“Here’s what happened from my point of view:”

This point of view, this collection of thoughts, I do not care for.

Here’s what’s true for me Dov. I know that I am. This much I know for sure. I know that I exist. The day this woke up within me is one of the happiest days of my life. As far as ‘I’ am concerned, ‘I’ have awareness, beingness, a soul or energy body, a mental body, an emotional body, a personality and a physical body. I know that I have all these things; but ‘I’ see myself expressing through these various aspects of mind, heart, soul, spirit, movement, physicality and personality. What’s funny to me, maybe more to me than most, is that nearly every personality I’ve ever met, including my own, is fucking weird. This filter of personality is bizarre because each personality is its own little world living apart and separate from all other worlds. Personalities never come together, they never join. Sure, they can relate, but only from a very narrow perspective. And because they cannot truly join, life from the perspective of the personality is lonely and fearful. Dov, if I have offended your personality, I do not care. I have no love for personalities.

I don’t think I have ever seen a mail or PM that so profoundly and thoroughly invalidates and nullifies the receiver so quickly, already in it’s second line.

“I give a rat’s hairy ass about your point of view, because you are nothing but a ‘filter’ to me!” Well, I’ll give this guy credit for being blunt and bare-knuckled in his approach.

On the other hand, I do love your heart, your soul and your spirit. I love these dearly. I love these immensely.

I am sure you do. It costs nothing. Loving what you define as ‘me’ is easy, because it lets you be in control of what ‘me’ to ‘love’. You can create and pick such parts of your creation that please your sensibilities, and remove the rest and then tell yourself that you love ‘me’. In reality what you claim to love has nothing to do with me, simply because my heart, soul and spirit are what makes up my personality, my characteristics, my being. Without my personality my heart, soul and spirit would have no expression.

But I suppose that is what you think it should all be. Integral Spirituality.

“If I believe you are me and I am you, and I cannot see where you begin and I end and you are my beginning and I am your ending, then I am never alone, and all is well. Nothing I do or say is ever me, because it’s really you, and nothing you do or say is ever you, because it’s really me, but since you are me and I am you, neither of us are responsible for anything, and neither of us will ever need to reach out to the other. We never have to reach out either to ask for help and support or to offer help and support. We don’t have to care anymore, about anything or anyone. Ultimate Selfishness disguised as Ultimate Spirituality.”

Heart, soul, spirit – that in which you feel we are the same, that is what you say you love. That which separates, that which makes you and me unique individuals, that you don’t care for. You love your own reflection in me, yourself in me, not me in me – that is nothing but worthless chaff to you.

Oh, brother Narkissos…

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License.

Beneath The Skin

It’s a composite of a portrait of me and a strongly demurred and obscured nude female torso – it depicts a piece of my personal history –

A Trans Man’s Transsexuality 101

I am being told that I have to remove this image from a Social Community Site because it contains ‘nudity’.

I live in Europe. In Europe ‘nudity’ is being considered in context – i.e the question of what is the purpose of the ‘nudity’ is taken into consideration before it’s deemed ‘inappropriate’ for public consumption. In the US any depiction of nudity, regardless of context or intention, is seen as pornographic, lewd, indecent and therefore immoral. Even if it’s clearly artistic or educational.

The USonians, influenced by Fundamentalist Xian Imperialism and values dating back to the Puritan Immigrants’ values of the 17th century, are so afraid that their children will become promiscuous and sexually depraved by seeing normal human anatomy and physical reality, that they actually demand that the entire world be censored to conform to their fears.

At the same time the US is the country that ‘gave’ the world MTV – where there is a lot more ‘nudity’, and sexually explicit images being cabled out than in the image I am being told to remove. The US is also the single Western country where sex education in schools are ‘forbidden’ – yet where teen pregnancies are such a huge problem, because of this single fact.

Smell the hypocrisy, my friends!

Compare my artwork to this artist’s work – Jody Scheisser – who is doing ‘fine artistic photography’ depicting nudity in a far more ‘explicit’ manner than I have ever published. Or compare to some of the most praised classical artists, such as Agnolo Bronzino’s Venus, Cupide and the Time (Allegory of Lust) – and this we ALL call fine art, and wouldn’t censor, wouldn’t deem ‘immoral’ or ‘inappropriate’ – even if we might not like it or think appropriate for prepubescent children to watch. Yet my single piece of art is deemed ‘inappropriate’ and judged as nudity, although one can hardly discern the forms or the details of the ‘nude female torso’! And that in a site that says that:

“The Ning Platform is not directed to children younger than 13 and is offered only to users 13 years of age or older.” (From the Ning TOS)

So the censoring of my art, by Ning (through the Gaia Community), is an extension of the hypocrisy of USonian society, based on the values of Fundamentalist and Puritan values of a small group of 17th century immigrants seeking freedom from oppression – a freedom they would now, through their 21st century descendants, deny me – despite my art being in no way offensive or sexually explicit in comparison to both classical and modern artists’ work.

—

When I attempted  to post this entry to the Gaia Network, I found that the image above had been removed by the Gaia Ning Team without any response to either personal messages about this or comments in a thread designated for the matter of ‘nudity’ in images, I see no other recourse than to delete any all my art from the Gaia Network, and leave the Network entirely, including all groups.

I can only assume that this was the Gaia Team’s intention from the onset of this sad affair.

I am referring to the words in Deuteronomy 23:1 which read:

He that is bruised with a bruising, or is bruised in the testicle, shall not come into the congregation of Jehovah . . .

What many don’t understand is that this biblical passage is a warning to all people. Even a woman is not spared from such a predicament. People of all genders must guard their “testicles” from being bruised or injured.

Of course, the biblical passage quoted above does not make sense theologically. The condition of a person’s testicles cannot have anything to do with the quality and sincerity of one’s faith. And surely, God’s Infinite Wisdom and Holy Word would not discriminate.

So what gives here?

The passage actually contains a deeper meaning than the literal words convey. This deeper meaning deals with the human psycho-spiritual condition – not the condition of one’s physical genitals. [...] Doesn’t it make more theological sense that faulty thinking and wrong beliefs would keep a person from joining Jehovah’s congregation than a sports accident or getting kicked in the groin would? Link

The pasuk (verse) in Devarim 23:1(verse 2 in JPS) is meant LITERALLY. Any MAN who has had their genitals mutilated either by their own will or by others’ cannot become an Israelite – i.e convert to Judaism, join the Jewish People. This has nothing to do with ‘heaven’ or being ‘spiritual’ – this is singularly about the fact that in Judaism – and whatever people say; Torah and Tanakh (Hebrew Bible) is concerned ONLY with the conduct of the Jewish People – it is the male’s obligation to procreate, not the female’s. Torah is all about ACTION, not about thoughts or beliefs or feelings. Also, circumcision is only performed on males, as a requirement for joining the Jewish People and become Jewish and if there is nothing to circumcise, Torah says that they can’t join. But they can pray, they can bind themselves to G-d, be His servants and they are as welcome as any Jew.

Yeshiyahu (Isaiah) 56:1-8 is clear evidence that the ‘interpretation’ you give this pasuk is faulty:

Thus saith the LORD: Keep ye justice, and do righteousness; for My salvation is near to come, and My favour to be revealed.
Happy is the man that doeth this, and the son of man that holdeth fast by it: that keepeth the sabbath from profaning it, and keepeth his hand from doing any evil.
Neither let the alien, that hath joined himself to the LORD, speak, saying: ‘The LORD will surely separate me from His people’; neither let the eunuch say: ‘Behold, I am a dry tree.’
For thus saith the LORD concerning the eunuchs that keep My sabbaths, and choose the things that please Me, and hold fast by My covenant:
Even unto them will I give in My house and within My walls a monument and a memorial better than sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting memorial, that shall not be cut off.
Also the aliens, that join themselves to the LORD, to minister unto Him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be His servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from profaning it, and holdeth fast by My covenant:
Even them will I bring to My holy mountain, and make them joyful in My house of prayer; their burnt-offerings and their sacrifices shall be acceptable upon Mine altar; for My house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples.
Saith the Lord GOD who gathereth the dispersed of Israel: Yet I will gather others to him, beside those of him that are gathered.

Further more King Solomon’s Dedicational Prayer (Melahkim Alef/1 Kings 8:41-43) for the First Temple says:

Moreover concerning the stranger that is not of Thy people Israel, when he shall come out of a far country for Thy name’s sake- – for they shall hear of Thy great name, and of Thy mighty hand, and of Thine outstretched arm – when he shall come and pray toward this house; hear Thou in heaven Thy dwelling-place, and do according to all that the stranger calleth to Thee for; that all the peoples of the earth may know Thy name, to fear Thee, as doth Thy people Israel, and that they may know that Thy name is called upon this house which I have built.

Naturally each is allowed to have their own understanding – but there are more or less probable ‘interpretations’ of Torah – and yours is very improbable, especially since it is a gross violation of the SPIRIT of Torah, which also says ”You shall not curse the deaf nor place a stumbling block before the blind; you shall fear your God – I am your Lord.” – i.e don’t make life harder for people who are already in a hard situation. Those who are in need of being taught about “faulty thinking and wrong beliefs” will not hear, because they don’t think they need it, and those who are already circumcised in their hearts, but in doubt of their worth to G-d, will increase their doubt through needless self-examination and spiritual self-flagellation. I.e they will stumble on the block you just put in front of them.

Micah 6:6-8

‘Wherewith shall I come before the LORD, and bow myself before God on high? Shall I come before Him with burnt-offerings, with calves of a year old? Will the LORD be pleased with thousands of rams, with ten thousands of rivers of oil? Shall I give my first-born for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?’ It hath been told thee, O man, what is good, and what the LORD doth require of thee: only to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God.

The interesting thing is that instead of actually commenting on my post/comment to his blog – he decided to attempt to change the subject and make it about me by making a slightly mocking comment about the moniker I had chosen for that comment:

Thanks for sharing your knowledge with my readers. However, I had to break out in a little giggle. You see, the symbolic meaning of a “bear” in Scripture is the literal sense of God’s Holy Word SEPARATE from its internal or deeper spiritual meaning. Amazing that you would pick such a name!

I decided to run with his bear-interpretation.

“All things in Scripture refer to our inner spirits. “

I respectfully disagree. So does the majority of people with any knowledge of the Scriptures, Judaism and world history. Torah isn’t concerned with our inner spirits, but with our conduct. Torah doesn’t split us into inner and outer. As G-d is One and Indivisible, so is Human One and Indivisible as Human is created in G-d’s image.

“the symbolic meaning of a “bear” in Scripture is the literal sense of God’s Holy Word SEPARATE from its internal or deeper spiritual meaning.“

Oh… what ever makes you believe this?
There are a few references to bears in the Hebrew Bible, and not once can those be understood as anything but references to actual bears. The symbolic meaning you assign to bears doesn’t even fit the passages!

When the ‘bear’ is referred to or described in Torah/Tanakh it’s as a just deliverer of retribution for sins committed either against G-d or other humans or as something preferable to meet when compared to a fool. – Shmuel B/2 Sam 17:8; Mishlei/Pro 17:12, ; 28:15; Hoshea/Hos 13:8

As I said in my previous comment: “Naturally each is allowed to have their own understanding – but there are more or less probable ‘interpretations’ of Torah…”

Unless one KNOWS the origin, context and purpose of any given text in Torah and Tanakh one cannot give an accurate account of Its meaning, and one will, while perhaps aiding oneself (as G-d speaks differently to each of us) ultimately lead others astray from the simple, plain truths of Torah.

It’s really simple. Torah speaks to our conduct here and now – the reward is here and now. There is no Heaven or even Afterlife in Torah. We live, we die and we are no more. Like the grass. The reward for conducting ourselves according to what Torah teaches (summarized in Vayikra/Leviticus 19:18 and Micah 6:8) is the continued existence and prosperity of Human (if one reads in a Global Context – of the Jewish People if one reads in a Jewish Context). Torah teaches us that we get ‘there’ by DOING. What we believe is totally irrelevant. What we DO is everything. In fact Torah says that by DOING we will eventually understand the ‘meaning’ of what we do.
THAT is the reward – not ‘heaven’ or ‘eternal life’.

