Archive for the ‘sex’ Category

The Primal Unit of “Civilization”

March 21, 2017

Cro-Magnon-ManThe connotation of “civilization” is modern, where we have technical and scientific advances almost daily.  Our history is replete with technical and scientific advances but at a much slower pace.  Yet, in terms of the word “civil,” primal man was far advanced in his humanity and civilization.  Perhaps ‘society’ or ‘culture’ would be better words instead of civilization.

I have found those who study anthropology still regard love as a feeling or emotion, usually between man and woman.  I regard love as a near infinite spectrum of energy, impacting us at the genetic level to produce the feelings or emotions.  For me, it is easier to look at it this way and it explains many things.  Therefore, I propose the primary unit of societies is the man-woman relationship.  This is not to say heterosexual relationships were the only ones, but like today, the heterosexual population is much greater than the LGBT population.  The difference is for primal man, it didn’t make any difference.  Every member of the tribe had a job to do for the survival of the tribe.  This was primarily exercising their talents.

The strength of the tribe was a function of their interdependence and synergy as grown by love.  Today we see our woman as “belonging to” a man (or vice versa).  Consider that in primal societies a woman “belonged with” a man as a mate and partner. The partnership was respected by other members of the tribe.  Why?

At this time, science believes one out of 200,000 babies is born with the ability to see infrared with their eyes.  They sense heat as well as color.  Is it possible under proper circumstances others have this ability as well?  I think so.  We are only slightly enlarging the Visible Light Spectrum to include infrared.  Could this be a function of love grown interdependence?  Again, I think so.  It makes it easier to pick up game hiding in the bushes.

Let’s look at the “science” we have on love.  Not much.  Dr. Helen fisher has looked at the impact of love as increasing blood flow to the brain with fMRI studies.  She interprets this as love is a function of brain chemistry.  Lynn McTaggart studies and promotes good intentions to change the environment.  Masaru Emoto studied the change in the structure of ice crystals after water was bombarded with good, loving thoughts.  Very few have loked at love as energy and when they do, they call it something else.  The Heart Math Institute calls it energy, avoiding the word love.

Returning to the primal unit of man and woman or woman and man if you prefer, we see in our patriarchal system thousands of years of child abuse.  “Spare the rod and spoil the child.”  I was not spoiled… or was I?  As I grew, my parents learned spanking me broke blood vessels in their hands.  They then used Uncle Jack’s leather clothes brush.  I have it as a keepsake.  Today we psychologically “discipline” them which can be more damning.  We teach them to “fit in.”  Before we are old enough to be spanked, we accept.  I wonder if teaching or allowing acceptance, with boundaries, would be better?  The point being we are instructed to focus on our children rather than our mate.  Divide and conquer.

In today’s relationships, married or not, there is a lot of resistance to change, even when change can meant growth.  Well, hell!  I like who I am right now.  We generally don’t see that we might like ourselves better if we change a little.  Primal man did not suffer the abuses we tolerate today.

Primal and indigenous man lived in an interdependent anarchy.  Leaders arose for a specific task.  Hunters, warriors, healers were each unique in their innate talents.  Acceptance is an attribute of love, as are the boundaries established by self-love.  The primal unit of the tribe was the couple.  We hear from anthropologists, that “open relationships” were the norm, or “serial monogamy” was the norm.  I suggest these authors are projecting their belief system and life style onto primal man.  They have no knowledge of the interdependence’s synergy or genetic changes that may come from love.  They do have credentials, which gives them more “authority” to express their opinion.  I have only experience.



February 27, 2017

1I guess a lot of guys don’t think about unity when we get into a relationship.  I never did before I got into my research.  I had my mind on something else.  I didn’t know squat about love either.  I figured if I like to give her “things,” I must love her ‘cause I’m cheap!  I did know you can’t buy love.  So my gifts of “things” were from my heart, not my wallet.  But, I never really gave her me.  These gifts had nothing to do with unity and unity  is where the action is!

The word unity encompasses all the other words we hear about relationships: commitment, fidelity, honor and love.  “Do you take this woman/man…” and seldom do they mention unity.  We hear about a “union” but it is as if they don’t want unity in the union?  Commitment is easy because we can only commit to ourselves.  When there is a mutual desire for unity, fidelity is easy too.  It is difficult to be in union with one while screwing another.  Further when you are screwing another you are not honoring the one with whom you profess to be in unity.  As you go through all the ups and downs, love is the glue holding you (plural) together.

Why is this mutual desire for unity so important?  Synergy!  The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.  We are each a part.  We can screw our heads off, having magnificent sexual responses, transmitting to one another universal love and it means very little without the mutual desire for unity.  Couples can be married for 50 years and never “get it.”  They will stay for show or stubbornness and have no concept of unity.  Unity is not that difficult, if you really want it and the rewards are beyond amazing.

Intimate sexual relationships are not the only kinds of relationships where unity and synergy can be achieved, as I point out in my book.  We can be in unity with our friends and neighbors as well.  It takes love to get there.  Sometimes, we can get there without knowing it until we are there.  Bottom line is love is the path to follow.  Brotherly love works too.


January 26, 2017

Hymens, like everything else on or in a woman’s body are uniquely formed.  The “intact hymen” is actually a detrimental medical condition called an imperforate hymen.  It is dangerous because when menstruation begins, the flow is backed up into the vagina and usually develops into an abdominal mass causing pain.  This article discusses different types of hymens.

The next issue is the word “virgin.”  In pre-Christian, perhaps other than Judaic, cultures, the word virgin meant an independent woman.  A woman who could grow, gather or hunt her own food and find or build her own shelter.  This is a woman who did not need a man to take care of her.  This is a woman who wanted a man on equal footing.   Well, ladies, it seems you have been culturally screwed out of your independence.  Time to get it back!

Intimate Relationships

February 7, 2015

I have now three criteria for intimate relationships

  1. A mutual desire for unity
  2. Lotsa love.
  3. Great sex.

This is exactly the reverse order in which I studied these things, but I’ve always done things backwards.

Unity: oneness with

It starts at home, with me. It comes from loving myself. This is different from narcissism and being completely selfish. It is more like taking care of one’s self: physically, emotionally and spiritually. That is going to vary for each of us, so I’m not going to get into absolutes.

Once we know pretty much who we really are, rather than what society and others have told us who we are, then we are ready to receive or look for someone with whom we can share our life. Contrary to popular opinion, it is always going to be my life, just as it is always going to be her life. “Gears meshing smoothly” is one metaphor. Two gears are always going to be two gears, meshing to make things work. But both have this desire to blend and mesh THEIR lives into a life together. Pick your own metaphor.

Lotsa Love

You all know by now, I look at love as an energy spectrum, said energy being delivered through the heart rather than the head. This too, has to be mutual, though it will vary from time to time around the spectrum. One can love another to near infinite heights, and it won’t work if not reciprocated. Even when reciprocated it won’t work without the desire for unity. Love as a feeling comes and goes. The energy is always there. How we let it in to us and focus it on another is a different story.

Great Sex

This is another one up for grabs. My views on great sex have changed significantly. Great sex can come from quickies in the presence of love, just as a reminder you are together as a pair of gears meshing. It can be had in those sessions lasting for hours or with transcendent sexual experiences. The definition of great sex is an individual subjective thing. I think it may have more to do with our desire to give ourselves and our responses to one another than looking for a response from the other.

In the beginning of my sexual life it was about notches in my belt. I got so many my pants fell down. Then it was about pleasing her. I was wearying of the continual chase. Figure out how to please one and I wouldn’t have to chase as much. Then I fell in love and transmitted that love sexually. It was entirely different: ecstasy as compared to pleasure. It didn’t last either. I instinctively knew the desire for unity was not there, but when ahead anyway, kidding myself.

Now, I’ve decided to reverse my order and go for mutual desire for unity, then love and the great sex will follow. This is not to say I won’t break this order of things, but unity will always be primo! We’ll see how this works.

“Sex Experts” and Sexual Biology

October 29, 2014


It is my opinion there is no such thing as a “sex expert.” Various experts will try and tell you, “If you do this then that will happen.” Or they will tell you, “ALL men or women are like this or that.” I will agree that some generalities may be applicable in some cases at certain times. Mostly I find nothing but authoritative opinion based on limited experience projected onto men and women as universal truths. My response is, “Bullshit!”

When I began my research under the guidance of Dr. Beverly Whipple, one of the great lessons I learned is “all women are different.” So are men. I was acutely aware of her scientific statements: “the data suggest….” And, “it appears that…” This gives us only generalities that are applicable to that specific and tiny study population.

I have experienced and observed a relatively broad range of orgasmic experiences. I have anecdotal evidence of more. I have also learned not to limit ourselves. Just because I don’t know about a specific experience you may have doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. Just because you don’t have one of the ones I describe, or have it differently than I describe, only means you don’t have it or have it differently. You are unique where you are right now.

I will say I believe our orgasmic experiences are a function of our unique DNA coding and that is impacted by our epigenome. Much of our epigenome is created by fear. It is essentially like wrapping up our genes with duct tape so they cannot be expressed, or produce the amino acids and thereby proteins that create various sexual responses in our bodies, including pleasure. Just because I believe it doesn’t make it true or a fact. It appears to work.

It also appears “love” un-wraps the “duct tape” from our genes allowing them to express or shut down in cases where they are not supposed to work. This is why I view love as an energy spectrum. I have no idea which frequency or frequencies act on anybody’s genes to produce the varying responses. Neither does anybody else. I can only tell you about a few responses I have experienced, observed or about which I have been advised. I can tell you about things in the human body that appear at a gross level to be common or in some cases unique.

For example, some women as part of their orgasmic experience, will have a clear, copious emission (250 -500+ ml) through the vagina. This is natural for them. Others may have a clear copious emission through the urethra (125 + ml) in addition to the milky emission from the female prostate (5- 15 ml). It doesn’t make any difference. As a guy, my job, our job, is to accept and appreciate what ever response she offers. We also need to listen to her and her body with our heart.

Some women have no control over their responses. They are going to respond the way they do whether we love them or they love us or not. Our love for them simply makes them feel safe, or confident in knowledge we will accept their response with gratitude, no matter what it is. WE ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR RESPONSE! WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING THEM FEEL SAFE ENOUGH SO THEIR BODY WILL RESPOND. Our love for them un-wraps our genes. Their love for us un-wraps their genes.

Some of the fears we hold are buried so deeply in our sub-conscious we don’t even know we hold them. Love seems to work anyway. My opinion is that with love, we are each our own “sex experts,” and I only have one X-chromosome. I can only tell you of a few things that may happen and some of the things in our common history that appear to wrap up our genes. We are fantastic creatures. My wish is for each of us to grow into our fantastic selves.

The Alchemy of Erotic Love… forGuys: Chapter 1. Where Are We?

April 28, 2014

What do we think about sex and love? Why do we think about sex the way we do? Where do you start a book like this? The best place to startmight be from where we are, and then work both past and future. What is important is not what “we” think, but what you think, and why.


What we think about sex is unique to each of us, but generally ranges from “it’s better than masturbation” to “it’s the most wondrous experience in life.” What I found humorous in my research is there is no clinical or scientific definition of sex! We all assume everybody knows what it is and what we are talking about. The problem is we can only define it from our own experience and education. Then, our education depends on how we interpret the opinion of others based on our own unique experiences. And then, we have our point of view.


The first thing I would like to offer for your consideration is a clinical definition of sex. “Sex is the mental and/or physical stimulation of nerve endings, creating electro/chemical energy that may result in pleasurable involuntary muscle contractions in the genitalia and other sexual responses.” Sex is also a mechanism for transmitting love, and we’ll get to this later.


As we will see throughout the book, this definition opens a larger can of worms than it closes. I have observed involuntary muscle contractions ranging from a gentle fluttering or buzzing in the genitalia (accompanied by a sigh of relief) to something resembling a grand mal seizure. Further, science doesn’t know what the “nerve impulses” are or if they vary with the individual? The bottom line is what we know about sex is primarily the opinion of others (including me) that limits our perception and experiences. I have no idea how far you can go and all I want to do here is give you more options by taking your blinders off. You may experience more pleasure and have other results as well.


Generally speaking what I have learned from others is that sex is either about pleasure or procreation. A distinct effort is made to keep love outof the equation. I call this the “Pleasure/procreation paradigm.” A paradigm describes distinct concepts or thought patterns. Even with this definition, we each have our own perception of the concept. When it comes to sex, there are about 7.5 billion perceptions of sex, one for each of us, and each of us believes most of the rest of us holds the same perception, but if you don’t, you are a pervert. I don’t think you are a pervert. I think you hold a different perception of sex and love than I do. All I am offering you here is a different angle to look at your perception. As you will see in Chapter 7, our sexuality is simply based on how we view sex, and that is a function of many factors.


In1974, Robert C. Solomon noted, “It is one of the dangers of conceptual analysis that the philosophers choice of paradigms betrays a personal bias, but it is an exceptional danger of sexual conceptual analysis that one’s choice of paradigms also betrays one’s private fantasies and obsessions.”1 What Solomon did not recognize is the overall sexual paradigm under which we in Western civilization currently operate (for 5000 years+/-): pleasure and/or procreation. The paradigms to which he referred were but sub-sets of this one, which in and of itself is a political construct. What this political construct does is keep us focused on pleasure or procreation and keeps us from focusing on love. We will see that love may be different from what we imagine it to be and in the next chapter we will see it can change us in wondrous ways.
Maintenance of the paradigm may also be viewed as “the war between the sexes.” The primary strategy of war is “divide and conquer.” In this war, the tactics are the four “D’s:” deification, demonization, denigration, and dismissal. I’ve found a number of historic documents that blatantly show these mechanisms and will discuss them in detail later, along with more modern erroneous myths. The problem is even though we are not consciously aware of these myths and misinformation; they permeate our society. I’d never heard of the Myth of Lilith, yet for years limited myself to the missionary position.


Lilith was among the first to be demonized; later the Malleus Maleficarum demonized all women. The goal of deification is to put the opposite sex, or the sexual relationship out of reach as seen between Isis and Osiris. To some extent, even “motherhood” is deified. The extreme end of the sexual paradigm is for men to view women as either sacred brood cows or pleasure palaces: both ludicrous. A man’s love for woman will be the salvation of mankind, should they accept it and return it.


Around1250 CE, Vincent of Beauvais wrote the Speculum Maius (The Great Mirror), the Funk& Wagnalls Encyclopedia of the time. In there was a section consisting of 2734 chapters called the Speculum Doctrinale. Deep in one of those chapters is an admonishment for husbands not to love our wives too much. This seems to have stuck!


Dismissal can be more damaging than burning at the stake.“Pay her no mind. She’s just a woman.” (I detested Tool Time for this reason.) It would be easy to point out the vile put-downs, or denigration, of women today. But they are historic and will continue into the future. We can only change it in ourselves, and by boycotting those who persist in it. One damn good reason is backlash. Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned! Or, “Karma is a bitch!” A better reason is what we men (and women) can do for ourselves by violating the Speculum Doctrinale, and loving. Through love, we may transform into the divine human beings we can be.


Through the ages, the word “divine” became woo-speak. It simply means having the ability to see or find the unseen. It is more about accessing our intuition and being able to solve problems without knowing how we are doing it. Although that “ignorance” in my left-brain, sometimes ticks me off, it works.


My point of view (POV) came from a transcendent experience, following my then beloved glowing like a firefly, lighting the room.  I was in blackness. There appeared a point of shimmering light, I recognized as my essence.

Then, another point of light I recognized as her essence.













The two lights danced toward each other,









becoming one bright light.



Beginning with the blackness, I was inthe presence of God and God was smiling.  THE POINTS OF LIGHT HAD NOGENDER.  There was no masculine or feminine, divine or otherwise in this dimension, or plane, whatever you want to call it.  No more than photons have gender.  I don’t know if I had “an orgasm” or not.  This was a part of that orgasmic experience.


This type of transcendent experience is called merging and it has many variations, as many as there are “types” of transcendence. “Any kind of transcendence with a partner is no guarantee of a lasting relationship.”  I read this in Jenny Wade’s book, “Transcendent Sex,” ten years later and smiled, because she was gone in four days. All this is discussed in later chapters.


Our society, or culture what ever you wish to call it, conditions us to believe, as it once did me, men are penises with wallets attached, the larger the better, and women are toys for pleasure or breeding to satisfy our respective egos.


There was one other element to my experience I forgot to mention: love; as close to “unconditional love” as I have ever experienced.  As I plowed through my research, I ignored it.  But something was missing?  DUH! Love!  With love everything fell into place.  Better yet, I was aware that I could recognize the essence of someone and had the capacity to love that essence unconditionally as well as receive her love.


In this life, or on this plane, where most of us exist, men and women are different.  We have different anatomies, not only in our genitalia but also all over our bodies.  I believe this anatomical difference was given to us for a reason.  I can’t put my finger on it, but I like it. It seems first we unite in the flesh, becoming one flesh.  Then we unite as male/female to female/male. Then we can see our essence,without gender, though in this life our gender will be with us ‘till we die.  The order is immaterial and there may be more.


My work leads me to believe as sentient,biological beings we have the capacity to make this leap.  It is a process: quickly for some, a long winding road for others. I choose to begin at the beginning, in this plane, this life, leaving each to their own quantum leap.  Is there more?  Probably. I can only lead as far as I have gone and leave the door open for the individuals who wish to pass through.  I also recognize other POV’s, because mine is not the only one.   Yet in the other ones I like, I can always find the love, even with another name.


Why is my book “… for Guys?” I chose to begin at the beginning.  In this life, I am a guy. As such, I have no business telling a woman how she should feel, beor what she should do.  I don’t even tell guys this.  I tell them what I have done and observed what works.  I tell them what my perspective is and how it changed my life.  How I think it works is all intuitive speculation.  I just know the results.


I describe the fantastic male and female interior genitalia for guys, using parts lists and wiring schematics.  I talk about responses few have experienced or even heard of.  This is just so they will know and not be frightened when and if they happen.  I talk about anatomical differences between men and women.  Women have a better connection between left and right brain, due to a thicker corpus callosum.  Sensory perception is a function of both halves.  Women have about 4000 genes on Chromosome #23, and men only have 2084.  Women have the capacity for billions of different kinds of orgasms (slight to major variations) men may have a dozen or more and usually limit themselves to one.  We are all unique creatures, but women are far more fluid and their bodies respond in accordance with their monthly cycle, making them an adventure.  If nothing else, I hope men develop more respect for women, simply based on their anatomy. My goal is to make this book an anachronism.  We will look back on it and smile, shaking our heads, saying, “weren’t we silly. All we gotta do is love.”


We are going to get into Archeology later, but I have to wonder about primal man. Suppose there was one who could read English, who picked up this book. He would probably look at it and ask, “What do I need this for?” When looking at how primal man lived, Archeologists project their perception of sex, their sexuality, on to primal man. Each of them has their own agenda, mostly to show they are not perverted. This way, they get to keep their job. I wonder, if without all the garbage we carry around, primal man was not more “advanced” than we give him credit? It’s just a thought.

Science, Fiction Or Fantasy?

March 11, 2014

clairvoyant  I am a man blessed with amazing sexual experiences.  I am a man cursed with curiosity.  I wanted to know what was happening in our bodies.  I began studying our sexual anatomy from the genetic level on up!  I’m not a biologist or anatomist.  I was trained as an Ocean Engineer and hydrodynamics was my favorite subject.  This enabled me to see the fluidity of life.

The first thing I became aware of was our historic conditioning.  It sucks!  The next thing, as I got more heavily into genetics is that this is the source of our uniqueness.  And then, there were the 3 Billion base pair not associated with genes.   What the hell were they doing?  And finally (probably because I am a thick headed guy), I was directed to love.  Like, “love might have something to do with it.”  Duh!  Boy, was I in for a shocker!

I started by modeling love as the visible light spectrum, which is only a tiny part of the electromagnetic spectrum, and then there is quantum mechanics.  This love stuff is big!  Then I got the idea the Zero Point Field (ZPF) from which all energy and matter flowed (s?) is actually love, therefore everything is love.  Then it got bigger.

Suppose our ZPF is only a sub-set of the love field?  That being the case, could there be other sub-sets Creating other universes or dimensions?  I am not the first to come up with “parallel universes” or “other dimensions.” This only offers a possibility.  I saw a kid on You Tube talking about 18 different dimensions, and others have said 10 or 12.  Maybe that is all they could see?  Perhaps they are nuts?  I must be nuts too, because I do not disbelieve.  There are “shadow people.”  I have heard of the Cherokee “little people.”   I am not prone to dismissing this as hallucinations, though I’ve never seen any doesn’t mean they don’t exist.  It may simply mean my perception is not yet open in this area.  They may exist in “alternate dimensions?”

In this case, we could then say our “reality” from our ZPF is ZPF1.  Were I living in ZPF18 then ZPF18 would be ZPF1, because if those guys are anything like us, their egos would tell them they are #1.  Geesh!  We’re funny.  And if their governments were anything like ours, we’d have an “interdimensional war” to prove which was #1.  We are also dumb!  Or maybe we just want to rape resources from another dimension?

On top of this, I’ve heard we have 360 senses in addition to our five basic: touch, sound, sight, taste and smell.  Why 360?  I have no idea.  But it is quite probable these senses allow us to “see the unseen?”  This is the basic definition of “divinity.”  Could the activation of these senses be in our DNA coding?  I think so.  I haven’t the foggiest idea of how they would work in our brain or pineal gland, or anywhere else in the human body.  But, our DNA coding is the blueprint for our lives.  Before we build anything of this complexity we have to have a blueprint.

How the various sections of our bodies respond to our modified blueprint I don’t know.  I don’t know if it is by demethylating, or otherwise allowing locked up genes to express themselves or if it is by creating new “genes” from the 3 billion base pair?  I don’t care.  It is your blue print, not mine.  What goes on in your body is none of my business.  But if you think something weird is happening, like shadow people or knowing what is going to happen before it does, what I am saying is it is probably something that has its origins at your genetic level and you aren’t nuts!  Then, I’m going to say, we humans are fantastic creatures!

We are just beginning to see how our bodies work at an energetic and quantum level.  It appears that “love” is what really does it.  I’m not the first to come up with this either.  Now does this mean if I have an extra gene or two open I am perfect?  Nope.  It just means I have more work to do.  It also means not everybody has the same genes open.  So, those who can see other dimensions, or auras, or into the future, or into the past are simply gifted and they aren’t perfect either.

We are all just human.  Some of us with gifts.  Some without.  Even so, the one common characteristic of humankind is we can screw up an anvil with a rubber mallet.  Wanna see my anvil collection?

Copyright 2014  Art Noble


March 11, 2014

edu2  We are told “formal” education began in Egypt about 5000 years ago, although military training was probably earlier.  In both China and India we are told it began 1200 years later, around 1800 BCE.  All formal education was based on “religion” as a mechanism for holding people together and controlling them.  In Egypt, it was the study of the gods Troth, etc.  In China it was Confucius.  In India it was Shiva and Shakti.  Then there was a pantheon of gods and goddesses.  Along came Judaism, with oral teachings until about 400 BCE according to some scholars or 1000 BC according to others and again we have religious teachings.  Most of these are based in fear.  This was followed by Christianity that really began with the Church at the Council of Nicaea in 325 CE.  It was formalized around 400 CE when Jerome translated the Bible from the three languages: Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic into Latin, and all the references to “Eros” were deleted and replaced with “Agape” which originally included Eros.  Around 800 CE, along came Islam.  Science, engineering and other disciplines were taught to build weapons for imperial expansion and fortifications as well as tombs to physically demonstrate how important religion is.  And here we are today.

One thing in common with all the “religions” is no mention of erotic love, except in the Upanishads, at least in the modern translations of these religions.   Many will talk about love in a round about way, but not really get into it.  It is my understanding, and I could be wrong, that Tantra evolved from the Upanishads.  I am sure there were other cultures extolling the virtues of erotic love, but not as well known as ancient India.  It appears to me, religion wishes to keep us away from erotic love.  Those who reject the church and focus on pleasure are of no threat to the control exercised by religion, so it is not only acceptable but also provides a mechanism for “divide and conquer.”

So where are we today?  I look around and I see Mammon as the “new” god, though he has been around since the dawn of civilization.  As Mammon’s servant, I see sexual pleasure.  Sexual pleasure is cool, because there may not be any real love there, and if there is, we can always change the focus back to pleasure.  At any rate, I have had a glimpse at what can happen with erotic love and other kinds of love, so that is what I “preach.”

Copyright 2014 Art Noble


February 11, 2014

Terms like “Divine Feminine” and “Divine Masculine” are used to divide us, separate us, and we are already separated enough!


As an engineer and wordsmith, I am hardcore.  No bullshit!  Also, as an Ocean Engineer and poet I recognize beauty in the fluidity of our humanity and our biology.  As a wordsmith, I like to see not only where our words came from, but also how their meanings have changed over history.  The word divine simply means having the ability to see or find the unseen.

 I look at all this as a function of our unique DNA coding.  Dr Bruce Lipton refers to our DNA as the blueprint for our lives.  Our lives are built on this blueprint.  If we don’ like our lives, we change the blueprint.  It sounds tough.  I suggest it is easier than we think.

 As an engineer I wrote a change order for a valve vault on a 30” pipeline. The manufacturer sent a flanged pup joint 56” (inches) long.  (A pup joint is any length of pipe shorter than the standard 20’.)  The original blue prints called for the pup joint to be 5 feet, 6 inches (5’6”) long.  They missed the apostrophe!  One tiny mark on a set of plans 3” thick and 24” x36” wide for a 130 mile pipeline!  It could have screwed up the whole job.  No problem.  I wrote the change order moving the vault wall and it fit.

Now let’s look at our DNA: our blueprint.  Everyone of us is unique!  Although each chromosome is composed of mom’s and dad’s contribution to us, during fetal development a lot of things happen.  In the segmented sequence of base pair we call a gene, there are five possibilities for each of the 20 or 30,000 genes that only use about 90 million of our 3.1 billion base pair. 

  1. They stay the same. 
  2. One or more base pair is added to the sequence.
  3. One or more base pair is subtracted from the sequence.
  4. One or more base pair swaps ends in the sequence.
  5. A combination of 2, 3 or 4.

This is called mutation.  The extent to which this occurs is called our “mutant load.”  Bottom line is we are all beautiful mutants.  There is more contributing to our uniqueness, but this is enough for now.

These genes when activated (expressed or turned on) produce amino acids that usually combine with other amino acids to produce proteins.  The proteins we know about are enzymes, hormones, neurotransmitters, neuroreceptors, and structural.  The first four impact our brain chemistry and it is as some big nest of wires with feedback loops running all over and impacting our amazing bodies.

Today we know methyl groups may form around any of our genes preventing them from expressing and producing that specific amino acid.  This prevents a “normal” protien from forming, where normal simply means that amino acid occurs in most everybody’s protein.  This impacts our brain chemistry.  It is just a little different for each of us.  Are we ever uniquely beautiful!  How does this happen?  We get them in three ways: 

  1. Transferred from parents.
  2. In fetal development.
  3. Fear instilled in post fetal development.  (Sexual abuse is a biggie!)

Methyl  gene
Methylated gene

I am sure there is more occurring in our DNA than methylation preventing our genes from expressing, but this is simply a primer, which is about all I have the intellectual capacity to write. 

Just as some of us are born with common methylated genes, some are born with out these genes being methylated.  They each have their own unique abilities to see, feel, perceive, and sense things the rest of us cannot.  We categorize them and put them in little boxes with names or labels like “empath,” “sensitive,” “paranormal,” or simply “strange” or “weird.”  The general population lacks acceptance of weirdos.  They may tend to collect into groups or cults where they are accepted.  Many of these are like cocaine.  Individual production increases initially, then usage increases until recovery or death. 

So what’s the answer?  You all know I look at love as energy: a spectrum.  Is it?  I don’t know.  As I look at it as energy it appears to work.  It takes energy to do anything.  Whether we are turning on a light switch or expressing a gene or untying a methylated gene, it takes energy.  Love works, so it must be some sort of energy.  I recognize the weakness of my Newtonian model.  It is only a beginning.

 Of course the next question is, “Does it really work this way?”  My answer is I don’t know and don’t care if it works this way or not.  Love works.”   Whether or not love is energy is immaterial.  Whether or not our divinity is a function of our DNA or not is also immaterial.  I put it together this way only to give me a hardcore possible explanation of what might be going on in our bodies.

Next question is why are girls so special?  To start with, their sex chromosome (#23) is XX giving them about 4000 genes.  Guys have an XY with less than 2100 genes.  I began my studies with sexual anatomy.  When I hooked up my wiring diagram to the female genitalia, all I could say was, “Holy Shit!  This is fan-f**in’-tastic!  Wow!”  I’ve reached a point where I know there is so much about our bodies I will never know and even if I did it wouldn’t make any difference because it keeps going and going. 

 Two more things about girls: 

  1. Their vagus nerve is hooked up to their genitalia and ours is not.  This is called the “nerve of compassion.”
  2. The structure connecting the left and right halves of the brain is thicker allowing girls to better process and integrate sensory signals.

There are probably a thousand more anatomical differences.  I don’t care.  I’ve seen enough to tell me what fantastic creatures they are and to appreciate their fluidity and power.

The last questions are why is sex bad and love a four-letter word? And why are we diverted into pleasure and/or procreation?  Erotic love with its associated passion, or amplitude of the energy frequencies transmitted, appears to be the most powerful mechanism for demethyizing our genes.  Divinity makes us aware.  We already are, but not too much.  “Women’s intuition” and “gut instincts” are the beginnings of our divinity.  We humans are fantastic but taught to limit ourselves where simply as biological entities we have no real limits.  (In your definition of real, we can limit anything.)

Other misused works to describe our growth into divinity are: awakening, evolving, ascension, transformation, transmutation (I like that one!), spiritual gifts, paranormal, empath, synestheisiac, clairvoyant, and on and on.  We are all divine to some degree or another.  I look at our purpose her as to love.  Our divinity is a “reward” for loving and makes us sacred or “safe and sane.”  We just need to let love flow through us.  It is pretty simple.  Love.  The tough part is getting rid of all the ego base limitations and fears we place on love and ourselves.  We are all fantastic creatures once we let love in.  Guys too.

Genital Detachment.

November 1, 2013

Woman glyph  I snicker at all the modern gurus who tell us to “get centered” then take the cookie cutter of disregard to our genitalia in the center of our bodies.   Consider an automotive engineer lecturing on how an automobile works, ignoring the carburetor.  Words, their use or non-use, have a direct impact on how we think.  And how we think is how we are… up to a point.

We did not come into this world separated from our genitalia or thinking “sex’ was a bad thing.  Toddlers explore their genitalia, until their parents come along and slap the crap out of them for doing something bad.  So, we begin detaching from our genitalia early in life.  Of course, if mine (male) are bad, yours are worse, ‘cause you are just a girl.  Or, the other way around.

This is nothing new.  Throughout history, we’ve developed what we euphemistically call “pet names” for our genitalia.  There are 2600 in English.  Most are vile, as in violent.  Some, deriving their name from sacredness were turned to express disgust.  I see this as part of some grand conspiracy to keep us from the full glory of our humanity.  This way, we may remain subservient to some sadistic, sociopathic “authority.”  It is a big con game and we are the dupes!

The big con is the politically constructed, sexual paradigm of pleasure and/or procreation.  That’s it.  That is all sex is about: one or the other.  By detaching our genitalia, even objectively with words like “penis” and “vagina” they are no longer a part of us; just a free floating entity, examined on the basis of pleasure or procreation.  With many of the “pet names,” it is even worse.

Interestingly, the word penis comes from a Latin word meaning “animal’s tail.”  Think of a dog’s tail.  It usually just hangs down between the legs.  It points straight out when on the hunt, and sticks straight up in the Alpha mode.  In Sanskrit, the word “lingam” is used. Lingam translates to “wand of light.”  There are two possible origins of this word:

1. Our enlightenment, or

2. Our bioluminescence.

Our enlightenment begins with awareness, something authority does not want us to have and I have written about bioluminescence in other blogs.[1]

The word vagina, coined circa 1580 by Realdo Matteo Colombo, an Italian anatomist: a guy.  The word in Latin means “sheath” or “scabbard,” as if something a man’s sword goes into.  This creates the image of an act of war, not an act of love.  The Sanskrit word, “yoni” means sacred place.  This is the sacred place on the entire woman: the whole darn critter!

Looking at the origin of words and sounds, I found the  “quh,” “ku,” “kuh,” and “coo” sounds are fairly universal in describing goddesses in ancient cultures: kunti, kunthi, kunda, etc., and other words for the Great Earth Mother, and universal yonis.  Keeping it simple, did you ever listed to a baby coo?  Did you ever think they might be trying to tell us something?  Naw. They are just babies.  They don’t know anything.  (Until I teach them all the garbage I’ve been taught for thousands of years.)

It should be noted Reginer deGraff around 1660 gave us another possible origin of the word cunt.  In cuneiform—there is that “coo” sound again—the Sumerian symbol for woman was the inverted triangle with the vertical cleft.  The inverted triangle is called the chaliceThe cleft was made with a wedge-tool called a cuneus, which is also the name for the impression made in the soft clay by that tool.  The word cunnus in Latin is translated as cunt.[2]  But, this was the symbol for the entire woman.  The symbol also meant “giver of life.”  Archeologists interpret this as childbirth.  I suggest it could also mean a different life through our enlightenment: our new awareness.

It is from these sounds and the names of these sacred goddesses that many believe are the origin of the word “cunt,” which we now believe is the most obscene word in the English language.  It became a disgusting word in England around the 14th Century in England, and perhaps other parts of Europe.  This set the stage for the 15th Century Malleus Maleficarum demonizing women in order to acquire wealth for the Church.  What do you think happened to the property of all the women burned at the stake?  This was a quick follow up to the Spanish Inquisition, making Ferddy and Izzy rich enough to sponsor Chris on his quest for India.  It took longer to con the masses because they didn’t have the net or other means of transmitting “misinformation.”  What a con!  The demonization continues with our “pet names” for each others genitalia.

Cunt was also the early name given to the priestesses of love (we denigrate to “temple prostitute”) in the Temples of Inanna, Isis, Ishtar, Aphrodite, Venus, etc.  It is strange we never hear the wealth accumulated in these temples, be it coin or food, was distributed to the poor, elderly and ill within the communities where the temples were located.  Sounds like “Christian” values to me.

The word pussy is found in Egyptology.  The cat was the sacred animal in ancient Egypt.  Today it is a slang term when applied to men means “less than.,” a wuss, a coward.  I like what Betty White is reputed to say: “Have balls?  You ought to have a pussy!  It takes a beating day in and day out and keeps on going.”  Same con.  Both genders.

Have you ever heard a guy refer to “his Johnson?”  If his last name isn’t Johnson, it isn’t his.  How about his dick?  If his first name isn’t Richard, it isn’t his.  By detaching from our genitalia, we are no longer responsible for any actions “it” may take.  Even modern medicine divides us by our organs and components, so integrating ourselves is a tougher job.

If we are going to have “detachment,” at least we can refer to our sacred places with more beautiful terms, reflecting the magnificent beauty the act can bring to us.  The female vulva is described as a “bower of bliss,” a flower garden, a lotus opening with love as a flower opens with sunshine, and many others throughout history.  A magic wand, a wand of enlightenment, an evolutionary tool, even an applicator of love—the glue that holds the universe together—are better than what are commonly used today.

Be it clearly known, I am no archeologist, linguist or sexual scientist.  I am a man who has seen the beauty and benefits of a small attitude change in making love with a woman.  My research focuses solely on this: both the positive and the negative we have been “taught” through the centuries.  They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, and I am a danger to authority who would maintain the sheeple status of mankind.  I know it works!  You won’t until you try it.


Copyright 2013  Art Noble





[2] Blackledge, C., The Story of V, Rutgers University Press, 2004

%d bloggers like this: