Tag Archives: Brain Genital Law

The New York Times, the Brain Genital Law (BGL) and Polygamy

polygamy(9)

We are increasingly becoming sensitive to what we say for fear of offending others. For that reason, it’s oftentimes risky to tell the truth. Though it shouldn’t, this truthful post will undoubtedly offend certain visitors starting with this personal observation: The personnel of the New York Times is, unlike, let’s say, The Wall Street Journal, both great newspapers which I read daily. It is an intentionally designed diversity one staffed by heterosexual and homosexual males and females, male and female feminists, many of them politically to the left liberals and a variety of ethnic and racial backgrounds. Conservative men and women are simply either not there or deprived of their computers.

The Times has energetically led a crusade for women’s rights including rights to their bodies  and abortion. It has successfully played a visible role in bringing about the homosexual marriage movement and the awareness of the transgender issue and the need to address it. Regarding the military, it has and continues to support the integration of females into the Armed Services even to the level of combat Marines. Regarding military sexual assaults, it has launched a major coverage effort almost always, either indirectly or directly, supporting the female position as victims ignoring data which clearly point out that females are frequently the perpetrators on females and males on males. And that’s another story for a future post.

In its efforts, the Times generally takes the woman’s side on many issues.

But, believe it or not, here’s what pleases me: The Times coverage of sex issues does support the concept of the Brain Genital Law or BGL!  The BGL means that the brain, in order to insure sufficient copulation which is necessary to propagate the race, has a huge and broad reservoir of ways to stimulate the human sexual drive from straight sex to sodomy to snuff movies, all of which are natural phenomena. All cultures, however, have recognized that it’s necessary to regulate the free expression of the BGL because of the destabilizing effect on societies of sex gone wild. A couple, for example, cannot copulate on the street of Broadway even if Mayor DeBlasio is for it! (Or can they)?

But, here’s what really piques my interest: Based on the Supreme Court’s preliminary decision supporting homosexual marriage, polygamy will inevitably arise on its future agenda of increasingly complex, tough to handle, social issues. Now historically polygamy has been and remains common in many cultures whereas homosexual marriage is a rarity, if not absent. If the Times is to remain consistent, it will strongly support the right of men to have multiple wives. Right? I think not for the feminist element of the Times, supported by the powerful male and female feminist elements in our universities, almost assuredly believe that polygamy demeans women despite history’s broad acceptance of it as, which it is, a natural, sexual relationship.

But, if I were a supporter of polygamy and sought to have the Supreme Court sanction it, I would, instead, first present to the justices a case on the legalization of polyandry- the right of a woman to have multiple husbands. This would be very consistent with the Times push for women’s rights and should gain its support. What do you think?

Ladies and gentlemen, hold on to your hats. The general deregulation of the BGL is well on its way and, if the Supreme Court is consistent, polygamy and polyandry may soon be with us. But the Supreme Court is often inconsistent on social matters influenced not by the Constitution or long-held accepted law, but by the attitudes and American values at a point in time. G and I believe that this will cause a much greater uproar than homosexual marriage. One thing is for sure: Emotion, and not reason, will be the driving force behind the polygamy-polyandry debate including coverage by the New York Times.

What I’m hoping for is that the controversy will finally lead to a rational, national discussion on the sexual revolution and the BGL and what are acceptable groundrules to accommodate the universal quest for orgasms.

 

 

Simplified Sexual Behavior Categories: Don’t Confuse Homosexuality With Bisexuality

To those of you who are not yet familiar with the BGL or Brain Genital Law, it states that, in order to propagate the human race through heterosexual mating and the production of babies, the brain goes overboard and indiscriminately stimulates and arouses the genitals to copulate in all kinds of ways from fetishes to homosexuality. According to the BGL, all such acts are, like heterosexual ones, natural and to be expected. All societies, however, in one way or another, place limits on its free expression such as prohibiting premarital sex, sodomy and homosexuality.

Though I’m sure it exists, I couldn’t find a simple, practical and easy to understand classification of the categories of the complicated world of human sexual behavior. Unlike the precision of mathematics, the dividing lines among the sexual categories are understandably blurred and oftentimes overlap. But we must at least try to bring some clarity where there is currently confusion and understandable ignorance. The following is a proposed classification:

–       Heterosexuality

–       Bisexuality

–       Homosexuality

–       Changing sexuality

–       Solo Sexuality

–       Fetish Sexuality

–       Pedophilia, Hebephilia and Ephebophilia Sexuality

–       Transgenderism Sexuality

Heterosexuality involves straight forward copulation between a man and a woman which is essential to fulfill the evolutionary mandate to propagate the human race. It is by far the most common type among the categories, and, by the way, the reason why we all exist. On the other hand, there are some heterosexuals who sometimes fantasize about making love to someone of the same sex, but never do. Then there are heterosexuals who not only think about it but who have dabbled with same-sex partners, but only on rare or very infrequent occasions.

Bisexuality is the second most common category and is, for some puzzling reason, universally mislabeled as homosexuality. This, in my opinion, is the most rapidly expanding form of human sexual relations in our country but is, for another puzzling reason, hardly addressed as such. Bisexuals copulate with both sexes. Therefore, as with heterosexuals, bisexuals fulfill the mandate to propagate the race.

Homosexuality is not at all as common as we are led to believe. It involves having virtually exclusive sex with same-sex partners over a person’s lifetime. If we stick to this definition, it is the third less common category and doesn’t fulfill the evolutionary mandate to propagate the race.  Seth Stephens-Davidowitz, in a laborious and admirable attempt to determine how many American men are homosexual, did not isolate, which is virtually impossible to do, bisexuals from bona fide homosexuals. Indirectly, however, his findings indicate that much of what he has come across deals with bisexuality- not homosexuality! (LINK: “How Many American Men are Gay” NY Times December 8, 2013).

Changing sexuality: To complicate things a man and woman may fall into a different sex category at a point in time. They may start out as a homosexual, then to a bisexual, then to a heterosexual. Over the years I’ve known a few of such couples who now appear to have a stable marriage. Of course, the gender passage can go in the opposite direction where heterosexuals end up with homosexual partners. I’ve also known a few of them.

Fetishes are multiple in types ranging from domination to golden rain to foot-worshiping and are becoming increasingly prevalent among both sexes. There is little information on how often fetishes culminate into a heterosexual act but we can reasonably assume that they are not major players in propagating the human race.

Pedophilia, hebephilia and ephebophilia: (LINK TO PAST POST). Though reliable data are virtually impossible to come by involving adults having sexual relationships with prepubescent children and teens up to the age of nineteen, it is almost certain that they are all increasing due to our rapidly changing sexual values and decreasing parental supervision.  Bottom line, they are not a factor in producing new babies.

Solo- Sexuality deals mainly with masturbation and in vitro fertilization. Our exploding rate of masturbation is, in large part, due to the Internet. A man or woman now has access- at the immediate time of desire and without barriers- to Internet porno which provides the whole ball of wax of ways to stimulate the BGL. Masturbation, without the need of studies or surveys to convince the most skeptical of minds, will not propagate the race. In his book, Confessions, the French philosopher, Jean-Jaques Rousseau, openly spoke about his sexual life including his masochism and exhibitionism. I do not share this type of openness. But I can imagine that, if I were young and had readily available to me all BGL stimuli at an instant, I would not be inclined to read Shakespeare’s Hamlet or study Einstein’s Theory of Relativity.  Regarding in vitro fertilization or IVF, these methods, which are growing in number, will increase baby production but which outcomes will not be known until the future. I would strongly advise that caution on these evolving procedures be taken.

Transgenderism is a very small but rapidly evolving and complicated social-legal category in America. It’s when someone’s BGL tells his or her mind that their body represents the wrong sex. Transgender sex will have minimal impact on the propagation of the human species.

I hope this attempt at sexual classification sheds some light on the complexities of human sexual behavior. I would, however, like to add that I’m particularly intellectually interested in the bursting forth of bisexual behavior. The issue of homosexuality has held national interest based on the controversy of homosexual marriage. But bisexuality is the much larger issue of our changing times.

%d bloggers like this: