So this is too funny. I checked back on the Charles Eisenstein 'I Like to Fight" where I posted:
Tereza Coraggio Nov 27, 2022: This does my heart good. I think we need a world that puts children at the center, surrounded by women, who are surrounded by men. Tonic masculinity.
Jay Rollins, Writes The Wonderland Rules: Stealing "tonic masculinity."
Tereza Coraggio: Yes please! I was hoping someone would. It took me a minute to figure out what the opposite of toxic would be.
Jay Rollins, Jan 18: Me and the boys took it and ran with it. :-D
So Jay wrote your second link on Jan 10, John Carter wrote your first on the 14th saying "I stole that from Jay Rollins, and I’m not giving it back." On Jan 19, Harrison Koehli on Political Ponerology writes "What is a man? Quality masculinity is tonic masculinity" citing John Carter and with a clever gin & tonic photo: https://ponerology.substack.com/p/what-is-a-man and then Luc Koch does What is Tonic Masculinity? citing all three.
Does this make me an influencer? Please say I'm an influencer. I've always wanted to be ;-)
Feb 2, 2023·edited Feb 2, 2023Liked by Tereza Coraggio
That is fascinating, its like the Chinese whisper effect for citing / giving credit for coining a phrase.
hehe, yes you are certainly influencing them (and a great many others apparently) :)
I almost invoked your excellent term in a discussion I was having on the Corbett Report website where a fellow had accused me of "bashing masculinity" because I advocated for men getting past the silly macho dogmas that say "gardening, cooking and sowing is for girls" and use our hands to co-create in alignment with Mother Earth, but I sensed the usage of the term would have been wasted on him so I refrained. He is of the train of thought that the solution to all our problems is for men to stop being "sissified" and to rise up in a violent revolt and smash things and go do witch hunts for the oligarchs. I attempted to offer another path more grounded in creativity and courage of the heart but alas, i was told that is nothing more than "60’s idealism that got destroyed."
Very interesting discussion, Gavin. I think you should stop tossing your pearls before snooty snouts and put this into a post on your site, using the term Tonic Masculinity. You are, as I said, what I meant by the concept. I'm not certain that 'the boys' are. I defined it when I coined it as "... a world that puts children at the center, surrounded by women, who are surrounded by men." The boys club only mentions children when John Carter bemoans that courts "give mothers custody to raise boys like defective girls." That is SO SO SO opposite of how I defined it.
Since I can't be part of the boys club and comment without being a paid sub, I think this needs to be another episode. To be continued ...
I think you may be right... while I do come across a few genuinely motivated, intelligent and open hearted people in the forums on there interested in collaborating and using solutions to work towards common goals, there is also a fair bit of hostility, fear (and even thinly veiled bigotry) expressed in the comments on there as well.
Thank you for your kind words and for clarifying what you meant when you used the term.
Yes, I think it costs me one dollar a month to subscribe to James Corbett's website, but I do appreciate his in depth research so I am happy to contribute a little in that way.
I look forward to the future episode that is to be continued :)
Much has transpired since you brought this to my attention, Gavin, and I am forever grateful that you did! I'll be posting my first response later today but it's become much more nuanced and appreciative than it was at first glance.
Jan 15, 2023·edited Jan 15, 2023Liked by Tereza Coraggio
Interesting. I would like to add the following: About Leonard Shlain's "Alphabet Versus The Goddess", what he says in his thesis is also very likely the real esoteric meaning of the Ten Commandments' famous prohibition against "graven images". After all, Moses was the de facto founder of a very patriarchal religion, with very linear thinking at that time. Interestingly, the very literal interpretation of it being against ALL images for any reason (not only worship of idols) generally did not catch on for very long, and remains quite rare in Judeo-Christianity (with the notable exception perhaps of the Amish, who also remain extremely patriarchal).
There were in fact schisms over the differences between "icons" (good) and "idols" (bad) in early Christianity, of course. But otherwise, it was generally not taken very literally overall.
Really interesting point, Ajax. In my research into the OT/ Torah, I came across an odd fact. The exact dimensions given for building the Ark of the Covenant, to house the stone tablets of the 10 commandments, is precisely the same as was found in the Pharaoh's tomb (forgetting which one). They also have enough gold to melt into a statue. And the last scene of Genesis is Joseph, who's stolen all the seed stock for the Pharaoh (the pyramids were called Pharaoh's grain siloes) and turned the population into indentured servants by taking their livestock, land and children. EXCEPT for his own family, who he welcomes.
It's my theory that those called the Hebrews were actually the ruling elite and were driven out by a revolt of the enslaved Egyptians. There are many other proof points I'll go into at another time.
What the 10 commandments forbid is individual sins against authority, but they say nothing about the morality of the society and what's right and wrong for them. No prohibitions against enslaving other people, for instance, or torture or wars on someone else's land. You and I could certainly have come up with better, in developing a moral code with the same word count.
Thanks for your thoughtful reply and good information!
Jan 15, 2023·edited Jan 15, 2023Liked by Tereza Coraggio
You're very welcome, Tereza. Very interesting theory you have. If so, that is a classic example of a "patriarchal reversal", as Mary Daly would say, and a DARVO to boot. (The Egyptians were far more gender egalitarian than the Hebrews/Israelites, and had plenty of female Pharaohs.) Another theory too: apparently the ancient Egyptians had a total of 40 commandments, ten of which may have been at least partially plagiarized by Moses.
Charlton Heston is probably spinning in his grave right now, of course.
I'm loving the image of CH spinning in his grave ;-)
What's a DARVO?
If we look at "Love the Lord thy God" as meaning Pharaoh, as it later became Caesar in the NT, it becomes absolutely sinister. And Pharaoh of course, was God, so why would it mean anything else?