And then he replies:

I respect your sincere interpretation of the Word of God. However, the Word comes to us from heaven – which is beyond time and space. Therefore, any communication coming from this non-physical source must have first existed in a purely spiritual form, abstracted from all terrestrial qualities. When angels read the Holy Word they understand nothing but the purely spiritual meanings of God’s revealed wisdom!

One thing that I truly dislike is when Torah is said to say things It doesn’t.

So I responded – pointing to his use of ‘heaven’:

“the Word comes to us from heaven”.

To me it seems that Torah disagrees with you – at least if one reads the plain words of It and doesn’t add interpretations and spiritual baggage to It.
Devarim/Deuteronomy 30:11-14
For this commandment which I command thee this day, it is not too hard for thee, neither is it far off. It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say: ‘Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, and make us to hear it, that we may do it?’ Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say: ‘Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, and make us to hear it, that we may do it?’ But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it.

G-d IS. If nothing else, Tehillim/Psalms 139 will tell us that this is true according to Torah and Tanakh. It is clear from the way the words speak of all kinds of places that the author of the Tehilla/Psalm suggests he might go and still G-d would be there.

When Torah speaks of ‘heaven’ It is speaking of the actual physical ‘sky’ or ‘space’ that we can see if we look at it. It is not speaking of a spiritual, non-physical ‘place’ or ‘situation’ out-side time and space.

In the Torah that I read, Torah came to us (Globally and Specifically) from G-d, not heaven. Or Moshe would have had to go up to ‘heaven’ to get it, and Torah says he didn’t, (at most he went up a mountain and came down again) – nor was there any need for that – because G-d gave it to us, G-d spoke (if you will from the Mountain to Moshe) and there it was – in our mouths, and in our hearts, so that we might do It.

Where do you find evidence in Torah that the angels read Torah?

“In the same way that our view of our vulnerabilities and our foreign policy was shaped profoundly by 9/11, I think this disaster is going to shape how we think about the environment and energy for many years to come,” he told the US political website Politico

Finally a president with guts enough to put the WTC-attack in its proper perspective! A horrible incident in USonian history, but nothing more than that.

And again the world is faced with the USonian ignorance and arrogance that make the majority of USonians look dumb, self-centered and boorish:

“He’s off-base,” said former New York fire department deputy chief Jim Riches, whose son died at the World Trade Centre. “These were terrorist attacks, not something caused by people trying to make money.”

From the perspective of the impact on the minds of normal, sane and thinking human beings, the leaking, burning oil-well that is spewing its deadly innards into the sea, unto beaches and wet-lands, is a disaster no less in magnitude for the sea-life, wild-life and ecology of the Gulf Coast, than “9/11” was for the citizens of NY.

The President is right on the money. Almost.

Considering the damage to the sea-life, wild-life and ecology of the Gulf Coast – including several species of animals and birds that live only there – in the wet-lands of Louisiana – and are either endangered or on the brink of being endangered – like the Brown pelican and the manatee, he is actually falling short in his ‘comparison’. More Wild-life will be lost as a result of the USonian short-sighted and egotistical use of fossil-fuels than the 2500+ human lives that were lost in the toppling of the WTC. While those humans are gone forever and their relatives have every right to mourn, they in no way make even a small dent in the human population on this planet. Yet every Brown pelican lost, every Manatee or other animal dead, either to the oil spill itself or to the ensuing starvation that will follow because feeding grounds are destroyed, will deprive the endangered birds, animals and sea-life of diversity in their gene pool, and in the end they will be extinct. Gone forever.

Now, that is a true catastrophe, a disaster that if not understood in its entirety is worthy of human grief and USonian shame. Jim Riches lost his son, true, but does that mean others have to suffer the loss of never seeing a Brown Pelican or a Manatee?

Jim Riches sees only himself and his loss. Barack Obama sees beyond all the Jim Riches, and realizes that the Deepwater Horizon continuous attack on the coast of the Mexican Gulf is an attack much more devastating to the USonian people living along that coast, in terms of having their environment, livelihoods, families and damaged, destroyed and decimated for YEARS to come, and for what? USonian greed, isolationism and arrogance.