creation of adam and eve

anyway can you believe that black sails unironically has a gay man use the biblical telling of god’s creation of adam and eve to describe his partnership with the man he loves I mean what a time to be alive

Questioning Nonsense

Questions:

1. How could anyone possibly belief that men were made of sand and women were made from a man’s rib? Similarly, how can anyone believe this to in anyway be symbolic for evolution?

2. Why would God, who supposedly knows EVERYTHING, create Adam and Eve and immediately put them in a situation (the temptation of the fruit) where he knows they will fail and then punish all of humanity for their choice? How can you be angry at an inferior being when you created it and you can see the future?

3. What reason do you have not to question the ridiculousness of these stories?

When you are told it is wrong to question the logic and consistency of the Bible ask yourself why you’re being told that. Does it make more sense that this God you’ve never seen is too advanced to question or does it make more sense that asking questions would unravel the fairy tale and disprove what people have based their lives on.

Religion has for many centuries been so important in society and people’s lives that there is an intense fear of losing the structure, purpose, and comfort it brings. It’s become so ingrained that it no longer matters to some how insane or illogical it is. They will warp their own mind to defend it the way a drug addict does to justify their using.

None of these things makes religion or God true.

Intro

The book of Genesis answers the question, “Where did all this come from?” Genesis is the first book of the Bible, and the first book of the Pentateuch. (The five books of the Moses). Genesis is the story of how Israel began as a nation, the author also tells us about creation.

Summary

Genesis opens with God creating the heavens and the earth, the stars, the plants, the animals, and Adam and Eve. God places Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, but they rebel against God, introducing a curse of sin and death to the world.. Adam and Eve have children and those children have children. Eventually the human race becomes so violent that God sends a great flood to destroy the world, but He spares the only righteous man, Noah. Noah builds his famous ark to escape the floodwaters with his family (and many animals). After the waters recede, God promises to never again destroy the earth with a flood. Hundreds of years later, God calls Noah’s descendant, Abram, to leave his family and journey to the land of Canaan. God promises to bless Abram with many descendants, and to bless all the nations of the world through him. Abram believes God’s promise, even though he is old and childless. God considers him to be righteous, and changes his name from Abram to Abraham. Later, Abraham has a son, Isaac. Isaac lived in the land of Canaan and has twin sons: Jacob and Esau. Jacob grows up, tricks Esau into giving away his blessing, and then leaves town to live with his uncle Laban. He then gets  married, has children, and lives with Laban for 20 years before God calls him back to Canaan. As Jacob returns to the land of Abraham and Isaac, his name is changed to Israel. Israel has 12 sons, and young Joseph is his favorite. Joseph’s brothers sell him into slavery, and he becomes a prisoner in Egypt. Joseph has the gift to interpret dreams and it became very valuable to the Pharaoh, so Joseph is released from prison and made second in command of all Egypt. Joseph warns Pharaoh that a terrible famine is coming, and stockpiles food for the coming years. Joseph’s predictions are correct and the famine reaches Canaan, and his brothers come to Egypt to buy food. The brothers make up  with each other and Joseph provides for all the children of Israel to move to Egypt.. The book of Genesis ends with the death of Joseph, whose last prediction is that God will bring the children of Israel back to the promised land.


Did you know?

  • Genesis means “Beginning”
  • God is the only name in Genesis 1 (Mentioned 30 times)
  • The Bible does not provide a clear date for creation, the flood, and other events in Genesis.
  • Moses wrote Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.


Creation - Fall - Redemption

Adam and Eve (Genesis 2-3)

  • Creation: God Creates  everything.
  • Fall: Adam and Eve disobeys God by eating the Forbidden Fruit.
  • Redemption: God still works through them to populate and care for the earth.

Abraham (Genesis 12-25)

  • Creation: God promises Abraham countless descendants and land
  • Fall: Abraham tries to have a child by another woman since his wife is barren.
  • Redemption: God still keeps His promise by providing a son.

Joseph (Genesis 37-50)

  • Creation: Joseph has a dream about leading his family.
  • Fall: His brothers fake his death, sell him in slavery, and Joseph is unjustly imprisoned in Egypt.
  • Redemption: Joseph rises to a position of leadership in Egypt and provides home and food for his family.