Jan 15, 2023·edited Jan 15, 2023Liked by Tereza Coraggio
DARVO = Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender.
Very interesting indeed. The "divine rights of kings" comes to mind. Saint Paul of Tarsus, the founder of what should be called Paulianity, basically rubberstamped that idea with "all authority comes from God" and "slaves, obey your masters with fear and trembling", and the rest is history.
Oh! This is fascinating. I was hoping it was these. I read them in their original format as part of an art exhibit and was struck by how wise and thorough they were. I like the "I have not" much better than "Thou shalt not" which makes whoever is seen as saying them above everyone else, rather than a personal commitment where everyone's equal.
DARVO's such a succinct acronym. That's exactly what I say the Bible has done, turn history upside-down and inside-out and turn the heroes into villains and the villains into heroes.
I remember Frederick Douglas talking about his hatred of Paul, who was read to them as slaves. Paulianity is a good name for it.
Jan 16, 2023·edited Jan 16, 2023Liked by Tereza Coraggio
Frederick Douglass was a very wise man indeed.
Another thing I noticed is that while the Egyptian 42 Commandments prohibit rape as well as adultery, the Hebrew Ten Commandments curiously do not prohibit rape, only adultery (which was historically defined one-sidedly under patriarchy).
In fact, not only is there plenty of rape in the OT that is tacitly or even openly approved of (!), but the word "consent" does not appear anywhere in the Bible (OT or NT) except once: the part where Paul says that spouses may not withhold sex from one another (aka "defraud ye not one another), except "for a time" with "mutual consent". The more one reads the Bible, the worse and worse it looks.
Jan 15, 2023·edited Jan 15, 2023Liked by Tereza Coraggio
And then later Jesus distilled the Ten Commandments into only two: 1) Love God with your whole heart, your whole soul, and your whole mind, and 2) Love your neighbor as yourself. But he was notably silent about graven images and stuff like that. One could argue that he superseded the original Ten Commandments. And he added the Golden Rule as well, as a corollary.
The rabbit hole goes deep. The golden rule, I remember from my days at the Jesus Seminars, preceded Jesus attributed to other people and religions. David Graeber talks about religions of altruism arising at the same time as coinage that made people participate in the conquest of their neighbors in order to survive--the origins of our system today. It created the logical corollary to pure greed, pure altruism. Before that were systems of reciprocity.
Jan 15, 2023·edited Jan 15, 2023Liked by Tereza Coraggio
So pure altruism and pure greed are really two sides of the same coin then?
Charles Eisenstein I think made a similar argument.
Kinda like how the Protestant Work Ethic (TM) and rampant mindless consumerism are also two sides of the same coin in the (post)modern era. One is used to justify the other. Because GROOOOWWTH! Or something.
Yes, that's exactly right. It's a section in his book Debt that I quote in mine. In the Inuit culture, for instance, they say, "Up here we're human, of course we don't let people starve." But it's not a religion, it's just how people are, and were, before the coinage-slavery-taxation triangle, as he calls it.
I think it's similar to how they get us all to take responsibility for pollution with recycling, so we don't question the corporations churning out useless stuff and packaging and dumping their waste in the ocean. Religions of altruism make us responsible for taking care of people whose lives have been trashed by capitalism, rather than asking why we're all hanging by a thread.
Graven images put false gods above the True God — Hence, not loving Him with one’s whole heart, soul and mind. This applies to any idol put in place of God.
The two precepts are a distillation of the vertical and horizontal planes of the Ten Commandments. They do not alter, supplant or supersede
It is true that many of the top Nazi brass and their philosophers were closet matriarchists to one degree or another, despite being outwardly patriarchal men.
Their economic system, which was actually different than that of other fascist governments and movements, was also very similar in some ways to Ellen Brown's ideals discussed in Web of Debt.
That said, a stopped clock can be right twice a day, and that doesn't make the Nazis any less evil or genocidal. Nor does it make Jews inherently evil either.
MGTOWs (Men Going Their Own Way), part of the so-called "manosphere" are a joke, a self-parody, and most likely controlled opposition.
What you say about (strict) monogamy of course is correct. It was created by patriarchy (not only Abrahamic religions, but their Kurgan predecessors as well) and decidedly one-sided, not to protect women, but to control them like a protection racket, and virtually guarantee paternity certainty. And Jordan Peterson's promotion of "enforced monogamy" (his words, not mine) show that he too is controlled opposition.
Jan 16, 2023·edited Jan 16, 2023Liked by Tereza Coraggio
I see that cwspangle has been banned from the Substack, most likely due to overtly anti-Semitic posts. Some of what he said in various posts was indeed a bit out of line in that regard, but other things he said did make some sense perhaps. He seems like a mixed bag overall.
I know, ironic right? I talk about being banned and then immediately ban someone 'indefinitely', which likely shows up as 100 years for them.
And you're exactly right. He (I'm guessing) said many things that were interesting, with which I potentially agreed or at least were worth further investigation. And then, among his 18 comments in quick succession were:
"The U.S. State Dept. has been infested with communists since WW1 and Woodrow Wilson, they tried to steal the Russian elections for their comrades in the Russian Communist Party through non-profit NGOs... just like at home in America... But Vladimir Putin defeated them, so they launched a faggot jihad against the Russian Orthodox church over the punk rock band and the Olympics... Miss neo-kabbalah lesbian Madonna, now rumored to be a Muslim convert, was flown in to agitate when Hillary went on a world-wide gay pride tour... And while Leon Puñettas (sic) was busy with gay pride celebrations at the Pentagon, two Navy Seals, a U.S. Airman, and a U.S. Ambassador were murdered, all because everyone was being so fucking gay."
and "Muslims increased their numbers only by raping women. It is the Sunnah of the Prophet, according to the Qur'an Muslims should do the same things that Muhammad did. Jews and Muslims have similar roots and customs. Bitter Marxists hate Caucasians. Jewish bankers have filled Europe with Muslims and America with Third World garbage. The Jews are unclean demons, like the Turks... Hitler was right."
So I've been thinking to write about the Double Propaganda Troll, who takes conspiracy research and mixes it with hate speech to discredit it. When I disagree with the Robs, it's on ideas with respect for them and everyone else. If attacks on generic people are allowed to be mixed in with research into specific systems and those in charge of them, it opens up the whole to be dismissed or worse--labelled racist or anti-Semitic accurately.
Your thoughts? Also, we're thinking alike on Ellen Brown and Web of Debt, per my posts below:
Fascinating read, although I always thought the thing with universal left-side baby holding was about having the infants ear near the caregivers heart beat.
Oh, that makes so much sense. Now I wonder if right-handedness became dominant in women because of that instinct in holding babies, rather than the other way around. It never occurred to me that it was so ingrained until he mentioned it.
I imagine it might be linked. I made myself a baby sling and carried baby mostly with the left arm around the baby so I could do stuff. The baby fits in my sling like you would be putting a broken arm in a sling, just there is a baby in the arm. The sling holds the baby leaving your left arm free but outside of the sling can hold the baby as needed too.
Slings are definitely underrated for carrying babies. I carried all three of my girls in a ring sling for preference, although my wife often preferred a Tula style carrier since the one shoulder sling was hard on her little shoulders. The sling was so easy to carry or tuck under a coat when not in use, and not boiling hot, that I chose it first.
Whichever style though, the take home is that strollers are a trap.
Yes, likely that is the reason. Sweeping statements of 'always' aren't always useful or true. It is important for the baby's muscle development to vary how you hold them routinely, especially for feeding or the neck muscles might shorten and stay turned towards the direction they are always fed.
I’m left-handed, and I definitely carried my kids more often on my right side— I had no idea that was so unusual. I mostly preferred a front or back carrier over a sling, though.
Slings are not common and many designs I have seen put the child in oddly. I madee my own based on a book I read about what South American native people do. It sounded good to me at two weeks post new life as a mom instead of an independent human.
Haha, you're fulfilling my youngest daughter's prediction when I tried to get her to watch it because no one had in the first hour. She said, there are people who are going to see it and love it, so leave me alone! That's why we need a tribe of women and not just surly daughters ;-)
Hi Tereza, first let me say your are so kind and professional and well, I admire your calm cool intellect toward the ROBS. I don't know this Rob Brezsny, but Malone has to be falling off the radar for most as I am finding his information not useful. When I had the gall to ask him what knowledge he had of the defense contractors production of the vaccines, which I heard about from Peter McCullough, I was reprimanded by a goon of his that I should not be directing that question toward him. Second thank you for the links you gave Ajax the great, I just listened to them all.
Helene, what a lovely compliment! Was your question on Malone's Substack? Since I'm not on it anymore, I need spies ;-)
And I can't believe you listened to all four episodes! I wasn't even sure they were still available as audio but radio4all.net is such a fantastic resource. I need to send them a donation and keep the bandwidth going.
When you said you listened, I checked to see if it worked, and it was SO nostalgic. I love my Take Back the City theme song, and the poems I included. Every week I had to come up with 3000 words to fill a half-hour, so 500 a day, with the day I just picked poems as a mini-vacation. A guy called Skidmark Bob helped produce it and he picked songs that went with my themes. Oh, I really miss that collaboration. Thank you for prompting me to take that time trip!
Jan 15, 2023·edited Jan 15, 2023Liked by Tereza Coraggio
Wow. Poor Rob's feelings are a little fragile, or a lot.
"Well, I guess unless they’re critical of you."
Yes, it is sad that women are encouraged to speak up until they do so.
*I do think it is about male competitiveness. Everything under the sun can be done better by a competitive man. (Except listening.) **It seems like a compulsion sets in - and listening becomes impossible when under a dopamine obsessive thought. Back away from the man who is "always right."
Your phrase about women speaking up is so well-put.
I'm so glad that you brought up competitiveness because I think that's the essence of patriarchy, which is also toxic masculinity. In a discussion on Charles Eisenstein's thread (were you there?) we were talking about matriarchy being a contradiction in terms because the concept of hierarchy was masculine competition. So it's not about women "getting ahead," it's changing the concept to a common purpose, which is what family represents to me--the universal in the particular. Everyone grew up in one, and most of us wish our parents had been better supported in being parents. What do you think, Jennifer?
I come from an ethology direction - the triune brain theory book made a big impression on me. Humans discredit how huge an amount of subconscious behavior patterns are innate instincts. Male competitiveness is not 'toxic' to me - it is male - across many species. Why call it toxic - just talk about it more maybe so they can lighten more by seeing it better. Larger males in a species are typically the protectors of the group and the female the protector of the her individual young. Males typically work together to patrol a territory as a group and tend to select a leader. Females may have a few elder lead women but each tends to focus more on protecting her immediate 'nest' from any other invader. I do think the pair bond is healthy for society and kids or we need a smaller village group home model to help with providing service and role modeling and a break to single parents or low functioning parents and their kids. Having a protective man who listens would be a 'father figure' - and that would be nice and not toxic imo.
In an emergency it is best to simply follow orders and know who is expected to give them and have a hierarchy planned for replacements in case something happens to that person. Traditional models have some value, including fitting in with ancient instinctual patterns of behavior. Women and men tend to trust a male voice/leader more than a female. It is instincts largely. How to change instincts? Not easily. I don't know how. Authoritarianism tries to divide us though and break up traditional family power structures.
Oh! My pleasure that you read my post and got my point is beyond measure, Charles! My enthusiastic response to Jay Rollins and his Tonic Masculinity Project will be posted later today.
Wow, these two Robs and their surprising responses! I had recently had a less favorable feeling towards Breszney lately in his writings about the election in Nov. I am so mad at the feminists who support the right to choose about a baby but not the right to choose for other medical procedures. I feel betrayed by so many of my fellow feminists. So he had a big pro choice push, and I've never heard him push for choice about the vaccines (although maybe he had before I subscribed?). I wrote one comment about this on his stack and never heard a response of any kind, which is fine, but I just have felt less interested in him since.
I don't know if I have issues with Breszny discussing feminine energy....Maybe have more thoughts on this later.
And what's up with Malone - from the way I read your previous articles, you weren't coming down against him, but asking very valid questions! What the heck? Isn't that what the medical freedom movement is supposed to be about anyways, asking better questions?
Thank you, marta. I didn't realize that you also read FWA. Yes, when he did the big pro-choice push, right after the Supreme Court reversal, I agreed with him on the issue but asked if the SC had forbid it everywhere, would he still say it was a national issue? I posted a link to my episode https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/roe-v-redux-leak-or-squirrel, but was respectful (I now notice YT has posted a clarification link on the vid ;-)
Then during the election, as you note, he said that everyone should get out and vote for every Democrat they could, because this was the biggest issue ever. And you're right, he's been adamantly pro-vaxx. I think I held my tongue on the former but have posted that there was another point of view with the vaccines.
So this is probably a long time coming, to let go of the hero-worship I had for him 40 yrs ago. I appreciate your reading of my articles on Malone too. I felt that I was pointing out contradictions, using only his own words, which is the same as I've done with Brezsny. I'm grateful that you recognized that.
And just to finish my comment about men commenting on femininity - I'm don't think I'm categorically opposed to that. I am opposed to him censoring you for bringing up reasonable concerns and reasonable discussion in this realm. What is the way forward for healthy masculinity and healthy femininity? I usually connect this to yin and yang, which I recently learned had nothing to do with feminine and masculine in its origin. In the origin it was just talking about the sunny side of the mountain and the shadow side of the mountain - both are needed at different times, both will happen at different times, and we all have those kinds of energies in us. That is not the same as feminine and masculine energies. More to explore here for sure!
I’ve been moving house and not keeping up on reading, but I am very glad I hopped in here when I got a chance! It’s amazing to me how such sensitive men in touch with their feminine side could get so touchy when a woman shares her thoughts! Almost as if... hmmmm
I'm glad you hopped in too! You're moving your whole passel of girls and your workshop to a new home? That seems like quite an endeavor. I have 35+ yrs of accumulation in this house and I can't imagine it, although it would jumpstart the decluttering project.
Really excellent discussion, Tereza. So much here to discuss! And, at the moment, not the time.
So, you were cancelled for creating a great rational argument about the irrationality of a 'feminist/feminine' ideology that is little more than putting women onto a pedestal. And that, of course, has been an outstanding attribute behind the Mary/Whore split that often undermines these kinds of man-splaining arguments.
Lol! You're rational argument touched his unintegrated anima, and he had a hissy fit tantrum. So funny. Loved reading this.
Yes, it was on his substack. Here is my comment and the reply from "peace be with you Goon". It was just a weird reply imo. I asked Malone because I think he was contracted out by the DOD. I will check out your link below for more info on your research into spiritual truth. Also I bought your book and am looking forward to it. I'm reading a graham lowery book now about the untold American history 17th and 18th century. Your book cover gave me a smile today when I glanced at it. I don't even remember how I came across your Third Paradigm. I think you led me to Matt Ehret who is a find too.
Helene Belloni
Dec 28, 2022
Dr Malone, i am shocked to find out that the vaccine manufacturers are defense department contractors and the pharmaceutical companies are medical sheilds. I understand that the vaccine is us military property until deployed in the arm. If you could elaborate on that more. I would be interested to hear the details etc...
1
Reply
YourVoiceCounts
Dec 28, 2022
·
edited Dec 28, 2022
you want to address your question to Dr. David Martin Ph.D. and track down the patents. Dr. Malone is Not the person to ask, as no matter what he says, it will be used against him, thus used against the movement / resistance. Peace be with you Helene. There are other available avenues to find answers to the questions you have, using the 101 key keyboard and optical mouse within arm's reach. With deep respect, pursue those avenues, and again, I suggest you start with tracking down and taking notes of Dr. David Martin's contributions.
oh, what a delight that you have my book and it's cover made you smile! I love my artwork and the eye being pushed off the pyramid. May it be so!
That is a very weird reply. It sure seems as if the PBWY Goon (YourVoiceCounts?) is acting like you accused RM personally. If he's a whistleblower, he should be exposing this info, given his former role in the DoD. Kinda like Edward Snowden talking about surveillance--it's his exact area of expertise. If YVC is just a neutral party with info to share, why isn't he answering the question rather than slapping you down? Very fishy.
Seems like a lot of people are scooping your term and running with it.
https://barsoom.substack.com/p/tonic-masculinity?
https://www.wonderlandrules.com/p/tate-modern
https://luctalks.substack.com/p/what-is-tonic-masculinity?
I will always remember where I first heard the term used though :)
So this is too funny. I checked back on the Charles Eisenstein 'I Like to Fight" where I posted:
Tereza Coraggio Nov 27, 2022: This does my heart good. I think we need a world that puts children at the center, surrounded by women, who are surrounded by men. Tonic masculinity.
Jay Rollins, Writes The Wonderland Rules: Stealing "tonic masculinity."
Tereza Coraggio: Yes please! I was hoping someone would. It took me a minute to figure out what the opposite of toxic would be.
Jay Rollins, Jan 18: Me and the boys took it and ran with it. :-D
So Jay wrote your second link on Jan 10, John Carter wrote your first on the 14th saying "I stole that from Jay Rollins, and I’m not giving it back." On Jan 19, Harrison Koehli on Political Ponerology writes "What is a man? Quality masculinity is tonic masculinity" citing John Carter and with a clever gin & tonic photo: https://ponerology.substack.com/p/what-is-a-man and then Luc Koch does What is Tonic Masculinity? citing all three.
Does this make me an influencer? Please say I'm an influencer. I've always wanted to be ;-)
That is fascinating, its like the Chinese whisper effect for citing / giving credit for coining a phrase.
hehe, yes you are certainly influencing them (and a great many others apparently) :)
I almost invoked your excellent term in a discussion I was having on the Corbett Report website where a fellow had accused me of "bashing masculinity" because I advocated for men getting past the silly macho dogmas that say "gardening, cooking and sowing is for girls" and use our hands to co-create in alignment with Mother Earth, but I sensed the usage of the term would have been wasted on him so I refrained. He is of the train of thought that the solution to all our problems is for men to stop being "sissified" and to rise up in a violent revolt and smash things and go do witch hunts for the oligarchs. I attempted to offer another path more grounded in creativity and courage of the heart but alas, i was told that is nothing more than "60’s idealism that got destroyed."
Here is a link to the comment thread in case you want to check it out. I found that his behavior offered a fascinating opportunity to study machoism and ego vs masculinity. https://www.corbettreport.com/the-future-of-food-is-ours-to-decide/#comment-146264
Very interesting discussion, Gavin. I think you should stop tossing your pearls before snooty snouts and put this into a post on your site, using the term Tonic Masculinity. You are, as I said, what I meant by the concept. I'm not certain that 'the boys' are. I defined it when I coined it as "... a world that puts children at the center, surrounded by women, who are surrounded by men." The boys club only mentions children when John Carter bemoans that courts "give mothers custody to raise boys like defective girls." That is SO SO SO opposite of how I defined it.
Since I can't be part of the boys club and comment without being a paid sub, I think this needs to be another episode. To be continued ...
I think you may be right... while I do come across a few genuinely motivated, intelligent and open hearted people in the forums on there interested in collaborating and using solutions to work towards common goals, there is also a fair bit of hostility, fear (and even thinly veiled bigotry) expressed in the comments on there as well.
Thank you for your kind words and for clarifying what you meant when you used the term.
Yes, I think it costs me one dollar a month to subscribe to James Corbett's website, but I do appreciate his in depth research so I am happy to contribute a little in that way.
I look forward to the future episode that is to be continued :)
Much has transpired since you brought this to my attention, Gavin, and I am forever grateful that you did! I'll be posting my first response later today but it's become much more nuanced and appreciative than it was at first glance.
Interesting. I would like to add the following: About Leonard Shlain's "Alphabet Versus The Goddess", what he says in his thesis is also very likely the real esoteric meaning of the Ten Commandments' famous prohibition against "graven images". After all, Moses was the de facto founder of a very patriarchal religion, with very linear thinking at that time. Interestingly, the very literal interpretation of it being against ALL images for any reason (not only worship of idols) generally did not catch on for very long, and remains quite rare in Judeo-Christianity (with the notable exception perhaps of the Amish, who also remain extremely patriarchal).
There were in fact schisms over the differences between "icons" (good) and "idols" (bad) in early Christianity, of course. But otherwise, it was generally not taken very literally overall.
Really interesting point, Ajax. In my research into the OT/ Torah, I came across an odd fact. The exact dimensions given for building the Ark of the Covenant, to house the stone tablets of the 10 commandments, is precisely the same as was found in the Pharaoh's tomb (forgetting which one). They also have enough gold to melt into a statue. And the last scene of Genesis is Joseph, who's stolen all the seed stock for the Pharaoh (the pyramids were called Pharaoh's grain siloes) and turned the population into indentured servants by taking their livestock, land and children. EXCEPT for his own family, who he welcomes.
It's my theory that those called the Hebrews were actually the ruling elite and were driven out by a revolt of the enslaved Egyptians. There are many other proof points I'll go into at another time.
What the 10 commandments forbid is individual sins against authority, but they say nothing about the morality of the society and what's right and wrong for them. No prohibitions against enslaving other people, for instance, or torture or wars on someone else's land. You and I could certainly have come up with better, in developing a moral code with the same word count.
Thanks for your thoughtful reply and good information!
You're very welcome, Tereza. Very interesting theory you have. If so, that is a classic example of a "patriarchal reversal", as Mary Daly would say, and a DARVO to boot. (The Egyptians were far more gender egalitarian than the Hebrews/Israelites, and had plenty of female Pharaohs.) Another theory too: apparently the ancient Egyptians had a total of 40 commandments, ten of which may have been at least partially plagiarized by Moses.
Charlton Heston is probably spinning in his grave right now, of course.
I'm loving the image of CH spinning in his grave ;-)
What's a DARVO?
If we look at "Love the Lord thy God" as meaning Pharaoh, as it later became Caesar in the NT, it becomes absolutely sinister. And Pharaoh of course, was God, so why would it mean anything else?
In just a couple of hints of things to come, I did a radio episode a decade ago on Biblical Blackwater: Sodom vs. the Mercenaries: http://thirdparadigm.org/3p_053.php, Zeitgeist Continued: http://thirdparadigm.org/3p_039.php, Nasty Noah & the Patriarchs: http://thirdparadigm.org/3p_016.php and Josephus and the Multi-Colored Turncoat: http://thirdparadigm.org/3p_013.php. These are mixed with poems and political issues of the time, so the Bible analyses are snippets in them.
Very curious about the Egyptian commandments, do you have a link?
DARVO = Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender.
Very interesting indeed. The "divine rights of kings" comes to mind. Saint Paul of Tarsus, the founder of what should be called Paulianity, basically rubberstamped that idea with "all authority comes from God" and "slaves, obey your masters with fear and trembling", and the rest is history.
Actually, it was 42 commandments it seems:
https://peprimer.com/42-commandments-of-ancient-egypt.html
Oh! This is fascinating. I was hoping it was these. I read them in their original format as part of an art exhibit and was struck by how wise and thorough they were. I like the "I have not" much better than "Thou shalt not" which makes whoever is seen as saying them above everyone else, rather than a personal commitment where everyone's equal.
DARVO's such a succinct acronym. That's exactly what I say the Bible has done, turn history upside-down and inside-out and turn the heroes into villains and the villains into heroes.
I remember Frederick Douglas talking about his hatred of Paul, who was read to them as slaves. Paulianity is a good name for it.
Frederick Douglass was a very wise man indeed.
Another thing I noticed is that while the Egyptian 42 Commandments prohibit rape as well as adultery, the Hebrew Ten Commandments curiously do not prohibit rape, only adultery (which was historically defined one-sidedly under patriarchy).
In fact, not only is there plenty of rape in the OT that is tacitly or even openly approved of (!), but the word "consent" does not appear anywhere in the Bible (OT or NT) except once: the part where Paul says that spouses may not withhold sex from one another (aka "defraud ye not one another), except "for a time" with "mutual consent". The more one reads the Bible, the worse and worse it looks.
Indeed.
And then later Jesus distilled the Ten Commandments into only two: 1) Love God with your whole heart, your whole soul, and your whole mind, and 2) Love your neighbor as yourself. But he was notably silent about graven images and stuff like that. One could argue that he superseded the original Ten Commandments. And he added the Golden Rule as well, as a corollary.
The rabbit hole goes deep. The golden rule, I remember from my days at the Jesus Seminars, preceded Jesus attributed to other people and religions. David Graeber talks about religions of altruism arising at the same time as coinage that made people participate in the conquest of their neighbors in order to survive--the origins of our system today. It created the logical corollary to pure greed, pure altruism. Before that were systems of reciprocity.
So pure altruism and pure greed are really two sides of the same coin then?
Charles Eisenstein I think made a similar argument.
Kinda like how the Protestant Work Ethic (TM) and rampant mindless consumerism are also two sides of the same coin in the (post)modern era. One is used to justify the other. Because GROOOOWWTH! Or something.
Yes, that's exactly right. It's a section in his book Debt that I quote in mine. In the Inuit culture, for instance, they say, "Up here we're human, of course we don't let people starve." But it's not a religion, it's just how people are, and were, before the coinage-slavery-taxation triangle, as he calls it.
I think it's similar to how they get us all to take responsibility for pollution with recycling, so we don't question the corporations churning out useless stuff and packaging and dumping their waste in the ocean. Religions of altruism make us responsible for taking care of people whose lives have been trashed by capitalism, rather than asking why we're all hanging by a thread.
Not silent at all.
Graven images put false gods above the True God — Hence, not loving Him with one’s whole heart, soul and mind. This applies to any idol put in place of God.
The two precepts are a distillation of the vertical and horizontal planes of the Ten Commandments. They do not alter, supplant or supersede
them in any way.
It is true that many of the top Nazi brass and their philosophers were closet matriarchists to one degree or another, despite being outwardly patriarchal men.
Their economic system, which was actually different than that of other fascist governments and movements, was also very similar in some ways to Ellen Brown's ideals discussed in Web of Debt.
That said, a stopped clock can be right twice a day, and that doesn't make the Nazis any less evil or genocidal. Nor does it make Jews inherently evil either.
MGTOWs (Men Going Their Own Way), part of the so-called "manosphere" are a joke, a self-parody, and most likely controlled opposition.
What you say about (strict) monogamy of course is correct. It was created by patriarchy (not only Abrahamic religions, but their Kurgan predecessors as well) and decidedly one-sided, not to protect women, but to control them like a protection racket, and virtually guarantee paternity certainty. And Jordan Peterson's promotion of "enforced monogamy" (his words, not mine) show that he too is controlled opposition.
I see that cwspangle has been banned from the Substack, most likely due to overtly anti-Semitic posts. Some of what he said in various posts was indeed a bit out of line in that regard, but other things he said did make some sense perhaps. He seems like a mixed bag overall.
I know, ironic right? I talk about being banned and then immediately ban someone 'indefinitely', which likely shows up as 100 years for them.
And you're exactly right. He (I'm guessing) said many things that were interesting, with which I potentially agreed or at least were worth further investigation. And then, among his 18 comments in quick succession were:
"The U.S. State Dept. has been infested with communists since WW1 and Woodrow Wilson, they tried to steal the Russian elections for their comrades in the Russian Communist Party through non-profit NGOs... just like at home in America... But Vladimir Putin defeated them, so they launched a faggot jihad against the Russian Orthodox church over the punk rock band and the Olympics... Miss neo-kabbalah lesbian Madonna, now rumored to be a Muslim convert, was flown in to agitate when Hillary went on a world-wide gay pride tour... And while Leon Puñettas (sic) was busy with gay pride celebrations at the Pentagon, two Navy Seals, a U.S. Airman, and a U.S. Ambassador were murdered, all because everyone was being so fucking gay."
and "Muslims increased their numbers only by raping women. It is the Sunnah of the Prophet, according to the Qur'an Muslims should do the same things that Muhammad did. Jews and Muslims have similar roots and customs. Bitter Marxists hate Caucasians. Jewish bankers have filled Europe with Muslims and America with Third World garbage. The Jews are unclean demons, like the Turks... Hitler was right."
So I've been thinking to write about the Double Propaganda Troll, who takes conspiracy research and mixes it with hate speech to discredit it. When I disagree with the Robs, it's on ideas with respect for them and everyone else. If attacks on generic people are allowed to be mixed in with research into specific systems and those in charge of them, it opens up the whole to be dismissed or worse--labelled racist or anti-Semitic accurately.
Your thoughts? Also, we're thinking alike on Ellen Brown and Web of Debt, per my posts below:
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/cj-hopkins-and-the-new-normal-reich
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/forgiving-hitler
Indeed he sure seems like a Double Propaganda Troll. There seem to be a lot of those lately. Almost like....controlled opposition!
Fascinating read, although I always thought the thing with universal left-side baby holding was about having the infants ear near the caregivers heart beat.
Oh, that makes so much sense. Now I wonder if right-handedness became dominant in women because of that instinct in holding babies, rather than the other way around. It never occurred to me that it was so ingrained until he mentioned it.
I imagine it might be linked. I made myself a baby sling and carried baby mostly with the left arm around the baby so I could do stuff. The baby fits in my sling like you would be putting a broken arm in a sling, just there is a baby in the arm. The sling holds the baby leaving your left arm free but outside of the sling can hold the baby as needed too.
Slings are definitely underrated for carrying babies. I carried all three of my girls in a ring sling for preference, although my wife often preferred a Tula style carrier since the one shoulder sling was hard on her little shoulders. The sling was so easy to carry or tuck under a coat when not in use, and not boiling hot, that I chose it first.
Whichever style though, the take home is that strollers are a trap.
Yes, likely that is the reason. Sweeping statements of 'always' aren't always useful or true. It is important for the baby's muscle development to vary how you hold them routinely, especially for feeding or the neck muscles might shorten and stay turned towards the direction they are always fed.
I'm so happy to have all your knowledge added to my Sub, Jennifer. You are a fount of wisdom!
I’m left-handed, and I definitely carried my kids more often on my right side— I had no idea that was so unusual. I mostly preferred a front or back carrier over a sling, though.
Slings are not common and many designs I have seen put the child in oddly. I madee my own based on a book I read about what South American native people do. It sounded good to me at two weeks post new life as a mom instead of an independent human.
I love this.
Haha, you're fulfilling my youngest daughter's prediction when I tried to get her to watch it because no one had in the first hour. She said, there are people who are going to see it and love it, so leave me alone! That's why we need a tribe of women and not just surly daughters ;-)
Forgive me if I never, ever try to explain the sublimely feminine.
a wise man ... ;-)
Hi Tereza, first let me say your are so kind and professional and well, I admire your calm cool intellect toward the ROBS. I don't know this Rob Brezsny, but Malone has to be falling off the radar for most as I am finding his information not useful. When I had the gall to ask him what knowledge he had of the defense contractors production of the vaccines, which I heard about from Peter McCullough, I was reprimanded by a goon of his that I should not be directing that question toward him. Second thank you for the links you gave Ajax the great, I just listened to them all.
Helene, what a lovely compliment! Was your question on Malone's Substack? Since I'm not on it anymore, I need spies ;-)
And I can't believe you listened to all four episodes! I wasn't even sure they were still available as audio but radio4all.net is such a fantastic resource. I need to send them a donation and keep the bandwidth going.
When you said you listened, I checked to see if it worked, and it was SO nostalgic. I love my Take Back the City theme song, and the poems I included. Every week I had to come up with 3000 words to fill a half-hour, so 500 a day, with the day I just picked poems as a mini-vacation. A guy called Skidmark Bob helped produce it and he picked songs that went with my themes. Oh, I really miss that collaboration. Thank you for prompting me to take that time trip!
And if you get a hankering for more, this is the link to the shows sorted by themes: http://thirdparadigm.org/themes.php.
Wow. Poor Rob's feelings are a little fragile, or a lot.
"Well, I guess unless they’re critical of you."
Yes, it is sad that women are encouraged to speak up until they do so.
*I do think it is about male competitiveness. Everything under the sun can be done better by a competitive man. (Except listening.) **It seems like a compulsion sets in - and listening becomes impossible when under a dopamine obsessive thought. Back away from the man who is "always right."
Your phrase about women speaking up is so well-put.
I'm so glad that you brought up competitiveness because I think that's the essence of patriarchy, which is also toxic masculinity. In a discussion on Charles Eisenstein's thread (were you there?) we were talking about matriarchy being a contradiction in terms because the concept of hierarchy was masculine competition. So it's not about women "getting ahead," it's changing the concept to a common purpose, which is what family represents to me--the universal in the particular. Everyone grew up in one, and most of us wish our parents had been better supported in being parents. What do you think, Jennifer?
I come from an ethology direction - the triune brain theory book made a big impression on me. Humans discredit how huge an amount of subconscious behavior patterns are innate instincts. Male competitiveness is not 'toxic' to me - it is male - across many species. Why call it toxic - just talk about it more maybe so they can lighten more by seeing it better. Larger males in a species are typically the protectors of the group and the female the protector of the her individual young. Males typically work together to patrol a territory as a group and tend to select a leader. Females may have a few elder lead women but each tends to focus more on protecting her immediate 'nest' from any other invader. I do think the pair bond is healthy for society and kids or we need a smaller village group home model to help with providing service and role modeling and a break to single parents or low functioning parents and their kids. Having a protective man who listens would be a 'father figure' - and that would be nice and not toxic imo.
In an emergency it is best to simply follow orders and know who is expected to give them and have a hierarchy planned for replacements in case something happens to that person. Traditional models have some value, including fitting in with ancient instinctual patterns of behavior. Women and men tend to trust a male voice/leader more than a female. It is instincts largely. How to change instincts? Not easily. I don't know how. Authoritarianism tries to divide us though and break up traditional family power structures.
"I feel that every time someone has to come out and state that they believe in equality, there’s always an under-the-breath “unlike you people.”"
Nicely put. It's insulting to exhort others to what are actually nearly-universal moral values.
Oh! My pleasure that you read my post and got my point is beyond measure, Charles! My enthusiastic response to Jay Rollins and his Tonic Masculinity Project will be posted later today.
Wow, these two Robs and their surprising responses! I had recently had a less favorable feeling towards Breszney lately in his writings about the election in Nov. I am so mad at the feminists who support the right to choose about a baby but not the right to choose for other medical procedures. I feel betrayed by so many of my fellow feminists. So he had a big pro choice push, and I've never heard him push for choice about the vaccines (although maybe he had before I subscribed?). I wrote one comment about this on his stack and never heard a response of any kind, which is fine, but I just have felt less interested in him since.
I don't know if I have issues with Breszny discussing feminine energy....Maybe have more thoughts on this later.
And what's up with Malone - from the way I read your previous articles, you weren't coming down against him, but asking very valid questions! What the heck? Isn't that what the medical freedom movement is supposed to be about anyways, asking better questions?
Well, kudos to you for your courage and tenacity.
Thank you, marta. I didn't realize that you also read FWA. Yes, when he did the big pro-choice push, right after the Supreme Court reversal, I agreed with him on the issue but asked if the SC had forbid it everywhere, would he still say it was a national issue? I posted a link to my episode https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/roe-v-redux-leak-or-squirrel, but was respectful (I now notice YT has posted a clarification link on the vid ;-)
Then during the election, as you note, he said that everyone should get out and vote for every Democrat they could, because this was the biggest issue ever. And you're right, he's been adamantly pro-vaxx. I think I held my tongue on the former but have posted that there was another point of view with the vaccines.
So this is probably a long time coming, to let go of the hero-worship I had for him 40 yrs ago. I appreciate your reading of my articles on Malone too. I felt that I was pointing out contradictions, using only his own words, which is the same as I've done with Brezsny. I'm grateful that you recognized that.
And just to finish my comment about men commenting on femininity - I'm don't think I'm categorically opposed to that. I am opposed to him censoring you for bringing up reasonable concerns and reasonable discussion in this realm. What is the way forward for healthy masculinity and healthy femininity? I usually connect this to yin and yang, which I recently learned had nothing to do with feminine and masculine in its origin. In the origin it was just talking about the sunny side of the mountain and the shadow side of the mountain - both are needed at different times, both will happen at different times, and we all have those kinds of energies in us. That is not the same as feminine and masculine energies. More to explore here for sure!
I’ve been moving house and not keeping up on reading, but I am very glad I hopped in here when I got a chance! It’s amazing to me how such sensitive men in touch with their feminine side could get so touchy when a woman shares her thoughts! Almost as if... hmmmm
I'm glad you hopped in too! You're moving your whole passel of girls and your workshop to a new home? That seems like quite an endeavor. I have 35+ yrs of accumulation in this house and I can't imagine it, although it would jumpstart the decluttering project.
Really excellent discussion, Tereza. So much here to discuss! And, at the moment, not the time.
So, you were cancelled for creating a great rational argument about the irrationality of a 'feminist/feminine' ideology that is little more than putting women onto a pedestal. And that, of course, has been an outstanding attribute behind the Mary/Whore split that often undermines these kinds of man-splaining arguments.
Lol! You're rational argument touched his unintegrated anima, and he had a hissy fit tantrum. So funny. Loved reading this.
You were right to call out their BS!
Yes, it was on his substack. Here is my comment and the reply from "peace be with you Goon". It was just a weird reply imo. I asked Malone because I think he was contracted out by the DOD. I will check out your link below for more info on your research into spiritual truth. Also I bought your book and am looking forward to it. I'm reading a graham lowery book now about the untold American history 17th and 18th century. Your book cover gave me a smile today when I glanced at it. I don't even remember how I came across your Third Paradigm. I think you led me to Matt Ehret who is a find too.
Helene Belloni
Dec 28, 2022
Dr Malone, i am shocked to find out that the vaccine manufacturers are defense department contractors and the pharmaceutical companies are medical sheilds. I understand that the vaccine is us military property until deployed in the arm. If you could elaborate on that more. I would be interested to hear the details etc...
1
Reply
YourVoiceCounts
Dec 28, 2022
·
edited Dec 28, 2022
you want to address your question to Dr. David Martin Ph.D. and track down the patents. Dr. Malone is Not the person to ask, as no matter what he says, it will be used against him, thus used against the movement / resistance. Peace be with you Helene. There are other available avenues to find answers to the questions you have, using the 101 key keyboard and optical mouse within arm's reach. With deep respect, pursue those avenues, and again, I suggest you start with tracking down and taking notes of Dr. David Martin's contributions.
oh, what a delight that you have my book and it's cover made you smile! I love my artwork and the eye being pushed off the pyramid. May it be so!
That is a very weird reply. It sure seems as if the PBWY Goon (YourVoiceCounts?) is acting like you accused RM personally. If he's a whistleblower, he should be exposing this info, given his former role in the DoD. Kinda like Edward Snowden talking about surveillance--it's his exact area of expertise. If YVC is just a neutral party with info to share, why isn't he answering the question rather than slapping you down? Very fishy.