swirl_-_personal_web_site_5053004.jpg swirl_-_personal_web_site_5053003.jpg

Just take a look at the rate of divorces, crime, and declining educations in America. Wake up America and remove those invasive groups from our personal lives and responsibilities. By incorporating the technical and other physical rules suggested in this article we will have provided actual physical, prerecored evidence, rather than biased evidence as protections against abuse; thereby, justifying the removal of invasive moralist, using worst case scenarios out to enforce a personal agenda. Those groups in government have become consumedly destructive of families, marriage, and general human civility...placing non-violent men and women - from all walks of life including well educated - engaged in consensual sexual relations, where no disease passed, or pregnancy resulted, in prison for life (modern dungeons with dark age torturers) Too many legislators in power are little different from a troop of alpha chimpanzees having a primal need to control sex. I've many times witnessed male machophile bikers, gang members, and the same of muscle headed legislators out playing their own personal sex games, who are also supporters of invasive sex laws. Just like in a jungle they want control of females for theirs and their boys future interest and procreation. Too many legislators in political and business gangs are merely a thin line difference from street gangs. Unemotional and non-violent men of reason, and men of science and reason, having less primal natures, will not fight back until they possess overwhelming power and force to accomplish their ends by non-violent means....At that time many of those invasive laws will change. The historical difficulties with having machophiles in governments and armies (not all are such individuals), is that, so long as their kind exist among the enemies over there, they must continue to exist over here to protect our fledgling democracy (read the Thomas Jefferson quote on the last page); consequently, it will take something very powerful, like new advances in science to change that entrenched power. Keep your eyes on the news of science and technological advances as mankind merges with artificial intelligence; and then finally, ends the primal world forevermore. It's true, that to predict the future is formidable, considering human history, but I proclaim that my predictions will derive close enough. That is my general opinion of the evolution of the intellectual human. It's time for a new age of reason and change.

In this world of imagined equality, there must be something wrong when, < by sycophants, courts are smirking and smiling as hundreds of thousands of non-violent men, in consensual relations, are being imprisoned for their sexual natures, while very few women pay. If only those machophiles were to place a pile of wood on a legislature or court room floor, and then, place a post in the middle to tie up 90% totally non-violent human beings, and then, personally come down off their throne and light a match, then we would get a clearer picture of those modern day witch hunters reminding us of a past age of darkness. Instead they cowardly pass on those inflicting measures, with a smirk and a smile, to thugs in prisons (torturers in dungeons), as if they represent moral justice. For anyone with a mind much greater than that of a moron, the truth becomes eminently clear! It's an old primal rule being embraced by feminist that says: when men are in the power sexual saddle they can be encouraged to destroy those other competing males....and so they do with their muscle headed expressions...and torturous treatments touting worst case scenarios. If societies want a world full of those muscle heads, they will get it, and the results will mean a continuing greater violence and wars from men/women who belong out with the dogs and in the dog house, and not on the porch, or in any civilized abode. (Read about other invasive laws created by those in power on this Web Site titled "Burning The Flag And The 1798 SEDITION ACTS". Much of the same twisted mind-set as witnessed in a today educated ignorance (not good science) reminds one of past blindness and power represented in movies like "The Crucible", "Splendor In The Grass" with Natalie Wood and Warren Beathy, and "The Majestic" with Jim Carrey", etc.) I believe that women are justly and finally at an advance in the sexual game. But that does not justify a wide swing in laws against men.

Another example is the teenage pop star Miley Cyrus, once that Disney Channel's purist and innocence, now strutting risky videos tempting males out of their mind and money; an example of the females' need to show it all. We see this same need in modern women who wear dresses so short that they bluff modesty by constantly pulling down on the dress, especially when sitting down. This flaunting would never have been acceptable in past societies. I say that there is nothing wrong with women's new opportunities for personal expression. The problem comes when in our modern society we allow this pulling apart and spreading out in obvious sexual temptation, paraded by women and school girls, spread all over the Internet, magazines at our favorite grocery store, billboards, sides of buses, and television, etc., and then, pass laws that control sex for everyone else more vociferously than those whose ancestry is more appropriately of the kennel club class, and the politically and monetarily booted and spurred.

The powerful continue to argue from a few destructive cases while they discourage and obstruct the interviewing of those many innocuous sexual cases. For example, recently the flauntingly palpable omission in any public debate from psychologist over the case of Utah's Elizabeth Smart's accused kidnapper Brian David Mitchell's step-daughter, who claims a sexual relationship with Mitchell from seven years old to twelfth years old, and yet she visits Mitchell in jail and defends him on the news. Even though no one is advocating legal sex with a seven year old, where's the evidence for a total destruction of this women. This is a genuine question that needs an answer not only from one side of the debate. If the women were totally, or even a little destroyed, one would imagine that she wouldn't want anything to do with Brian David Mitchell. Nonetheless, consequently, one needs to remember that in logic one cannot logically argue from the particular to the general and apply one case to all cases. Nevertheless, as I've predicted, that is exactly what has happened in the state of Utah as, lesbian and feminist looking and acting females, appeared on a local television show equating the tragically violent kidnapping case of Elizabeth Smart to all sexual cases under the magical age of eighteen (we need a plasizmograph sexual record of just who these individuals are). It was clear that the target of these women is males. They even say that the majority of cases are never reported, thereby, leaving a kind of assumption that there are all those many cases out there that would surly wish to be reported....of course, there are some that would. The asexuals, bisexuals, lesbians, and feminist, along with they're machophile male cahoots have managed to co-opted the truth. To amalgamate the Elizabeth Smart travesty to all those other sexual cases has become just another rout for feminism. Modern psychology is too often more focused on primal emotion and power, than truth. You would think that if psychologist understood the human nature and mind as much as they imagine, then they would already have power over mankind much like in the movie "Dune". True they do have a lot of power, but without unimpeachable understanding. It can be relatively easy to find worst case scenarios involving human relationships, but that is not justifications for passing laws against all such activities.

These are just some examples of the powerful's primal need to be in control of the universe even in the face of common sense and conspicuous truth. They conscribe anecdotal evidence as empirical evidence stating that basic instincts equate to enforcing laws relating to the right to drive or drink alcohol. Furthermore, recent studies have determined that (loving) teenage sexual relationships do not have a detrimental effect on youthful emotions or educations (105th Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association). Of course, this research is not surprising to intelligent people who have long understood that the debate goes on and on because this group of booted and purred just don't know what the hell their talking about. We'll soon witness more research proving that denying ones sexual instincts is harmful....inclusively, that a male may become impotent if he doesn't use it. This is just further evidence invalidating present day laws that criminalize too many personal sexual relationships as well as regulated prostitution. Additionally, what will they say should science discover that (some) men/women are more blinded and driven by instincts' designed sexual pheromones?....Evidence they don't want to be discovered! What will they say if science discovers that the reason females are developing early is a cause from epigenetic influences battling back against expert tinkering with nature's instincts? You should understand that their primal game is about power over your personal life.

The facts are that injurious relationships may exist between any human beings. People of disenfranchised genetics, emotions, and educations may be harmful to themselves or someone else in society. Some young individuals are far more affected by the needs of authority for power over sex, and their pressures that engender shame and fears over the powerful emotions, jealousies, and possessiveness of sex and procreation. Authority has a natural desire to possess its mate's sexual proclivities against any and all other suitors and paramours (possessiveness, as opposed to a lasting responsibility and friendship, is a grand problem with many human relationships. Possessiveness can be so powerful in some individuals that they won't allow their mate to befriend, touch, hug, or kiss another human being. Of course, this is why many marriages end in divorce and damage to all family members). Of course, many among the opposition often say "Well, your advocating a Sodom and Gomorrah, or anything goes"....Not so if you read the beginning paragraphs above. I'm referring to the real world behind the scene, that has always existed, especially for the booted and purred. The facts are that the booted and purred have always rigged the rules in their favor....among other things, as attested to by my remarks above about Vegas. It's mournful to watch the booted and purred occult their witch's torches while they are being slapped on the hand for their fancied indiscretions, while you're being totally torched and divested of yours. In the scientific methodology, if there is any evidence opposed to conclusions, then those conclusions must be revised. Growing up in a world of human relationships can be harmful to the weak and disenfranchised, but does not justify laws created controlling everyone else in society, but it does demand humanitarian societal efforts to educate, and to the mental health of all, and those disenfranchised.

