I would like to make a commit on this news account just posted on an Internet news page: (2/16/2011) BOSTON — "Sen. Scott Brown has revealed he was sexually abused as a child several times by a camp counselor and has detailed physical abuse by a stepfather.
The Republican senator from Massachusetts made the revelations in an interview to air Sunday night on the CBS program "60 Minutes."

"Brown says the camp counselor threatened to kill him if he disclosed the sexual abuse.
"He said, 'If you tell anybody ... I'll kill you. I will make sure nobody believes you,'" Brown said in the interview.
Brown also said he looked into buying a home where his stepfather had physically abused him just so he could "burn it down."……."
~ The Associated Press.

As terrible as those kinds of revelations can be (homosexual on heterosexual and vice versa) they’re more often further exacerbated and misinterpreted by media and public prejudices. The truth is that these egregious cases disguise nature’s aggressive instinctual proclivities. Too often authorities inappropriately recur these tragedies to others and even heterosexual interludes under the hammered age of eighteen even when engaged in vociferously proclaimed consensual relationships.

I have often witnessed average individuals and others in positions of power who fail to understand scientific evidence revealing several different natural sexual leanings (named previously). They simply refuse to accept overwhelming evidence (I'm not attempting to justify the egregious case above). I don’t wish to repeat that evidence which is readily available in many studies. I will just list several of the more assertive analogies: Sex is a kind of war for power and survival. It’s a very powerful force and human life would long ago have become extinct if it were not so. Additionally, it’s not surprising that those lucky in love do marshal they’re advantages against competing natures. We witness this throughout nature and in human competitiveness for a mate….often called “love and war”. Too many successful humans at the game of “love and war” deride and castigate anyone different or failing at this game. They often push any failures aside with disdain instead of offering a helping hand. I say that far more efforts should be made aiding the personal consensual sexual relationships of all human beings and we’d discover that our world is a much better place to live in witnessing far fewer egregious tragedies. And as I have discussed previously, by changing failed laws over human sexuality, life will work much better for all human natures.

To get back to the case above, you’ll discover that little consideration will be made regarding the powerful sexual natures of the two criminal perpetrators above. Yes, I agree that penalties must follow forceful and non-consensual sexual relationships. Yet, I wonder how many empathic heterosexual human beings exist to understand homosexual proclivities (I’m totally heterosexual from my earliest memories and it can be hard, from a biological sense, to understand homosexuality). However, I don’t really believe that primal nature cares, and that, only a modern advanced intellectual mind can imagine an empathic response. I explained earlier on why I believe that homosexuality is normal; however, presently unfavored by human nature and counterpoised to heterosexuality. My question is to just how many truly modern advanced minds exist in this world…not enough.
As a truly heterosexual male I can’t imagine the incredible pressures visited upon a homosexual born into a largely heterosexual world. It must be terribly traumatic. So for me, it’s exceedingly important for empathic human beings to seek sexually fulfilling lives for every other human being. This would require heterosexuals to suppress some of that violent instinctual and aggressive response to natures competing sexual proclivities…that same response you may militantly project onto those two accused perpetrators above….the stepfather; the camp counselor; and/or....we can continue on with instinct's violent and hateful responses in which we adjudge to be a reasonable response by society and its contradicted victims. (Maybe society and science will decide to remake every human being either homosexual or heterosexual. Of course, I belileve that making everyone heterosexual would better endear both sexual natures together even if children are no longer borne by the female. This could be a kind of final solution once completed).

The point that I’m posing is that to internalize that kind of vengeance and hatefulness will do more harm to the advancement of our civil society, as well as, to the emotional healing of Senator Scott Brown. I’m sure that it’s hard for me to fully imagine Senator Brown’s pain, but my opinion on internalizing hate stands. It could be that Senator Brown already understands the frailties of hate and will find a less destructive and satisfying outlet. It seems to me that for him to run for Senate of the United State Congress, and then succeeding, provides evidence that he’s working to turn a terrible trauma into a resounding revival!

One thing is certain, and that is, that too many non-violent men, as well as a few truly deserving violent men, are being adjudicated by the hundreds of thousands for their sexual predispositions, and then, they're rendered into prisons more often akin to dark age dungeons with historical thugs and torturers. Conversely, millions of women and girls continue their flouncing in bare skinned apparel and dresses so short and revealing that little is left to the imagination and wanting eyes in schools, on the streets, and over the media and Internet as though all is inviolate and should not unduly enamor more visual males. Is that really true? Machophile males and feminist pychologist are playing a double-blinded game that justify destroying competing heterosexual males; and feminist (tendency to matriarchy), along with other sexual natures, are out to destroy heterosexual power.
Evidence suggest that these heterosexual games are being encouraged by the booted and spurred in the media, and machophile males and their female lovers, out to garner power, and at the expense of vulnerable young and older males. As I’ve iterated before, there is nothing wrong with women and girl's newly found right to show it all, so long as laws don’t abrogate men’s natural sexual rights to consensual sexual relationships, within the boundaries afore mention. The facts are that the failures of present day laws, that justify imprisoning thousands of non-violent men, are their own evidence of foolhardiness, or better said, heartless foolishness.

Let’s be clear that a primal pleasure response of an ignorant torch carrying public, which reminds us of the primal pleasure response of the conflicting sexual nature mentioned above, will never find a solution; but it will take the unemotional responses of men and women of science. Otherwise, the conflicts will continue perpetually including society’s primal turpitude in response. That is my belief.

Additionally, to continue this synopsis on homosexuality and heterosexuality, I would like to pose a statement and question over the sometimes emotional pressures seemingly especially experienced by heterosexual females to reveal consensual sexual relationships engaged in at an earlier age: From biology we witness a strong inherent drive for proof antecedent to reproductive desirability. We witness throughout nature how mating is preceded by physical and fanciful exhibits and displays. This activity appears to be deeply inborn in nature. So when I hear an women tell me that there was no ring, no effort, no proof of love.... It was too easy. They say that they feel used with no lasting security benefits to a future family. On top of all this, they felt shamed by social norms and prohibitions against (female) sex before marriage.

I believe that much of this primal inborn prerequisite to sex, much like phromones, has dissipated in modern humans, but still, it revivies in some females, and to a differing degree in others and aggressive males, as a kind of strong primal eroticism (some of these individuals continue to attain too much power in modern society). The end result is an impelling desire to tell all at some future point in a female's life as though that will cleanse their shame and self respect. This urge is a left over from our days in the jungle. I believe that this desire, to tell all, does not exist as strong in most modern women today. Nonetheless, it exist in enough modern women to cause havoc in today sexual allegations. And those women do suit the sexual and power mongering strategies of the booted and spurred who search for every possible avenue garnering personal power and to spurn the competition....both men and women. I do not believe that those few women represent the vast majority of women who engaged in loving sexual relationships at a young age without disease, apparent and overt force, or pregnancy (105th Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association...loving youthful sex not a problem). Females will be discovered to be just as able as males to survive sex at a younger age before marriage.

Once a female or male reach puberty more often (some) female's feelings and emotions are suddenly more ruled by the above mentioned inborn perimeters, and a shame and desire to reveal all may overcome. Inclusively, we've all witnessed young girls and women as they parade in revealing dresses and makeup, and males demonstrating their muscles and antics. More modern females and males include a greater degree of civil and intellectual parading to those exhibitions. There is a slow evolution from a primal sexual relationship to a modern intellectual sexual relationship. Especially, in modern females, whereby an intellectual nature is superior to the bronze and muscle of a more primal sexual drive, I believe that the overcoming pressures to reveal consensual sexual relations from a youthful age, will wane.

One way to research this idea would be by anonymously questioning older women as to whether they still believe that imprisioning hard working, and even successful professonal, many who are non-violent men, for years over loving and consensual sexual relations with them at a young age, where there was no disease, overt force, or pregnancy, was a good idea. There is obiously something inherently wrong when asexual, weak sexual, and feminist along with their machophile male cohorts, continue to rationalize the imprisonment of large numbers of ordinary as well as professonal men of all degrees of careers and success, as though, somehow those men/women are all mentally and biologically defective, over sexual desires with young fertile females. Conversely, the evidence tends to prove that authorities are designing realities that support their own sexual and political power. The true evidence is more proof that today sexual laws are confirming a continuing primal control over a more modern intellectual dominion. If you listen closely to authority you'll note a strong aggressive and venomous parlance and pompous display of worst case scenarios. You'll note in court rooms and in public venues the smirking and smiling of accusators and courtroom officers that further provides proof of a defect in authority's adjudications...even within the jurors own minds. They smile because they really understand that there are underlying lies that justify destroying those sexual competitors. Those among them who are not open minded human beings will ignore the evidence presented here.

I should add that many young girls are a more modern intellectual sexual human, but some still turn in consensual sexual relationships over shame or fear of being discovered and they preemptively and understandably place the blame on the male especially in cases of pregnancy or disease. Most cases are turned in by others or discovered through associations; in other cases, authorities gang up on them in interviews convincing them of the shame of it all, and that they and the male and society will fair better off for the revelations. The young girls have no idea what those demon interviewers are up to, as their plans will destroy both the young girl's family and the male by throwing totally non-violent human beings into commensurate dark age dungeons with modern age thugs and torturers...then authorities vociferously deny being modern day witch hunters. It's only later, once females are disassociated from the relationship, that they'll discover the truth, but then, as a result of the revelations, and by the power of social taboos, they're further divorced form veracity. The end result of all these revelations over a very sensitive and emotionally driven instinct is a brainwashing of the young females, and the destruction of many educated and totally non-violent men and families; as well as, a lost of their future contributions to society. The cost to society adds up to millions and millions of dollars and wasted talent for America (some say that the over-all cost of America's prisons is over two trillion dollars). Worst case scenarios do exist, but ninety percent of those cases are consensual and non-/violent in every way. Authorities love to focus on worst case scenarios! It's time to put an end to authority's deceit, and remove society's sexual nature from the primal jungle, and to place it sensibly into a modern age of common sense rules. Present day rules encourage the procreation of more thugs as they justify the reduction in the numbers of non-violent procreations by successful hard working humans. The end result of this nonesense will simply insure a continuation of mankinds violent and warring ways. Since this group of primal natured humans still populate governmental power strings, change will be strangled.

There is another elaborating element to female sexuality that further relates to young female sexual desires and tendencies to tell all. And that is nature's instincts directing females only to precreate with alpha males. We see this prerequisite throughout nature, and it's not surprising to witness its existence, to a degree, in modern females who pursue bad boys. The difference in modern human females is that much of this drive may now be abated in favor of more males in a mode of intellect, success, as well as health. In line with those more primal females, mentioned above, I believe that these more primal alpha pursuing females have a greater drive to tell all over consensual sex at a young age. Still, I'm convinced that most modern evolved females don't desire to tell all over a loving youthful consensual sexual amour, and that most reports are from pressures issuing from authorities. This primal tendency to tell all may not be any more or less prevalent in the educated or professional female because of unknown social and environmental pressures today, and from their past influences on epigenetics. Obiously, some males have remaining primal drives, also, as is attested to by their aggressive responses to sex and competing males. Again, this drive is more pronounced in males whose drive is a grander throwback to the primal jungle...not so in more modern and empathic males. Unfortunately, I believe that too many females and males of the primal nature still control our laws and power strings...and media.

I accept that my approach to this subject is a somewhat existentialism injected with elements of personal observational inductive logic. What's that "empirical existentialism"? To my layman senses, it is simply an effort to inject as much of common sensual and real scientific analysis as possible into an existential understanding of human life and sexuality. {Inclusive to it all, I'm a transhumanist in a final analysis. Science is about at a point where it will change the arguements}. I'll admit that it's very worrisome to realize that so many people still view this subject emotionally and not very logically. Case at point, is a resent study questioning parents about their children's sexual attitudes, activities, and responsibleness in life and at school. In overwhelming numbers, parent's emotional responses were that their sons and daughters are sexually inactive, and that their fears were that other parent's kids were the big threat to their child's chastity. The facts are that their children are no less sexually wise and active than other children. Many parents simply forget, or choose to forget, their own youthful experiences and reality. Otherwise, their first and foremost fears were that their children could get someone pregnant or themselves get a disease or pregnant. And because of this kind of ignorance, and today pychologist encouraging (peer) sexual relations if any, society finds that youthful disease, pregnancies, and divorces run ramped to the tune of 85% failures for young people. I believe that this outcome is a direct evidence of government and pychologist wrong headed tinkering with natures sexual instincts. I ask you, how much better off is American society than it was earlier in the last century, especially right after women's sufferage when some new laws made sense to protect some women's sexual rights; but then, a (few) powerful feminist took over the strings of power, and sexual rights for the average woman and man went down hill. In the 1960' and 70' young people tried to recover some of those lost sexual rights, but largely got caught up in drugs and other civil rights issues and the Vietnam War. Since that time feminist and their machophile male cohorts have gained ground, and society has been non the better for it. Government and pychologist continue to argue over education, marriage and divorce; and in a resent study, four out of ten American's said that marriage is no longer that important. Wake up America! I believe that the unbiased technical solutions that I propose would help support heterosexuality and reduce the amount of trauma and numbers of youthful pregnancies and divorces significanctly. I do defer to a possibility for replacing my idea for a vasectomies and tubal legations, with new day-after pills, once proven safe. But what would guarantee that they're properly used?

I admit to not being formally educated like some authorities, but someone should revisit what Carl Sagan said about experts and authorities. I simply report experiences and observations from real life. I grew up in the forties, fifties, sixties, and seventies where talk about high school orgies, talk of teachers and student sex, and preachers and priest in sexual relationships (less talk of gay on straight, or straight on gay) was nothing surprising...It was just real life. Most of those teachers continued to contribute far more than any imagined harm...And compared with a loss to society from imprisoning those totally non-violent individuals for life in prisons, there is no commensurate deleterious example. My self, as well as many young boys and girls, felt more trauma from being left out, then from participation. Those who seem more shamed or disgusted were asexuals, weak sesxuals, less attractive, socially brainwashed, or some genetic or other such deprivation. Those same licentious students are now successful and running businesses and our country. They simply choose to forget those early years of their life and use their new powers to further dominate competitors, as they now deal with new sexual laws that control other's lives, and those political and sexual competitors in favor of their's and their own children and inheritable power. It's nothing new for parents, and particularly men, to attempt enforcing sexual rules that deny their own licentiousness...I've witnessed such hypocrisy. Those same men are almost identical to alpha males in a troop of chimpanzees. We need more laws to prevent law makers from passing one law after the other until a day comes when we'll all have no personal rights. They've rationalized this kind of nonesense power grabs since the beginning of recorded history...and they've rarely been right over a cumulative history. In ninety percent of youthful sex lives of those young people, who were not already those few mentally constrained and distraught, are doing just find in life today. They have relatively stable careers, marriages, sex, and children. Many of those young individuals who were left out of those orgies have less happiness and success. The political powers to be and pychologist need to stop their efforts convincing young people that their early sexual licentiousness has anything to do with live's difficulties or successes....ninety-percent of the time it does't. Life is wrought with difficulties including genetic and others of live's seeming battles against all odds. Society once seemed far better off in many ways for staying out of those personal sexual relationships where there was no disease passed, overt force (like homosexual on heterosexual, or heterosexual on homosexual), unwanted sex far below puberty, or undesired pregnancies outside marriage.

  It's significant to mention adolescents social phobias, "and among the commonest diagnosis in females", which could further influence the natural conditions named above. "Social phobia begins in childhood or adolescence, typically around 13 years of age"....I say around about the time of the strongest onset of puberty in females. Of course, this condition is not suspect or inherent for all females, but I question whether it is more pronounced in the more primal sexual female drive. A "family history was present in 38.8%" of cases". I believe there's good reasons for suspecting an exacerbating effect from phobias on the young female's instinctual propensities mentioned above. And considering this may be true, then it's not surprising how pychologist and authorities could easily use fear and shame to embitter the condition in adolescents and adults. As an added note, I would like to add that the fears and shame often promoted by authorities and pychologist over the powerful emotions of sex, pregnancy, and social acceptance, could easily engender a "persistent fear of social or performance situations in which embarrassment may occur". I reiterate that most modern females do not succumb to those phobias in regard to consensual sex at a young age. Therefore, the larger number of cases said to exist out there, in which I would declare, would never want or desire to be revealed to authorities...whose grandest desires are to see just how many totally non-violent men (and women) for which these, witch-hunter thugs in pychology and authorities, can imprison and torture. What we are talking about are laws that take a few atrocious worst cases and apply them to a vast number of innocuous and consensual cases.

I love an unemotional and scientific analysis. I leave it to anyone to prove that my understandings are sophistic. Furthermore, I predict that present day expert tinkering with natures sexual instincts, attempting to prevent the sexualization of asexual and bisexual, and particularly youths to heterosexuality, will result in the ultimate undoing of heterosexuality and equatingly magnifying homosexuality; and this especially further animated by over population; and even possibly by impeding some unrealized osmotic epigenetic transference through sex at a young age, that may have historically aided the propagation of heterosexuality; and of course, without which, may result in heterosexualities ultimate demise (I'm not blaming homosexuality). If you don't think so, then your not an open minded inquisitor. If this degrading of herterosexuality is true and continues, I further predict that the human male, both heterosexual and homosexual, will wither away and the female alone will inherit the earth. Sex is a kind of primal activity and may not tolerate expert tinkering from experts! Heterosexual relationships and marriage are already waning as has been attested to by recent polls showing that four out of ten individuals asserting that marriage is no longer as important. The general public needs to understand that a world encouraging more tinkering into our personal sex lives, from the greatest number of pychologist and public officials in history, has created a better world for them, but not for you, the average citizen.

It's possible that present day school and college sextexting and sexploits will change some of those laws and laggard outcomes. I have other equally striking evidence and examplies comparable to those mentioned above, but I sometimes find it difficult to write on and on in the face of powerful emotionalism and social ignorance now threatening the future of heterosexuality. When I say words like "threatening" I don't mean that the outcome will be ultimately worse for all, but certainly different from most peoples intellections; but certainly worse in the short run for males and heterosexuality....I will further add that coming advances in medical science will likely insure the safety of day-after-pills, or some other solutions preventing unwanted pregnancies; and use nanobots and other means to prevent sexual disease (and even control illegal drug response); and the debate over consensual sex at a younger age will change. But in the mean time, psychologist who have turned reality on its ear by finding normal to be a male having sex with a male, or a female having sex with a female; however, a reality which has long been true in fact and instinct for some 99% of biology, for any aged male to desire sex with a fertile female at any age, is somehow strange is what I call strange (Re: media decrying that a 51-year-old actor from the movie The Green Mile marrying a 16-year-old is some how strange).

This belief system begin with a feminist belief that pregnancy at a young age detoured their power to independence, education, and a profession. It was empowered by convincing booted and spurred males that their inheiritance and daughter's future were in peril. They were right in that pregnancy, disease, or apparent and overt force could damage their's and their daughter's future; but not nature's love and sex. We do need laws against those three outcomes. However, If present beliefs continue heterosexuality is dead. It just has not rolled over yet! In reality, either homosexuality or heterosexuality are only strange in the eye and nature of a biological competitor. Considering how over population is a risk today on earth, the outcome of present thinking, may simply be evolutionary correct for other reasons. I predict that present thinking will result in many more asexuals and bisexuals being sexualized and converted to homosexual; therefore, resulting in fewer pregnancies and a lower population growth...interesting. Therefore, I further predict that the only way to reestablish parity of heterosexuality with homosexuality is to reinstate heterosexuality's equal powers to sexualize asexuals and bisexuals to heterosexuality. I'm not sermonizing against homosexual marriage...only for laws that reestablish parity of sexual power without the risk of young pregnancy, disease, and apparent and overt forceful sexual relationships. I believe that we are already witnessing a conversion of sexuality in society and social media. Keep your eyes and ears on the news!


I would like to get back to solid science which will soon provide more answers. I would like to repeat something that I've said before, that debating this issue with an ingrained sophistic public, is to a degree a waste of time, because soon coming advancements in science will suddenly ameliorate the arguements, one way or the other. Those today powers-to-be, who we have long needed to control crime, who are only a thin line difference from the criminals they purport to control, (not all such individuals are dark-age primal humans, but too many are demons-in-the-guise-of-saints; and...that is evil only in a slightly different face than past Saxons and Huns, or as presented in the excellent 1994 movie "Murder In The First" staring Kevin Bacon and Christian Slater), will be removed from power; or human life on earth will risk total extinction from new powerful creations of science and technology. Because of this group in power America has the highest percentage of citizens in prison. And I say those larger numbers are directly a result of throwing totally non-violent consensual sexual relationships and non-violent drug users into prisons. Because of those in power America ranks 14th out of 34 OECD countries in reading skills, 17th for science, and 25th for mathematics. I re-iterate something that I've phrased before, that America sports more psychologist than ever imaged in history, and more than most any other country in the world, and yet, It has more problems than many other so called lesser, countries of the world...more fail marriages, more teenage pregnancies; just as much or more drug abuses. Go analyze, and then, rationalize that!

Another added note from the news: I just read where law enforement forced individuals not to publish, or to destroy copies of a women's youthful salacious, lascivious, and lecherous diary because it might mislead free willed and autonomous adults contimplating her character and culpablity in a possible crime; whereby, in the same case they condemned and even attacked a man for having created a picture diary - visual men's kind of diary - that resulted from females undressing in open windows - as if they didn't know the window was open - and other pictures which did not involve a crime, even though none of the pictures were sold or distributed. I think they should go to the supreme court over that one. It's as if they're saying that only a judge or expert can interpret the constitution. True, there are still appropriate and inappropriate methods, places, and times for taking those pictures, but they're not so apparent as experts would lead you to believe. They too often think in terms of their own best interest. When have you heard that one before?

No! I have never taken salacious pictures of women; although I might have. I've alway preferred the real thing. But, who I am, should have little to do with men's rights to that kind of diary. The feminist and machophile goofs-balls in legislatures and psychology are devils out to control all of life on earth for their own sexual and monetary benefit. Many feminist have become masters of deception while they continue to enlist the support of machophile male legislatures, who already have their careers and families and sexual satisfaction; as further evidence that women have become masters of strutting their stuff, dressing their daughters like street walkers, flashing in public and in front of open windows, on the Internet, in the media, and wearing dresses so short that they can hardly sit down; but then, they do in clear view of visual males. Count the number of salacious female images, even on first pages of the Internet and media, specifically directed toward bamboozling males out of their mind and money. Hell, young males in high school would even place mirrors on their shoe toes, or use all other methodologies to look up girls dresses, and most girls knew it and didn't care; however, there are alway those few asexuals, angry homosexual women (because they have been forced over time to act like heterosexuals) and girls, and feminist who would complain. Many machophiles were not taking those pictures, or using those mirrors, because they were out having sex with those females.

The problem is not that women do those things, but that ignorant males in legislatures have been bamboozled into passing too many power-laws to lock-up those other competing males who may take a video diary, or become sexually enthralled. It's as though those machophiles in society are out to cheer those salacious pictures of women and girls just so that they can draw out other males to be arrested and destroyed. Feminist clearly understand how power-males are always searching for ways to eliminate the competition...just like in a jungle. Of course, women and girls will loudly pronounce their right to strut their stuff and that they're doing nothing wrong. I agree so long as experts and legislatures stop passing ignorant laws against sex that benefit primarily themselves. Of course there are limits to the time, place, and character of pictures taken; however, the history of machophiles has always been an over reaction. You'll find this to be true throughout history. Most cases should require no more then a stiff fine the first time to make money for a money starved government. Many of these issues remind me of some individual's concerns over breast feeding babies in public; but then, I grew up on a farm where one sees things that city folk think are shameful, alien, and strange, etc. The only thing strange are those asexuals, angry gays, and feminist that come up with those notions. The truth is that a SMALL number of women, including feminist, have used their newly found freedoms to garner power in life's historically contentious struggle with males for power...matriarchy. Women are finally winning in that struggle although the struggle is as much to do about power as equal rights. It only takes 3% of a population of matriphile or machophile to gain control over an entire population of an example in despotic governments, etc. Feminist, angry gays, and asexuals have now invaded psychology and are out to brainwash the average female and machophile into destroying male power, and in the case of SOME angry gays, to destroy heterosexuality all together. Machophile males in legislatures are being shammed by those few female psychologies and don't even see it. I will add that this may be a natural next step in evolution for reasons I won't go into here. I referred to some of those reasons throughout this article. This persuasion has nothing to do with women's justly acquired equal rights, but ascribes only to a SMALL historical percentage of aggressophile females and males who historically have controlled entire populations of average males and females.

Even today there exist a modern scourge to rival that of the Dark Age inquisitions, recent prohibition, age old civil rights, and today sexual civil rights of both gays and straights. Hundreds of thousands of totally non-violent, primarily men of all professions engaged in conconsensual sexual relations, where there was no pregnancy or disease involved, are being lock up in prisons to be tortured by state thugs; and primarily asexual, bisexual, and hateful homosexuals, and feminist who are moralizing in the name of psychology and not empirical science. A primary right and interest of the state is not laws against sex and love, but against pregnancy, disease, and overt force even if in the past those consequence where not enforced or enforceable....They are enforceable today. The animus of many of those laws are as much to do about instinctual power as about right and wrong. Considering the defamation of the KKK through charges of civil rights violations, it may take a similar charge against government and psychological associations. Like with many new laws, they are not all wrong over some changes, but they are historically overbearing. I'm certain that if a Ken Burns kind of "Prohibition" documentary is ever made about state abuses over sexual morality, those witnesses interveiwed will reveal thousands, if not, millions of families that have been destroyed by modern day machophile and matriphile psychologist. They will discover totally non-violent indiviluals, whose destroyed lives and families, have simply faded back into the shadows of society. They are ordinary men and women and not the type of individuals to fight back with guns and bullets, so authorities feel safe in their treachery of the constitution and civil rights. Those psychologist and legislators of moral turpitude will continue the supporting of today sex laws; all the while, as they hide their own slithering paths to favorite madames, neighbor's wifes, mistresses, procreating fatherless children, and/or where what happens in Las Vegas stays in Las Vegas.

I continue to read and hear about more evidence in the news that supports my contention that a few feminist, and others I've mentioned above, have procured psychology and primarily machophile male legislators, to enforce personal vendettas and interpretations of moral right and wrong in order to further their own socialized natures and inheritance. Feminist and machophile psychologist have even create laws to prevent others from interviewing or questioning young girls and boys involved in consensual sex ballyhooing an excuse that it could harm them...but, of course, not so if only questioned by them. This is simply more nonesense to hide the truth. Most of those consensual cases, short of jealousy, pregnancy, and disease, are turned in by others and not by those individuals involved. But I'm continuing this particular report from a today news report regarding the infamous congressional lobbyist Jack Abramoff who is now out of prision. He says that numerous congressmen are engaged in stock market insider trading based on privileged knowledge concerning new legislation in congress on business. They get a head start on when to buy and sell stocks. These are many of the same individuals that pass moralizing laws to control your sexual rights. Nonetheless, I would contend that this treacherous criminal activity is only a drop in the bucket. Of course, some people will claim that these are two different issues. Well, I say that if you believe that, I have heard about a flying pig farm; but I've never witnessed a real pig flying, except maybe, on jet-blue. The truth is that there are at least two different rules in life, and those are the laws for you, and those laws for, what Thomas jefferson would call, the booted-and-spurred. In fact Thomas Jefferson would be in prison today for his sexual relationship with Sally Hemmings. Of course, there are those who try to convince you that Thomas Jefferson never had sex with Sally Hemmings...but I refer you to the flying pig farm. These people can't understand how a genius who was largely responsible for our American constitution could have had sex with a forteen year old girl; but this same group can't understand the sexual proclivities of Benjamin Franklin. I ask you, who do you believe is likely the more intelligent, those ninety-percent of psychologist and today legislators, or Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin. I think that the today sexual game is largely about a few feminist and machophile males in a alpha instinctual power and inheritance struggle against you. While congress is out passing moralizing sex laws regarding who is screwing who, they are out screwing you!

The facts are that I've thought of many many more clips of evidence from a long life that I've lived. I'm very old now. I just don't write them all down when I think of them. I grew up in a puritanical world with little sexual experience, and now find it necessary to say something about what I see as the ignored truth about sex. This subject reminds me of the American age of alcohol prohibition and how so many feminist, and ultimately, more males succumbed to half truths about reality and morality. For example, not everything that led to prohibition was bad. It led to some valuable regulations for society. But to get to those better-for-society rules, moralist trampled on about everybodies constitutional rights and it led to the greatest crime spree in American history. I say that that is what is happening today with sex laws. I believe that if congress insisted on a nation wide assured anonymous poll of every female and male, from the age of twelve to ninety years old, asking them whether they believed that sex to age fourteen is ok so long as medical science could provide exceptional assurance that there is no probability for pregnancy, disease, and it is totally consensual and with no apparent force, would they believe that it is ok; and in conjunction with the same poll, ask those same individuals - first asking them their age - about what age of individual would they prefer to have sex with the first time, or any time in their life. I say that the answers to those questions would blow moralizing psychologist and machophile legislators away! Sex is an instinctual power struggle for precreation and we should be mightily weary of psychologist and politicians who legislate morality. Like total power corrupts totally, moral power can corrupt totally and infamously to the best interest of the legislators. For every totally non-violent male imprisioned over consensual sex, a machophile ends up sleeping with that abandoned female. It is resulting in a Society that maintains a higher number of aggressive members, and violence and wars are an ultimate history. In a world of massive weapons and technologies it's time for the alpha-alpha males to become extinct. As many geniuses have noted, so long as societies continue to spawn a need for militaries and police we are still primal in our nature. Such militancy in a general society can not survive the future of powerful sciences and technologies.

In further consideration of the future of science: We will ultimately discover how much of humanity will survive the coming escape velocity of science. It's hard to believe that this new age of science, created on an average by less aggressive, less emotional, and more empathic humans, will be less empathic than earth's past history of horror and war. I say this because I believe that most men of science have historically been less violent as a group; and I surmise, will only make their move to take over power on earth once it can be accomplished non-violently, by way of overwhelming force from new sciences and technologies. We'll find out in the next fifty years as I do believe that the singularity is near!
swirl_-_personal_web_site_5054002.jpg swirl_-_personal_web_site_5054001.jpg