Theme Verses:

“I will establish My covenant between Me and you and your descendants after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your descendants after you.” (Genesis 17:7)

You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives. (Genesis 50:20)


Quick outline of Genesis

The beginnings of all mankind (Genesis  1:1–11:32) 

The  beginnings of the world (Genesis 1–2)

The beginnings of sin, death, and judgment (Genesis 3–9:17)

The beginnings of the nation’s (Genesis:18–11)

      2. The beginnings of Israel (Genesis 12–50)

Abraham (Genesis 12–25:18)

Isaac (Genesis 25:19–26:35)

Jacob/Israel (Genesis 27–36)

Joseph (Genesis 37–50)


Key characters in the book of Genesis

  1. Adam (Genesis 2:4–4:1, 5:1–5)
  2. Eve (Genesis 2:4–4:1)
  3. Noah (Genesis 6:8–10:29)
  4. Abraham (Genesis 12–25:11)
  5. Isaac (Genesis 25:19–26:35)
  6. Jacob/Israel (Genesis 27–36)
  7. Joseph, with the famous coat (Genesis 37, 39–50)

The Jewish New Year is a two-day holiday that starts on 20th September and heralds the seventh month of the Jewish calendar, Tishri.

As well as offering families a time for gathering celebration, it’s a time of personal reflection and prayer.

The 10th day of Tishri is also time for Yom Kippur, the holiest day of the year in Judaism.

the Torah – Leviticus – describes Rosh HaShanah as Yom Teruah, the Feast of Trumpets, or the Day of the Sounding of the Shofar.

It’s a traditional anniversary of the creation of Adam and Eve. God balances a person’s good deeds over the past year against their wrongdoings, so the day marks a time of reflection and penitence, and worshippers ask God for forgiveness. It’s also the start of the agricultural cycle of sowing, growth, and harvest.

It’s a Mitzvah to hear The shofar being blown. It’s a minhag to eat symbolic foods such as apples dipped in honey to evoke a “sweet new year”.
Dates, pomegranates, black-eyed peas and a whole fish with the head intact may also appear on dining tables. Round Challah is eaten to symbolise a circle of life and the new year.

Holiday candles are lit on both nights, and kiddush and sumptuous holiday meals are enjoyed on both nights and both days of Rosh Hashanah. We don’t go to work, drive, write, or switch on or off electric devices. We are permitted to cook and to carry outdoors (except on Shabbat).

Many of the Rosh Hashanah customs are symbolic of the type of year we hope will come our way. On the first night of Rosh Hashanah, we eat a slice of sweet apple dipped in honey. We eat pomegranates, with a prayer that this year we will be full of mitzvot as a pomegranate is full of seeds (there are 316 seeds in a pomegranate). And for good measure, during all Rosh Hashanah meals, the challah (bread) is dipped in honey. If symbolism isn’t enough, we verbalize our wishes, wishing family and friends a shanah tovah, a wonderful and sweet year.

On the first day of Rosh Hashanah, there is an age-old tradition to go to a body of water that contains live fish and perform the Tashlich ceremony. The word tashlich means “cast away.” We say a little prayer and shake the corners of our clothes, asking G‑d to cast away our sins. Water is a metaphor for kindness, and the lidless eyes of the fish symbolise our hope that G‑d’s watchful eye should always be upon us. If the first day of Rosh Hashanah falls on Shabbat, Tashlich is done on the second day.

Debunking Serano’s “Debunking”

Julia Serano believes he has “debunked” radical feminists in this article published on his blog yesterday. I would like to take some time to deconstruct Serano’s arguments and debunk trans activism’s “debunking.” Because of all the fallacies and straw men in the article, this post will be a long one. Grab a snack and join me. Serano, this is rhetorically addressed to you.

Your second sentence in this article:

From pre-interview conversations we shared, I knew that my interviewer planned to ask me about Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s comments from earlier this year wherein she claimed that trans women are not women.

And in the article you link to for a source:

Adichie, who is not transgender, responded: “So when people talk about, you know, ‘Are trans women women?’ — my feeling is trans women are trans women.”

Notice how you’re dishonest in the second sentence of this article? You begin by touting yourself and your interview for the New York Times, and then immediately, falsely, cast skeptical feminists like Adichie as the villains. While I wouldn’t disagree with Adichie if she had said trans women aren’t women, she didn’t say that and you begin your piece by framing “popular” feminists (Adichie and women like her) as a natural enemy.

Moving on, you talk about your own book for a while, and then:

Women who insist that trans women are not women often object to being called “cis women” under the false assumption that it somehow undermines their femaleness — this is not at all the purpose of this language….In other words, referring to someone as “cisgender” simply means that they have not had a transgender experience.

You do not get to determine other people’s analysis of your writing, especially if you want to falsely put words in Adichie’s mouth. If you are going to claim that trans feelings are what matter over other people speaking, then you cannot simultaneously tell anyone who feels undermined by putting a prefix on our oppression that we are wrong.

I could say “In other words, referring to someone as ‘he’ simply means he was born with a penis and has been treated accordingly by society” and you’d call me a bigot. You cannot support, for instance, the idea that misgendering a trans person is violence if the alleged offender meant no harm because according to your logic, the intent of words matters more than the effect.

How many times have women heard men tell us not to take their words negatively? “Calm down!” “Relax!” “It’s a compliment!” This is tired.

While some cisgender people refuse to take our experiences seriously, the fact of the matter is that transgender people can be found in virtually every culture and throughout history.

This is not an argument. Sexism has occurred in virtually every culture and throughout history. So has rape, murder, and child abuse. Longevity is not relevant. You cannot argue that it lends legitimacy or validates your claims.

While cis feminists who claim that trans women are not women obsess over questions of identity (“How can a ‘man’ possibly call ‘himself’ a woman?”), they purposefully overlook or play down the fact that we have very real life experiences as women.

Actually, we don’t obsess over your identity. You do. Radical feminists are focused on material problems whereas you are the one constantly blowing about identity validation. I have never asked how a man can call himself a woman because society allows men to call themselves anything they want, including the biologically impossible.

You do not have experiences as a woman. You have experiences as a man masquerading as a woman. They will never be the same as our experiences.

Forcing trans women into a separate group that is distinct from cis women does not in any way help achieve feminism’s central goal of ending sexism.

Spaces free from men does help our goal by allowing us to organize women like you to come and tell us who we are and what our goals should be. Men forcing themselves into women’s spaces is sexism.

Other common appeals to biology center on reproduction — e.g., stating that trans women have not experienced menstruation, or cannot become pregnant. This ignores the fact that some cisgender women never menstruate and/or are unable to become pregnant.

A man has never become pregnant. Where are women who do not menstruate or are unable to become pregnant complaining like you are? I have never become pregnant and never once did I doubt that I’m a woman. Society has treated me from birth as a female with the potential to become pregnant. You do not have that potential.

Women’s genitals vary greatly, and as with chromosomes and reproductive capabilities, we cannot readily see other people’s genitals in everyday encounters.

Women do not have penises. Diversity in vulvas and vaginas is not a penis. We can evaluate the sex of 99% of the people we come across at first glance. I PROMISE you that men know I have a vagina when they sexually harass me on the street even though they can’t see it.

When I lived in Spain as an Iraqi girl, I was sometimes mistaken for a person of Romani heritage and treated as such. (One specific incident comes to mind where I was patiently waiting to use a cash machine and the current user tried to shoo me away, believing I would try to rob her.) While my phenotype might appear to be that of a Roma girl to some people and I have had “real experiences” of being an Iraqi mistaken for a Roma person, that doesn’t make me Romani. It doesn’t give me the history of the Romani people or the struggle of their daily lives and common discrimination.

And frankly, what could possibly be more sexist than reducing a woman to what’s between her legs? Isn’t that precisely what sexist men have been doing to women for centuries on end?

Possibly the idea that a woman is a collection of stereotypes rather than a biologically oppressed class? Acknowledging I have a vagina and my life has been a certain way because of it is not reductive. I never said it defines me; it makes my life significantly different from yours and as a radical feminist I am trying to fight against that. You’re the only one using that argument.

So it is hypocritical for any self-identified feminist to use “biology” and “body parts” arguments in their attempts to dismiss trans women.

Biology is directly tied to our oppression. We need to point that out to fight the oppression. Is it a black person playing into racism by pointing out that she is black? Is a Jew hypocritical for pointing out that antisemitism happens to her because she is Jewish? During the Holocaust, people with Jewish heritage who self-identified as atheists were STILL murdered along with practicing Jews. They couldn’t identify themselves out of the ghettos or the concentration camps because your identifarianism is made up.

The main thrust of this assertion is that women are women because of socialization and/or their experiences with sexism. But what about me then?


  1. It’s NOT ALWAYS ABOUT YOU.
  2. You’re not a woman. There is your answer.

Or what about young trans girls who socially transition early in life, and who never have the experience of being perceived or treated as a man?

Socialization literally starts in the uterus. There are cultures with superstitions that doing certain things will “curse” a pregnant woman with a female infant. I can see you don’t spend a lot of time with children (alhamdulillah–thank god) because you would see how early that socialization begins and reflects in their behavior. I’ve already written about how society disadvantages female infants.

A young girl is forced against her will to live as a boy. Upon reaching adulthood, after years of male socialization and privilege, she comes out about identifying as female and begins to live as a woman. Do you accept her as a woman?

Children are not forced against their will to live as their biological sex because biological sex is natural trait for human beings . Children are forced to conform to gender roles but your insistence that womanhood is just a collection of those roles is actually upholding the problem.

Saying “you are a boy” is not the same as being told what “boy” socially entails, or that you cannot do feminine-labeled things because you are a boy. You were NEVER a young girl so don’t act like a victim in that sense. I’m sorry society forces children to uphold gender roles but radical feminists are the ones out here fighting them.

More often than not, people who claim that trans women aren’t women make both the biology and socialization arguments simultaneously, even though they are seemingly contradictory (i.e., if biology is the predominant criteria, then one’s socialization shouldn’t matter, and vice versa).

Biology is the basis of that socialization. Radical feminists are not arguing conflicting ideologies. We acknowledge that socialization is assigned to us based on our material and unchangeable biological sex. This is not contradictory in any way.

Much like their homophobic counterparts who make appeals to biology (“God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve”)

Creationism is not biology. You’re trying to undermine biology and evolution with an example that you know is religious and not scientific at all.

The trans-women-aren’t-women crowd desperately throws the entire kitchen sink at us rather than attempting to make a coherent argument.

I think I’ve made a very coherent argument but trans activists ignore that argument and set up straw men, like you just did in the sentence immediately before this one. You’re the one who has it wrong.

While gender socialization is quite real, all of us are capable of overcoming or transcending the socialization that we experienced as children.

So now you’re acknowledging gender socialization but saying we can overcome it. This is blaming women for our own oppression because we cannot socialize or identify ourselves out of it. Even trans men cannot escape their socialization and the attacks against their female biology like anti-abortion laws.

If I could transcend my socialization, I wouldn’t wear makeup, but my job requires me to look “presentable” and this means wearing makeup in my society. If I could transcend my socialization, I would be much firmer with men who interrupt me but I know they will likely react with more hostility and I have to prioritize my safety over shedding stereotypes. It’s hardly an option really.

The “Male Energy” and “Male Privilege” Fallacies

The way you’ve put “male privilege” in quotation marks and followed with the word “fallacies” makes me extremely nervous for this next section because it sounds like you don’t believe male privilege exists. But I will read and judge fairly…

In my many years of being perceived by the world as a cisgender woman, I have never once had anyone claim to detect “male privilege” or “male energy” in me.

This is because your male socialization means you are more likely to react with hostility or violence when being criticized, and our female socialization makes us less likely to criticize men, out of fear or concern for your feelings over ours.

Do you think male-identified males have these conversations with women or with each other all the time? I have never told a man he exudes “male energy.” I’ve never even heard of this. It’s bizarre. It’s also unrealistic to believe people tell you every thought they have about you. I’m sure people have thought things about me—both flattering and unflattering—that they’ve kept to themselves.

Male privilege is a very real thing. In my booking Whipping Girl, I talk at length about my own personal experiences of having it, and subsequently losing it post-transition.

Why do you have male privilege in quotation marks in every previous line? It’s very obvious you don’t think it applies to you as you’ve stated this directly. That’s the same line of thinking I’ve heard from most male self-identified “feminists” who really just want to deny their own culpability. We’ve all heard it.

The fact that the trans-women-aren’t-women crowd constantly harp about trans women’s real or imagined male privilege, yet refuse to acknowledge or examine their own cisgender privilege, demonstrates that their concerns about privilege are disingenuous.

“Trans women’s real or imagined male privilege.” So which is it then? You aren’t putting forth a coherent argument.

Cisgender privilege is not real. Women are not privileged more than men in the world, and accepting the reality of your body and how it means you are treated in the world is not a privilege unless you argue that being transgender is a mental illness, in which case those without that mental illness do have some advantages. But the trans lobby takes offense to that.

There are numerous problems with this line of reasoning [that trans males are caricatures of women]:

1) It relies on a highly negative view of feminine gender expression (that I have debunked in my writings) and implies that conventionally feminine cisgender women are also behaving superficially and/or reinforcing stereotypes.

If you do believe that women are an oppressed group, then naturally if follows the oppressed group cannot be blamed for their participation in that system to the same extent as the oppressors.

I have been socialized from birth to act feminine according to my culture’s standards. You haven’t. When you imply that acting out my oppression make you oppressed too, it’s insulting. First, it makes a joke of what I am forced to do to live safely, and second, it implies if I acted differently, I wouldn’t be oppressed as a woman, which isn’t true.

2) It ignores the many trans women who are outspoken feminists and/or not conventionally feminine.

Lots of men call themselves feminists but it doesn’t make them feminists or make them women. Calling yourself a feminist doesn’t make you a feminist any more than calling yourself a woman makes you a woman. (It doesn’t make you those things at all.)

3) Trans women do not transition out of a desire to be feminine; we transition out of a self-understanding that we are or should be female (commonly referred to as gender identity).

If there is no discernible biological condition that defines someone as a woman, as you argue before, then what are you transitioning to?

You are just adopting feminine stereotypes (but picking and choosing, mind you) and saying that makes you a woman. It doesn’t. Womanhood isn’t a feeling or an inner identity and to imply this is anti-woman because it sets the foundation for blaming us for our own position within an oppressed class.

4) Trans women who are conventionally feminine are not in any way asserting or insinuating that all women should be conventionally feminine, or that femininity is all there is to being a woman. Like cis women, trans women dress the way we do in order to express ourselves, not to critique or caricature other women.

You are asserting that feminine stereotypes make you a woman instead of what you are: a feminine man. And, by your language “[imply that] femininity is all there is to being a woman” you are implying that femininity (which is a set of cultural stereotypes) is at least part of being a woman. This is in conflict with your “identification only” mantra and it is proven false by every proud gender non-conforming woman and man out there.

5) This line of reasoning accuses trans women of arrogantly presuming to know what cis women experience, when we do no such thing. In reality, it’s the cis women who forward this accusation that are the ones arrogantly presuming to know what trans women experience and what motivates us.

You literally said in your last point: “Like cis women, trans women dress the way we do in order to express ourselves.” I do not dress the way I do in order to express myself; I dress this way in order to avoid violence in an extremely patriarchal society where women are expected to be covered or attacked. You just claimed to know my experience and motivations and you got it completely wrong.

As a trans woman, I will be the first to admit that I cannot possibly know what any other woman experiences or feels on the inside.

Then why have you spent this entire article constructing straw man arguments and insisting radical feminists believe things that we simply don’t? Your second sentence was a lie about something feminist and woman Chimimanda Ngozi Adichie said. How could you assume you have anything in common with us?

But the thing is, the trans-women-aren’t-women crowd cannot possibly know what any other woman experiences or feels either!

Actually, I do know what other women experience and feel because I am a woman. We have a shared experience as an oppressed class that you are not a part of. I’m glad you are acknowledging that you don’t know how we feel, but women around the world have the common experience of our biology and our socialization as the lesser sex according to that biology.

It’s the cis women who attempt to exclude us who seem to have a singular superficial stereotypical notion of what constitutes a woman, or of what women experience.

When you call the shared experiences of women under patriarchy “a singular superficial notion” you are arguing that sexism does not exist. Sexism has to have a definition in order to fight against it and that definition is the oppression of women as a class of people based on our reproductive biology.

Some cis feminists will extrapolate from this [trans people’s claims of sexed brains] that all trans people must hold highly essentialist beliefs about female-versus-male brains, and therefore that we are an affront to feminism. Often, they will make this case while simultaneously making essentialist claims themselves (e.g., regarding reproductive capacities) in order to undermine our identities.

The idea of different male and female brains is an affront to feminism because we know scientifically that our brains house our personality traits, intelligence, and memory and thus significantly affects how we act within society. Arguing that women have fundamentally different brains from men supports sexism by allowing men to argue our social circumstances are actually brought about by biological determination and that our lower place within society is valid because we are less intelligent or naturally drawn to certain tasks.

As a biologist, you should know that genitals serve a completely different purpose than the brain and does lead to different lived experiences for men and women. Even without the social construct of gender, women have pregnancies and men do not. To point out that male and female genitals are different is acknowledging material reality, whereas you are trying to construct your arguments upon subjective “identities.”

Radical feminists argue this material reality should not place women at a lower position within society or designate certain roles for us that have nothing to do with biology. Radical feminists accept our realities as people with vaginas and uteruses and the biological consequences of those things. What we do not accept is the unnecessary and oppressive social roles that have been created based upon them.

But here’s the thing: Rachel Dolezal is one person. In sharp contrast (as I alluded to earlier), transgender people are a pan-cultural and trans-historical phenomenon, and comprise approximately 0.2 – 0.3% of the population.

Prevalence does not make something good or healthy. A lot more than 0.3% of the population is sexist and that doesn’t mean sexism should be accepted in society. Since you can’t undermine that Rachel Dolezal acted out stereotypes and then called herself a black person and how this is directly linked to the trans phenomenon, you’re trying to argue that the problem is small.

According to the American news networks, white people “identify” as people of color to check those boxes on university and job applications to take advantage of affirmative action all the time. People confess to doing it. So the problem of people moving into spaces designated for certain marginalized groups—including people of color and women—is not small like you make it out to be.

I am Iraqi and I plan to study in the United States which means I have to require a special visa and still face possible rejection as a result of Trump’s travel ban on my country. (I’m not a Muslim, but the ban targets Muslim-majority countries and I live in one.) Still, I checked “white” on my university applications because it clearly states Middle Eastern people are white during that process. Marginalized Americans worked hard for those distinctions and I will not undermine their work by claiming to be someone I’m not. Maybe we can discuss a separate Middle Eastern category in the future, but I’m not going to claim to be black or Pacific Islander.

I have never once in my life heard a trans woman claim that our experiences are 100 percent identical to those of cis women.

Then what is your article even about? Why does the idea of women having our own spaces without trans women bother you? What is under threat here? Your “identity,” as you state above?

The problem isn’t that we (i.e., trans women) refuse to acknowledge any differences, but rather that the trans-women-aren’t-women crowd refuses to acknowledge our many similarities.

Feminism doesn’t focus on similarities because sexism doesn’t. “Why don’t we just all come together because we aren’t that different” says the person in a position of institutional power. Society tells people we are different and then as soon as you want something we have (that you have relegated us to) you claim to be just like us. Please.

There was a time in the 1960s and 1970s when many heterosexual feminists wanted to similarly exclude lesbians from women’s organizations and from feminism. The justifications that they forwarded were eerily similarly to trans-women-aren’t-women arguments: They accused lesbians of being “oppressively male” and of “reinforcing the sex class system.”

Lesbians are women and feminism is the movement to liberate women from sexism. Lesbians are biologically female and therefore women, whereas you are not. Many previous “feminists” have been racist and antisemitic as well, but people with common sense know black women and Jewish women are adult human females and therefore included in feminism. Biological males do not belong in feminism. Do not appropriate the struggles of lesbians.

Trans women are women. We may not be “exactly like” cis women, but then again, cis women are not all “exactly like” one another either. But what we do share is that we all identify and move through the world as women.

No, you are not women. You are biologically male and socialized as boys and then men. Not all women are exactly alike but we all have the shared experience of being biologically female and being treated accordingly. You do not have that experience. You do not move through the world as a woman, but as a man pretending he is a woman.

I said at the outset, forcing trans women into a separate group that is distinct from cis women does not in any way help achieve feminism’s central goal of ending sexism. In fact, it only serves to undermine our collective cause.

Sexism is rooted in biological sex. You are a biological male and in this way you are distinct from biological females and we do not have to include you in our mission to liberation ourselves from oppression by men.

What is our collective cause? What are your goals and how do you hope to achieve them? What are you doing to help women other than writing about how we exclude you because you are a man? How do you define sexism?

Your piece is riddled with incoherent arguments and you attempt to paint radical feminism as illogical when, in fact, radical feminism can be used to logically dismantle all your arguments and point to a clear foundation for women’s oppression.

This work starts with a falsehood and ends with a vague assertion that feminists, by asking for our own spaces free from men, are hurting ourselves when actually, you have only argued how these actions hurt you and men like you. You have blamed women for our own oppression throughout this article and yet you expect us to take you in with open arms and validate your identity because that is the only thing that you believe ties you to womanhood.

It doesn’t, and we’re not here to entertain you.

“The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat." 

Dr. Aschenasy, a Hebrew scholar said: "In Hebrew, beguiled does not mean "tricked” or “deceived”, as commonly thought. Rather, the Hebrew word is a rare verb that indicates an intense experience evoking great emotional, psychological, and/or spiritual trauma. It is likely that Eve’s intense, multilevel experience, this “beguiling” by the serpent, was the catalyst that caused Eve to ponder and evaluate what her role in the Garden really was.“

Satan’s [deceptive efforts] were not enough to deceive Eve into blindly eating the fruit. What it DID do was beguile her: made her question, made her doubt, and sent her on a soul-searching journey.


Ayahuasca


THE WORD AYAHUASCA: comes from the Quecha language and means “soul plant”, “death plant” or “vision plant” known by many different names from the 72 cultures that ingest Ayahuasca in Peru, Columbia and Ecuador. This legendary hallucinogen is used by Shamans to cure illnesses and to communicate with the Spirits. Various Shamans of the Rain Forest simply refer to Ayahuasca as the “cure-all”. To the indigenous people, it is known as a sacred medicine that can cure all illnesses. Without a doubt, it is the most celebrated hallucinogen of the Amazon.

ACCORDING TO THE INDIGENOUS FOLKLORE: Ayahuasca is the fountain of knowledge, the best way to reveal the mythological origins of life. The anthropologist Gerardo Reichel-Donatoff once wrote that to consume this spiritual drink is to become the center of the cosmos. The origin of our existence where the individual sees tribal divinities, the creation of the universe and of mankind, Adam and Eve, the creation of animals and the establishment of social order.

THE BIG CLEANING: Ayahuasca has never been used casually or for recreational purposes in the traditional societies. The Shaman, which is the person who knows how to bring out a chemical induced state of trance, guides those who wish to embark on the “search for vision”. The Shaman is without a doubt, the master of ceremonies, the key figure in drinking Ayahuasca. After sunset, the bitter drink is passed in a circle from person to person, and the Shaman begins to sing or chant about the visions that they will see. When they hear the song, the participants feel a certain tingling on the lips and a burning in their stomach. A nauseating energy ill overwhelm them, and many will begin to get sick with vomiting and diarrhea (but not necessarily everyone). This is a strong and unstoppable movement of the colon that penetrates all organs passing through the intestines like a liquid laxative of the soul, cleaning the entire body of all parasites, emotional blocks, and ancient feelings of resentment. This is why the natives of the Amazon refer to the “purge” when they speak of this drink. “One cannot help but be impressed by the notable improvement in their health attributed to the purging caused by the plant”, wrote the psychologist Ralph Metzner, editor of “Ayahuasca”. Metzner wrote an anecdotal report of the complete disappearance of certain types of cancer after one or two sessions using Ayahuasca. The rejuvenating impact of the “purge” helps to explain the exceptional health of those who use Ayahuasca, including even the oldest people.

TRAVEL IN TIME AND SPACE: After the inevitable purge, the senses sharpen and the initiate experiences are “magnetic liberation of the whole world”. After that spectacular visions are coming like a turbulent pandemonium of images that change faster than you can think. While one is under the influence of Ayahuasca, people frequently have the sensation of being separated from their bodies and catapulted into a strange area of excursion. During this trip outside of reality, marvelous sights appear and enchanting landscapes that unexpectedly give way to unsettling encounters with wild jaguars, enormous iridescent snakes, and other predator beats that will try to attack the person. William Burroughs described a sensation of flying long distances when he drank Ayahuasca during a South American expedition in 1953. “The spiritual drink is a trip in time and space”, he wrote in a letter to Allen Ginsberg. The blood and substance of various races: black, Polynesian, Mongolian people of the mountains, desert nomads, Indians, new races that have never been experienced before will pass through your body, incredible trips through the mountains, deserts, and jungles… A place where the past is forgotten and the emerging future combines in a vibration without sound.“ It is unknown, why the visions provoked by the Ayahuasca include animals from the jungles of the Amazon. Especially when people from other continents ingest the sour tonic. Long anecdotal stories about rivers and electric radiations that illuminate the night sky are classic elements of the experience with this liquid. An indigenous said: "Always when I drink Ayahuasca I have such wonderful visions that I have to cover my eyes with my hands, because I am afraid someone would steal them.

DAY 3307

Jalsa, Mumbai                      Apr 17/18,  2017                 Mon/Tue 12:35 am 





Birthday - EF - Jonoon Alhob , Ninad Junnarkar , Manoj Lahoti  ….                       Tue, April 18 …. all our wishes for the birthdays of our dearest Ef’s .. may they all have a wonderful year and years ahead .. with our love and our affection ..



As the day draws to a close, and the mental preparations start for another 24 gone by, the mind begins to formulate what the the last task of the day shall begin with and how .. namely the connect with the Ef and the Blog and the other social mediums .. and everything that is thought of before coming to this stage of writing, simply goes out of the window .. nothing whatsoever remains within .. the words begin to form as the DAY is filled, the date adjusted and the time inserted  .. and as the space bar for ‘return’ is punched that is when the mind begins to wander and accumulate matter that shall find its way to that particular DAY as in DAY 3307 ..

Notice how craftily at least a dozen lines have been composed, merely on the subject of what the composition of the start should be .. I always knew I was stupid .. but that stupid !! hmmm ..


The first thoughts that rack the brain and the body as you arise are .. ‘ya buddy .. today we are going to conquer the World ‘ .. and within a few minutes of this rather blatantly over optimistically bent of mind laced with a strange arrogance, we discover that all of those lofty ideals and thoughts are washed away with the paste on the toothbrush under running tap, the flow of which determines what shall be the context of the days’ feelings .. the cold splash upon the sleepy skin of the face awakens to reality of life and its obstacles that we shall all have to face .. and it is quite strange is it not, that with that first flush of the acqua, numerous ideas and collective thoughts of accomplishment simply wash themselves away .. into oblivion and beyond …

What has been designed in the mind as activity, deactivates .. and the mundane everyday regulars take over, destroying all that could have been the beginnings of a satisfying 24 ..

BUT ..

the human is a peculiar and uncanny instrument of creation .. be it, what it may, .. the Adam or its rib as Eve .. they all are substantially equipped to muster enough courage to either survive or demolish any ideas of survival .. and the portion that remains ever the closest to the hemisphere, is the responsible, abject component, of this adventure .. 

When the cranium disagrees, or claims overworked conditions without the carrot of a promotion or a bonus .. all else, in what ever form falls apart ..

And the devastation is so acute that it can ruin your being for several 24′s of the time given to us in calculated form, by some mathematical geniuses of the Age of Revelation - whatever that may have been or is ..

Revelations are peculiar too .. after all they share the same peculiarity as the peculiarity of the creation of the the humanoid .. so some commonality exists .. and it is this commonality that we all succumb to .. at times to good and better climes .. most times at completely nothing ..

I can admit with absolute certainty, that I become a victim of this as often as the days that go by .. and therefore, when I subject my dearest Ef to some of this ‘bumff’ that goes by the name of a Blog, it is of great personal composure to learn the following morning or at times within minutes that, I was not too far wrong … !!


SO … as we shout and scream about the 9 years of this writing and the validity of its contents that seem to have been a source of immense connect and togetherness of a family .. I wonder .. and I wonder still ..


Sometimes the grey in appearance instills in the many that are below the age of the self to give it respect and love and admiration .. I shall accept it all with the hugest of humility .. but we all know that it is misplaced and not deserving .. I do prevent the occurrence of such like, when there is meeting .. but beyond expressing the ‘please do not do this’ there is little that can be done ..

Amidst the embarrassment that it causes me, my words seem to drift away without having meaningful effect .. and this is of greater concern and much disturbance .. and I do know that time shall come when it’s repeated actions shall eventually force one to accept it, in a manner that shall not be acceptable at all .. 

FOR .. now there is the flexibility to bend down and attempt to stop the practice .. in time however as age grows, the bend shall be physically difficult, and that is when the idea of preventing it shall wear thin and the practice shall become one that should or shall have to be accepted .. a practice that I shall never wish to cater to ever .. 

HENCE .. DO STOP THIS ENTIRE PROCESS OF PROSTRATING IN SUBSERVIENT ACT, AND PREVENT ANY FURTHER DISTASTE ..


Good night .. with folded hands ..


Amitabh Bachchan 

Meet Me Inside (Creation of Man Version)
  • Eve: Adam, did you yield?
  • Lucifer: He succumbed to sin, no he doesn't yield
  • Lucifer: I'm satisfied
  • Adam: Yo we gotta clear the garden!
  • Angels: Here comes The General!
  • Lucifer: This should be fun!
  • God: What is the meaning of this? Eve, take the fruit away from Adam!
  • Eve: Yes sir
  • God: Lucifer you had never agreed with me but believe me these humans don't need to sin. Thank you for your service.
  • Adam: Let's ride
  • God: Adam?
  • Adam: Sir?
  • God: Meet me inside
  • Choir of angels: Meet him inside, meet him inside, meet him inside, meet him, meet him inside
  • God: Son-
  • Adam: Don't call me son

anonymous asked:

Hello! I just wanted to ask if you know where the church stands on human evolution? Or evolution in general? As a practicing Catholic, I must admit, I am having a little trouble believing the biblical story of creation and being offspring from Adam and Eve.

Hello!

Catholics are free to believe in evolution (or not). There is no definitive stance (Read more here), but recent popes have made statements in favor of evolution. Either way, Catholics must believe these things about creation:

1. The creation by God of all things at the beginning of time.
2. The special creation by God of man.
3. The formation of woman from man.
4. The unity of the human family.
5. The original happiness of our first parents in a state of justice and grace.
6. The divine command given to man by God to prove obedience.
7. The transgression of that command at the instigation of the devil in the form of a serpent.
8. The fall of our original parents from their primitive state of innocence.
9. The promise of a future redeemer.

For more information about these guidelines and creation beliefs, go here. If Catholics believe in evolution, then they must still believe the things listed above and that God is responsible for it. This is called theistic evolution, which is a type of old-Earth creationism.

Having said all of that, I really think you should look into young-Earth creationism (YEC) with an open mind before rejecting it. It’s the first one listed on the fourth page of this Genesis Bible study. If you want to learn more about it, check out the Kolbe Center for the Study of Creation (a Catholic apostolate), Answers in Genesis, Genesis Apologetics, the Institute for Creation Research, and Truth: The Objective Reality (I know one of the bloggers behind TTOR and we’re really good friends.). My reading lists (link in my bio) include YEC books that you might be interested in. Young Earth Creationism, Creationism - The Official Page, A Biblical and Scientific Defense of Young Earth Creationism, and Catholic Creation Alliance are wonderful Facebook groups that you should join to learn more. 

Even if you end up believing in evolution, you might still benefit from the resources I mentioned.

I hope this helped! God bless!

Ad Jesum per mariam,

María de Fátima