Future genetic engineering is the only likely solution keeping everyone from harm. In the mean time, governments do not have a right to enforce their personal instinctual efforts at winning the sexual competition beyond protecting the individual from force, disease, pregnancy outside marriage, and determining, what I would say should be a younger age of consent. I have outlined ideas for real technical solutions independent of emotional biases like vasectomies/tubal ligation, medical VD checks, and coded audo/video records of consent. Those fixed, empirical, and unprejudiced solutions, which must be at hand in cases of claims of abuse, provide the only adjudging powers afforded the government over basic instincts. The only way around those rights is when governments can show general over-all harm to society, like over population, and not some individual harms that fall through the cracks as acclaimed by psychologist. Individual harm can be discovered throughout society, and marriage, but we do not outlaw marriage, etc. The powerful too often seek controls coincidence to their personal image and best interest, but there are dominations that one may enjoin in a free society that one should not enjoin. In my nearly seventy years, I've witnessed American families and educational system deteriorate while psychologist argue over how to make improvements....and continued to pass laws. I believe that the next major improvements in America's and the world's societies will come through the ever accelerating evolution of science and technology. Little will change before that scientific evolution emerges and human nature is changed for evermore.

Meanwhile, keep your eyes on today schools, colleges, and university campus sexploits and sextexting in papers, books, and over the Internet. They begin the process of changing society's lies about what's right and wrong about sexuality. They will begin to remove much of the legislated morality and power of those booted and spurred, and those personal agendas applying worst case scenarios to the eighty to ninety percent of cases that would never want to be revealed, from power over the young and oldies sex lives. What will governments do about sextexting, etc., once science creates the next advances in computers which may be invulnerable to hacking, even by government (of course, I believe that the answers will only come once science can change human nature). Those moralists are the masters of angering the masses of people until a day comes when the people have had enough and the world is again back at war....a cause of endless wars. Unfortunately, the people never remove all of the booted and spurred, and soon they're right back in power, racing to dominate and control the world.

I can find many quotations among the Enlightenment Era founding fathers regarding religion in our American constitution that reflects on a commiserating, uncanny, and compelling association with modern day psychology and its definitions, interpretations, and explanations of sexuality. For example: "We discover in the gospels {psychology} a groundwork of vulgar ignorance, of things impossible, of superstition, fanaticism and fabrication"...."No mind beyond mediocrity dares there to develop itself". "Millions of innocent men (mostly men since the advent of women's suffrage which was long justly due in its enactment), women and children, since the introduction of Christianity {psychology}, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have not advanced an inch towards uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools (many men and some women), and the other half hypocrites (booted and purred men and women flaunting and spreading out their sexual conquest, and otherwise, the goading and tempting vulnerable young and old men out of their mind and money (media), to support roguery and error all over the earth." ~ Thomas Jefferson ~ Beaver (PARAPHRASE).

It's clear that there is a scheme among psychologist out to enforce their personal interpretations of law and right and wrong; and thereby, to create a world where human beings dare not defy decrees dismantling natures consensual and loving relationships. Their plan is an obvious one that destroys yours, and in turn, does embellish their sexual and inheritable power for now and into posterity. What we find is an intrigue of constitutional crimes in the guise of saints. Of course, this group does not want to hear deleterious logic that could threaten their primal governing exercise of sexual authority.

I challenge enlightened legislators to investigate every single individual and family member touched by this cabal of psychologist and law makers, not just in the present, but in their future outcomes and happiness. And that muster of interviewers must include individuals of outspoken antithesis points of view. They will find a lot of individuals and families needlessly destroyed by their actions. They should compare America's age of consent laws with those of nations like Spain and compare harm and cost of incarcerations and happiness to all involved. Although, I do believe that Spain should include laws requiring a vasectomy, tubal ligation, medical record/check for disease, and coded (to prevent accidental or pompous display on the Internet...self destructing after a predetermined period., etc.) auto/video record before every sexual encounter with anyone under eighteen (There is no absolute evidence, even more particularly today. Nothing here would prevent a complaint of abuse. A good reason to enlist unbiased technology). Note that nowhere in mammalian biology do immature males find it easy to have sex with fertile females. In America it adds up to young pregnancies and divorces to the tune of 85%. Considering this evidence, it's not surprising that psychologist have such a poor reputation among the public.

Considering that young males and females will not be having a vasectomy or tubal ligation, and are more often better off having sex with someone older who may be held responsible, and be more responsible, until eighteen, or older-- they would be ready to wait for the one to marry (they often desire someone older and more mature by nature--check biology). Otherwise, the rules of sex between young individuals would remain largely as now exist. Additionally, I would require an auto/video and disease record of sexual relations between older individuals, outside marriage, single to single, as well as between married and unmarried individuals. Of course, the booted and purred don't want any record of their sexual exploits outside marriage. They want to be able to have baby after baby with one women/man after the other....and so they do! Where's the outrage coming from psychologist over this legalized polygamy and child abuse? It's not hard to guess.

Because of a greater threat of permanent separation, an affair between older paramours, is more certain to end in a divorce. For centuries older males and females had their sexual drives satisfied with younger paramours. And because marriage and pregnancy were not generally a result, and less expected, those older relationships felt less threaten, and remained together much longer. The affairs were usually just a short lived sexual amour no longer an adventure with their long and familiar mate. Conversely, affairs between very young paramours more often end up with a disease, pregnancy, or short term marriage that divorce to the tune of 85% (considering America's legislators and pychologist are pairing peer sexual relations, or no sexual relations, America sports more teenage pregnancies than any other developed nation on earth. When do they learn?). Very young males and females more naturally gravitate toward mature individuals for sexual experiences, and even, like Hugh Hefner's young girlfriends, over money and future security and opportunities. No government should have the right to deny those opportunities for substances and survival; and especially in personal lives, and without organized prostitution, to disclaim poor female and male sexual rights. Of course, the booted and purred among the powerful would like to convince you that they never use their money and power to control societies; therefore, my recommended unbiased technical solutions over sex named above. In a modern society it would lead to more older marriages remaining together, and younger individuals waiting to pick the one to marry and raise children. What we see today among many families, and particularly young marriages at 85%, is a disintegrating right and left, and little that works including educations.

In spite of the fact that America sports more psychologist than ever imagined, in the history of the world, our families and educations are falling apart in comparison to other nations-- even a dictatorial China. The reasons are becoming clear knowing that psychologist and our government are becoming more dictatorial. Someone needs to revisit a quotation by Benjamin Franklin about giving up liberty for a little order and deserving neither and losing both...not to mention, reading about Benjamin Franklin's own sexual exploits. I believe that America's destruction of personal sexual freedoms is one reason for our continuing decline in education and motivation to create and invent through science and technology. Too much of societies time and energies are being lost in efforts to navigate foolish and punitive laws governing personal rights and relationships. The statement was never truer: "Machophile governments and psychologist need to get a life". Benjamin Franklin was right, and soon we could become a third world nation....

The problem with this group of booted and spurred is that they can't, or don't want to understand how life is diverse and competitive and does not always look like them...nor should it. This same group of feminist and moralist attempted prohibition and failed, and now since women's suffrage, have discovered another avenue to power over sexuality, and it's working. They should remember what Einstein said about prohibition "Why do you pass laws that you can't enforce". They're among the same group that has long coerced gays into believing that they're just heterosexuals making bad decisions...until recently. Human beings are not the same, nor do circumstances or environments expect them to be the same. There are men and women who are especially attracted to mates that are fat, legs, breast, etc. For psychologist, or anyone, to attempt to convince another human being to be attracted to the same sexual person is tantamount to forcing a heterosexual to be homosexual, and vice-versa...It's ridiculous. They do this by saying that men/women should be attracted to other less acceptable figures with good personalities, as in a contradistinction to natures drives, and not just to tight figures like Miss/Mister America. The nonsense goes on and on! Additionally, keep your eyes on the media as more and more independent women are reported in sexual relationships with younger and younger males, just as older males have long been attracted to younger females. That is a normal condition of biology...except maybe for asexuals and low sexual individuals...

The one thing that parents do have is a right to direct their children's sexually in a direction in line with their own personal values, something now that both parents are working, is being enforced by an echelon of societal laws out to control everyone else's morals. That should not be a government's right to enjoin in our free constitutional republic. Prisons are costing American's some 60 to 70 billion dollars a year - plus. To continue, Parents should receive support from authorities when a child's at home responsibilities, and school social and grades are suffering from a sexual relationship, to end that sexual relationship without instinctive retribution. Retribution should follow a failure of resolution from warnings, and warnings should be initiated through parents to authorities, and/or through school authorities with evidence of dereliction in those established perimeters.

After careful considerations, itís historically clear how those bullies from a school yard have weaseled themselves into positions of power. In time mankind will discover that growing up to be an adult often likens to losing that childish sense of wonder, discovery, and truer sense of empathy. Maintaining an element of a childish nature is preferable to growing up in an adult hardened, primal blind, and ego central antagonistic view of every other competing human. Itís as though once humans grow-up they experience amnesia of their own youth; too many individualsí instincts and hormones entrench the bad and forget the good. Itís as though many human brains begin to acquiesce to egotism and prejudices which begin to solidify commencing at about the age of thirteen. This concept is diametrically the opposite of most psychologistsí understandings of reality.

P.S. Here's some more legislated nonsense from today law makers: In the voyeurism trial of father-in-law of Utah missing women Susan Powell - of which Steven Powell may be involved - Steven Powell is only charged with secretly taking nude pictures of young neighbor girls from a distance through an open window of which he kept personal to himself, and (supposed) unconsented secret revealing pictures of Susan Powell ...not placing them on the Internet or giving to anyone else. The prosecution was asking that Steven Powell be imprisoned for ten years for this ageless male proclivity where no pictures were shared, and all this in the light of female exhibitionism, flaunting, and sexual harassment of visual male that one sees daily on soap operas, in magazines, on billboards, sides of buses, all media, and all over the Internet, etc. And no, I have never personally taken nude pictures of anyone. It's not my thing. Here is just two days worth of female sexual harassments plastered daily on my opening page Internet placed to sexually harass males out of their mind and money:

(1) Miley's outfit shows too much (2) Dwt's star flaunts abs (3) Brinkley shows off leggy style (4) McCarthy stuns at pool party (5) Cher's outlit turns heads (6) Katy Perry's oulit shows too much (7) O'Day outlit too revealing (8) Mila stuns in plunging dress (9) Simpson shows too much (10) McCarthy covers playboy at 39 (11) Biel's amazing beach body (12) Mariah stuns in red (13) J. Lo flaunts beach body (14) Jessie J's wardrobe malfunction (15) Lohan's nasty new habit (16) Fox's bikini baby bump (17) Longoria's photo disaster (18) Tyra flaunts her bikini bod - need I go on. There is worse on soap operas kids watch with their parents daily, or see on the street. I've seen many a women walking down the street in mini-skirts so short they show everything with every step, and particularly when they sit down.

Let's be clear that I'm not against women's new found exhibitionism if legislators change the laws to reflect commonsense sexual rights for men and women named above. And I can tell you right now that had someone taken a nude picture of me when I was young, I wouldn't care if they plastered all over the place. Still, I can understand that some people wouldn't like their nude picture all over the Internet at any age, particularly adult pictures. But to some extent I think of this silliness like people's disdain for women breast feeding babies in public. How rediculous! They need to get a life. Furthermore, to believe that so many women disrobe in front of open windows without foreknowing is rediculous...They do it in public while laughing at male naivete'. Next thing you know they'll be wanting to outlaw life itself. And to think the kinds of wars we have gotten from these kind of people over the ages is evidence any evil is possible from those in power.

Luckily, in this case, the judge saw through some public and prosecutors nonsense and reduced Steven Powells sentences, but not as much as I would have. These kinds of laws are a result of feminism - not the average women or girl - over the last several decades. They are making the same misstake they made over prohibition. Not all of their concerns are wrong, but they go too far creating nonsensical laws that have resulted in the imprisonment of some one million totally non-violent men (including drugs), and an American prison system holding 25% of the worlds prisoners. This nonsense is as evil as the inquisitions and dark ages. Thomas Jefferson talked about the violent penalties enacted in England over largely innocuous crimes. American moralizing legislators are at it again in history as leader have throughut history over and over again. Their game is about power over procreation, power over money. Still I can believe that Steven Powell may have been involved in the death of Susan Powell, but that has yet to be proven.