywhere.

Add on top of that the fact that men have a driving urge for sexual release that can get out of hand (pun intended) and the stage is set for the biggest misdirect of the ages.  Unlike an animal, those sexual urges of the man became unconstrained.  Just like animals, their performance has remained very constrained, obviating their ability to express their love in its most essential physical form.  

Do you see the joker in the deck yet?  Do you see why men have tried to prop up their image for as long as we have been sentient?  Uncertainty, confusion, perversions, and stupour developed because we have always looked at it as an animal would.

The phrase "we are only human" says it all.  It is the most offensive phrase ever created and, so far, we deserve it.  I look forward to the day that we say, "Omigoodness, we are human!"

Conspiracy theories

There is one conspiracy that caused all of the conspiracy theories.  We are suspicious, distrusting, paranoid, and befuddled for one reason, and it causes us to look for answers where there are none.  It is the conspiracy comprised of the whole of the human race.  We have never faced the one issue that derailed our sentient state.  That is the only real conspiracy.   We have bottled it up inside each one of us, substituting some number of paradigms of nonsense to compensate.

We are a mess and can't even admit it.  So, we make shit up.  All of the conspiracy theories are based on the conspiracy never to look under the covers.  It is the stupour at work.   We want answers and have been too lazy, fearful, paranoid, and imbecilic to find the real answer.  The real answer is that we are a mess until loving coitus becomes the gladly accepted, celebrated form of coitus. With that realization, we begin to become human and put all of the conspiracy theories behind us.

Irony

There is so much irony in all of this that it becomes mind-boggling.  The one that really hits home, though, is that it took a lifetime to resolve the puzzle and, yet, it will take a young man to see it through.

Another irony is that men have thought all along that they had it all.  At least, that is what their surface thoughts convey.  Deep beneath, lurking in the subconscious since we became sentient, they have always known that something was wrong.  Their compensation, as a gender, is everywhere to be seen.  No one has wanted to face the truth because all were convinced there was nothing to be done.  Humanity has been so wrong on so many levels.

As I've mentioned in a number of the books, sentience seeks clarity.  When clarity if forcefully denied in the face of what is apparent to any sentient creature, we become befuddled.  We remain in a stupour. 

Even if it were true that there was nothing to be done about it (just shoot me now), we would need to face the truth.  All of the conflicts regarding sex that we face today could be dealt with if only we faced the truth.  The more difficult truth to prove is that men are not on a clock when it comes to coitus because we are not just an animal.  Animals are limited in their duration because of nothing more than instincts.  Men can learn to overrule those instincts.  That is what the chapter Details begins to uncover.  Men can learn to love.  Men can perform the act of loving coitus, even though the majority today still do not.

The books

I have apologised for the books long enough.  They are very good.  They were the necessary exploration of the mess we have made of human life.  

I would start with Human, the latest book.  It certainly has the most insightful view.  It's been a learning process all along.  But, really, they are all terribly insightful as I progressed past the prehuman view.

I call it speculative nonfiction.  Of course, it is no longer speculative.  I would say the speculation ended entirely around Ten.

All of the nonsense

I keep looking for a way to circumvent the paradigms of nonsense for you, but that is difficult.  Maybe I have succeeded this time.  The most difficult issue with the paradigms of nonsense is that there are so many, each with its own little twists of delusion that trigger the denial.  It is the River Lethe in an all too real form.

Let's see if I can describe the worst paradigms of nonsense.

The first, the one that held us in thrall for ages in the west was "Sex is for making babies only".  For animals, that is true.  They couldn't do any better.  We have relegated ourselves to the state of an animal due to inertia.  That is not appropriate for a human, sentient being.  It is an unnecessary restriction (see sentient clarity).  Coitus, and sex in general, for a sentient being is not the same as it is for an animal.  It should be enjoyed mutually.

"Joy and celebration of the transcendent state that can exist during coitus is bad" just about every religion in existence proclaims, in one phrase or another.  Make no mistake about it.  It was the genesis of misogyny, sexism, perverse outlooks, and the failure of our sentient state.  All because coitus has never been a shared joy.  Do you see how this led to all of today's conflicts regarding sex?  We have known better for a long time.  We just wouldn't admit it openly until the last century or so.

By the way, I have no idea how the East bypassed the sentient reality.  I would have to guess it is buried in the "save face" thought process.

All of the rest of the paradigms of nonsense stem from those two that were enacted long, long ago.  Sappho, as far as I can tell, was the first to bash it all to pieces.  Is it any surprise that most of her work was burned?

The militant view of those that seek alternatives that succeed in making loving mutual are understandable but not helpful.  They will change as the opprobrious reactions fade with the advent of loving coitus.

None of those initial paradigms of nonsense have helped.  They did not impede the perversions, insanity, misogyny, or hate that has held humanity in its grip since the beginning.

That is another point.  All we have done for three millennia is hide from the truth.  We concocted religions in the west  specifically to hide from the truth.  That goes as far back as The Garden Of Eden and the later versions of Pandora's Box.

The essence of Pandora's Box says it all very clearly.  

Well, I'm not going to go into all of the paradigms of nonsense that followed in order to avoid the truth.  They were piled, one on top of another, as we continued to deny a sentient reality.  That is part of what the books are about.  It took me fifteen years to break through.  It should take you less than a few books.

Slightly edited and I will almost certainly have more to add.

That it took twelve books (and a few million more written words, including a lot of rhoetry) to get here only goes to show how deeply embedded the paradigms of nonsense are.

One last clarifying point.  There is no evil (you'll note that I avoid the word (and the word 'god' most assiduously).  There is only stupour and lack of clarity.  Or, to perhaps state it more precisely,  The lack of clarity caused by the forced stupour caused by sexual inadequacy equates to evil.  It is all inertia of the animal.

Sigh.  Since I mentioned 'god', I should clarify.  I am utterly agnostic when it comes to some being creating everything and messing around with it.  If there is such a being, it has not revealed itself to me.  I do not consider any other prehuman credible.  They are, as far as I can tell, all snake-oil salesmen.  Slimy and unworthy.  Do you think the perversions of the clerics is new?  I do not consider some form of creator out of the question.  But, I sure consider all of the fabrications that the prehuman has created nothing more than fabrications.  "I speak for god" is almost as offensive as "We are only human".  Afterdeath is another matter entirely.

Final passage on Trajectory of Life

Sentience, Conscious Awareness, and the Trajectory of Life

Before the human race, evolution was exclusively a matter of genetics.  With humanity, Nature introduced conscious awareness, which creates an unsurpassed way in which a sentient race can improve itself and everything around it.

Before humanity, thought was limited.  It remained a feeble representation of awareness until the advent of humanity.

Attaining sentience, though, isn't like flipping a switch.  The heightened intellect and conscious awareness that comprise our sentience have been developing for hundreds of thousands of years and continues to improve.  It is a long, grueling effort.

Lofty concepts like love, peace, and noble characteristics can take us into intriguing realms.  Unfettered conscious awareness is necessary.  Our conscious awareness has remained constrained.

Conscious awareness allows us to question, "what is?"  It also allows us to conceive of ideas that extrapolate on "what is" by asking the question, "what can be?"  These concepts are further refined by asking the question, "what if?"

Abstract ideas mean nothing on their own.  Reason, which humanity was also gifted, can and should complement the effort. 

If, in the overall scheme of life, an idea is attractive but the results remain tentative, we retain the idea, attempt to refine it, and study its potential and validity versus circumstances.

Concepts, like love, peace, and noble characteristics(e.g. honor, integrity, dignity, generosity, compassion, etc) have mostly proven unworkable, so far.  Though they hold promise, more and more they have become labeled as wishful thinking because our conscious awareness remains handicapped.

As conscious awareness became increasingly capable, the circumstances humanity confronted exceeded our capacity to comprehend and adjust.  Intellect was not yet capable enough to resolve the issue with reason.

Often irrationality prevailed.  Once accepted, irrational explanations are often extremely difficult to vanquish.

Our inability to achieve those higher ideals is due to a certain irrationality accepted long ago. "We are only human."  Humanity never gained respect for itself due to a crucial aspect of sentience that was sidestepped.  It has inhibited humanity's sentient ideals.

Our conscious awareness was duped.  We became convinced that we are no more than a sophisticated and dangerous animal.  We remain in a stupour of bewildering proportions.  

Our conscious awareness revealed too much too soon.  A key link regarding what makes us human remains missing.  Our intellect could not keep up with what conscious awareness revealed and it never recovered.  It remains blinded.

Comprehension, clarification, and guidance of our own existence, due to conscious awareness and reason, are Nature's most powerful tools to lead human, sentient life into unbelievable realms of success, far exceeding genetics.

We remain stunted due to a lingering issue.  Our ancestors crafted a thorough scheme of denial, resembling the River Lethe, regarding one aspect of sentient existence.  When we approach the issue, our minds go blank.  We avoid the issue at all costs.

We have gone down a long and weary path of developing self-defeating concepts like supernatural beliefs, existentialism, authoritarianism, always denying our own staggering potential.

An animal's reactionary viewpoint, reminiscent of a death wish, utilizes violence to achieve obscure, witless, and meaningless goals.  That  is defeatism, not sentience.

The break in the chain began when humanity faced an immensely perplexing situation far beyond its initial sentient comprehension and ability to cope and adjust.

Our early ancestors had not yet developed the powers Nature grants a sentient race in the form of reason and intellect.  Instead, through imagination and creativity, they obfuscated and blockaded the attainment of a fully functional sentient state.

The curtain of obfuscation has grown to untold proportions over the millennia.  In front of the curtain, we see a demented race.  What lies behind the curtain is our humanity.

Humanity was put in the awful position of resolving a seemingly impossible issue or forcing blindness on humanity.

Resolving the issue, at the time, was just not possible.  That left obfuscation on a scale that is difficult to imagine.  For very important reasons, the dilemma was considered dangerous.

Sentient awareness never rests.  It is always seeking clarity.   The animal that we remain had to obscure that awareness.  Our conscious awareness has continually pounded against the bars erected to block clarity.  Every youthful generation attempts to break through the nonsense.  It took my entire lifetime to do so.

It is now in the hands of humanity to implement the resolution.  This book and the previous eleven delve into the issue and its resolution in great depth and detail.  You are welcome.

The issue was created when the first form of life engaged in the activity of creating life while only one gender achieved a state of bliss that is obtainable by both genders of a sentient race.  This finally became apparent due to the conscious awareness, intellect, and reason provided by a sentient state.  The resolution was not simple to isolate but it is ridiculously simple to implement, once the fear is gone.  Again, you are welcome.

The issue created by conscious awareness is simply stated.  For a sentient race, there are two desires for coitus.  Please oneself and please one's mate.  The two desires have never converged because the full capability of a sentient race was never applied.  In the current rendition, just like an animal, one gains pleasure while the other provides pleasure.  That is fine for witless animals.  It is not acceptable by humans of either gender.  It wreaks havoc on everything regarding the sentient state.

Men take, women give, and it begins in bed.  It need not remain that way.  Human resolution is clear and straightforward.

Until that changes, we remain a demented animal out of sorts with human potential and awareness.  Our humanity requires that the animal act of rutting become the human act of loving.

The only complete resolution is when the unassisted act of creating life also becomes an act that creates love by sharing the incredible, transcendent gift.  The act only creates love when it is shared.  Both genders suffer in its absence in different ways.  The concept of love remains damaged.

Can you begin to see how this would have confounded our ancestors?  They were at a loss for resolution.  They handed down their bewilderment and defeat, generation by generation. 

Men can easily overcome what seemed an insurmountable barrier to our ancestors who clamped down so hard on the matter that exploration remained untouched for millennia (see Details).

We twisted the situation and ourselves into knots because we were convinced that men could not succeed. The implication was that men were undeserving of a sentient state.  We have been so very wrong.  We mistakenly accepted the conclusion that we are no better than an animal at the most important act of sentient life.  

This loving act transforms humanity into a fully sentient race.  It frees us from the shackles of the animal entirely.

Transforming the life-creating act of coitus is the missing piece of the puzzle to fulfill our humanity.  The lack has induced the human race's emotional upheaval and, through obfuscation which resulted in a state of stupour, impeded our conscious awareness, reason, and fulfillment since the very beginning.  

It crippled us.  The phrase make love has meaning.

Loving coitus is the crucial aspect of the Trajectory of Life for a sentient race to take the reins of its existence in its own hands.

Love and the nobler qualities are natural extensions of a fully functional sentient life.  They are the first steps along the extended Trajectory of Life provided by sentience.  

Our dystopia is only a by-product of the stupour that is eliminated with ease by a race in command of its sentience.

It is not utopia.  It is stable emotions, rational thought, conscious awareness, and reason transforming our higher ideals into actuality as sentience becomes a way of life.  It is human.

Men were undone by the misbelief that a certain aspect of their sentient existence was beyond their measure.  Make no mistake.  Nature provided all that is required for a man to achieve loving coitus.  It is explained in Details.

Noble characteristics will appear in full force once the male gender gains its sentient confidence and self-respect.

The obfuscation began due to bewilderment.  It became a force of its own over the long millennia as it was inadvertently and subliminally embellished to counter our growing conscious awareness.  The animal remains in charge.  Only the cowering fear that there was nothing to be done holds us back.

    I get into the Trajectory of Life a lot more in some of the later books.

They try

It is truly amazing.  Something so simple to improve - for a human, sentient being - has been delayed for three millennia because it was difficult for the animal to comprehend.  The difficulty is all in understanding something that is beyond the realm of the animal.  Its implementation is dead easy.  It just takes a completely sentient attitude to accept that men can do things that an animal never could.  The success itself is built in.  We just had to remove the three thousand years of misdirection and misinformation of the animal.  There was enough of the animal's viewpoint available as our sentient awareness developed that it took control and brutally shut down any mention of the subject.  Our early sentience never had a chance.

Men have been trying since then to love while the big picture has been hidden from view.

 I guess I should have pointed this out long ago.  My only excuses are that I was shocked by what I had uncovered and, more than that, I was so outraged that it had fallen to me to try to straighten it all out.   I feel like I was the last person on Earth that it should have fallen to ... but, then again... I had spent a lifetime being misunderstood (or is that disunderstood?  the stupour, you know; somehow I never became infected; and, no, I can't explain it).  Much like Cassandra.  Nobody ever wanted to listen to my crazy thoughts.  So, I wasn't in much of a mood.  And, of course, trying to straighten out three millennia of nonsense took its toll.

Anyways, I should have pointed out that men have tried all along to love and be lovers.  I can't help but conclude the only reason they ever tried was because of the magnificence of woman.

But, the point is they have always tried ... and, essentially, fallen flat on their faces.

It is another reason that I am so certain that humanity can achieve a loving existence.  (anytime I use the word 'love' I feel I must explain. it's not the love that you are familiar with; it is not some mushy, roll-over-and-die, bewitching state; it is something that we have never yet experienced.

Men want to love.  Duh.  They have been like a cripple since the beginning.

I think this may be (I'm only guessing here, on so many levels) why it is so difficult to link misogyny to the male gender.  It's not that men really hate women (unless they are utterly insane (and there's plenty of those).  It's really that men hate the situation as they are born into it and have had no luck (or wit, my greatest gripe) in changing their circumstances.

There's a crucial point to be addressed here that I have struggled with since the beginning, never finding a good way to address it.  I think I have.

I was reading someone mentioning how the sexual drive of the man is the problem and the reason for all of the perversions of men from sex trade to rape to, well, all of the awful things that men do to women to satisfy their lust.

It seems like a pretty open and shut case, right?  Do you see the flaw in the argument?  It is not the lack of respect for women that is the problem.  It is the lack of respect for himself that is the problem.

Can you imagine a man that has respect for himself performing any of those awful perversions that so degrade, not only the woman but himself?  Do I need to explain further or can you connect the dots?

Of course, that is just the tip of the iceberg.  If men did not crumble from failure to love as they reach puberty, all of the nastiness that we endure would be gone.

I'll make the assumption you can connect the dots.  While I haven't addressed it in quite this way before, I have addressed it plenty of other ways.  Men lose respect for themselves bang on puberty because they fail utterly to be the lovers they always expected to be.

I guess that leads me to another key point.  On second thought, I don't think I will expound.  Let's see, though, if I can give you a few hints and let you do some extrapolation on your own.  It seems to me that women have given men the benefit of the doubt all along.  That is a good thing, of course.  Not only does it show the generousness of the feminine gender (which should, in actuality, be a human trait) but, also, the woman's dead reckoning was dead on.  A woman making a big deal out of it would have done no good.  We are approaching a point, though, where the levee is about to break.

I think I'll leave it at that.  I really don't know if you can extrapolate from there.  I'm just tired of the harbinger and explainer, unless the answer just pops in my head as it did for the above insight on the insanity of it all.