Necia said:
No, that's entirely what it is. It's the mind/body dichotomy--enlightenment only comes when we rid ourselves of "the pleasures of the flesh"
Necia said:
No, that's entirely what it is. It's the mind/body dichotomy--enlightenment only comes when we rid ourselves of "the pleasures of the flesh"
Oh! Of course. I just can't get going in the morning if I haven't corrupted a pure and virginal young man's soul. It's so easy too. I just have to cough or smile in their general direction and it seems to be enough.
Ommetaphobia said:
This reminds me of this commercial I saw on TLC the other day. It was called "God or the Girl". I don't know exactly what the premise is, but from the ad it seemed to be about 3 or 4 guys who had received a calling to become priests but whose sole obstacle into priesthood was their reticence at getting rid of their attraction to women. What is it with religion trying to conflict enlightenment with one's desire for women? Their logic seems to indicate that we're basically tools of Satan created to lead men astray or something. This sort of thinking leads tons of victims of rape to be accused of bringing it on themselves.
No, that's entirely what it is. It's the mind/body dichotomy--enlightenment only comes when we rid ourselves of "the pleasures of the flesh" and all that crap, when we rise above the demands of our weak-willed, deviant, impure bodies and reach some nonexistent plateau at which we're all just floating disembodied brains, pure intellect--and woman has always been placed squarely on the "body" side of that divide. And if woman is body, then she's another material, physical weakness that can lead our (or, well, "their," I guess) minds/souls/etc. astray and thus must be jettisoned in order to transcend.
And, you know, it's totally true. I mean, I go trolling for pure male souls to lead astray all the time--don't you?
Necia
San Francisco, CA
August 2005
MAY 18, 2006 08:51 PM