I've never watched Comedy Central (or South Park) and I realllly don't like crank fone calls and have rarely found them funny, but am looking forward to the show. My hubs watches tv...I find it incredibly boring and if I'm not watching something that's educational or enlightening, I can't set still for it. The last program we watched together that I really enjoyed was Black Sails on HBO. It was fun to compare what I know about the history of the Golden Age of Piracy (which is quite a bit) to what they portrayed in the show. For a TV show, they didn't do a terrible job.
There's no pizza delivery where I live and the last time I "ordered a pizza" (which I had to make a 30 mile round trip to pick up) was about November of 2019. I've made them at home, from scratch since we changed our diet and went to 100% organic. My whole wheat sourdough pizza crust is pretty darn good!
I left Twatter in Dec of 2017 when they told everyone they'd be "followed" and banned for what they said on OTHER platforms. I made a new account in 2019 for two months and deleted it. I can't stand that place...IG either and the only reason I'm still on FB is because of the "memories" (I'm a mom) and my sis's and mom (and aunts and cousins) are on there.
Ahhh... That's why I had to stop using my hellfone. I felt invaded. And it makes sense why I've become so darn "choosy" about who/what I'm listening to lately and explains my need to unplug from the internet on a regular basis. I value my identity too much and our electronic media seems very "de-personing" to me.
My camera's are disabled. I have one that I'm able to take pics and vids with, but it lives in a faraday bag. No smart appliances and nothing but trail cams out here in the boondocks, thank goodness. They've got enough spy balloons up. I'm certainly not going to assist them.
Okay...yeah. No. I still don't like prank calls. I had to fast forward as I found them irritating. My sense of humor is extremely uptight and sometimes non-existent. Very dry in an odd way. I'm ruled by Mercury and prefer sarcasm in the haughtiest sense. Most thing's I find extremely funny goes over people's heads.
Hi Janice, I am “ruled” by Mercury too - (sun & moon!), but I hate sarcasm. My brother who is 4 minutes older than me loves sarcasm and has mastered the art! I am fascinated by how subjective humor is. Maybe what we find funny gives away the secret of our psyches! 🤓
I watched the first two skits first before I listened to your entire show. I thought they were extremely funny. When I found out later they were prank calls and one character was a real person, it was even funnier.
The elderly couple playing strip poker in the background....too funny.
If I was one generation below, I may have gotten into South Park. But I think even then I would have needed subtitles. I can't understand what they are saying.
I was a fan of SNL back in the hay day when it first started.
Thanks for your Friday night shows....even if the subject is as outrageous as what was done to us, what "we" were subjected to, and the lack of five minutes of deep thinking, and now Virus? what virus? So what if we kept you for seeing your grandkids for 7 friggen months!!! Now, it's all good. Right? NOOOOO!
And Alex Berenson turned out like so many others to be a fear peddling, star stuck Ass hat.
But your voice is soothing and your diction perfect, and I really like you!
With South Park, the place to start is the feature film -- Bigger, Longer, Uncut. It's a musical. It's wholly outrageous. And 25 years later, it's still a fucking scream. All I can say is -- highly recommended...and though I don't usually advocate for anything on schedule 1, a hit of weed or a gummy take it to another level. South Park is like the Pink Floyd of the 21st century.
yes that is the whole point. Perhaps listen to my segment; I go into some of the details, and speculate about how their process works, from beyond what I have read.
My comments. Good discussion of the hidden environment we live in, the domination of society by the digital communications. Good example of pizza places getting orders vis cell phones, with data collected on the callers, choices, patterns of individual callers and when calls come in in large/small numbers. All getting processed. People live in a bubble environment, lack the ability or even the desire to analyze, compare, verify what they read/hear/see. A Substack post by Alex Berenson who poses as a hard core critic of the “COVID” narrative who nonetheless upholds the idea of a public health threat from the “Ebola virus,” which like “SARS-CoV-2” has never been shown to exist via isolation and purification. Berenson refused to answer Coppolino’s inquiries re proof for “Ebola.” Everything has been reduced to “opinion,” as if there no longer are facts, or objective truth.
Quote from a 1976 work by Marshall McLuhan, as to how electric media, starting with radio and getting more so with subsequent media technologies, is body-invasive. Instatnt involvement mans suppression of the body and of individuality, we all become indistinguishable, replaceable parts of a mass audience. The last three years have been mass promotion for a society functioning on the basis of digital IDs and Central Bank Digital Currencies. Something i had not heard of before, how on Vashon Island (in Puget Sound, off Seattle), a “hip” enclave, there were posses over the last 3 years hounding people not adhering to masking mandates.
People show little awareness of what has gone the last 3 years, or much of a desire to look at it. I can relate. A FB friend hassled me a bit for not being willing to go hang out at a weekly Dead music event i used to be a part of, saying she has forgiven the venue and the “community” at large for demanding adherence to shots mandates, she just wants to get on. What kind of “community” is this, willing to practice medical apartheid and follow the dictates of authorities without any proof? What comes next is rule by AI, CBDC. People have demonstrated the willingness to obey. Knowledge is power, gives us the ability to make choices, though we have to choose to do so!
I enjoyed hearing them and the music, the result of various collaborations of Brian Eno and David Byrne.
Crank Yankers was funny, though at times i felt annoyed on behalf of the pranked. The tantra discussion with Iva Veazey. Eric suggested it's up to women to teach tantra to men. I know of no woman who would be remotely interested, certainly not my peers, not sexually minded at all, not women who are significantly younger than my 75. So, once again, excellent theory, thin on practice, especially in this time of growing isolation,
Strongly agree about the need to get past guilt and shame. Consent is political, wanting is human, i like that. Porn involves no rape? Not according to some commentators, who have stated all porn is rape.
Experience is not propelled by NO. Experience is propelled by YES and regulated by NO. If you sit in a parking space and step on the brakes, you never get to Alaska.
Well, I know of no study that shows that porn leads to rape. That was the claim of Dworkin; it sounded "good" but no evidence. There was also the argument that all heterosexual sex is rape — which is itself an aggressive and violent thought form.
However, I would say that porn is disembodied sex; it's fantasy rather than imagination; and that can lead to a hollowing out of one's sense of self, and a lessening of the desire to connect — and therefore contributes to the overall violence created by digital conditions.
I didn't remotely mean to imply i agreed with the "porn leads to rape" BS. Sorry if anyone took it as my agreement. I could say some things, being a recovered porn addict, but would prefer first seeing there was interest in reading what i had to say.
Jeffery, I really appreciate your take on how most are affected by our electronic and corrupt banking world. "people have demonstrated a willingness to obey". This runs deep in society.
Interesting that you find that there are no women that you know of that would be interested in being a tantra teacher to men. While this seems to have been a strength for cultures in times gone by from what I have read, the guilt /media manipulation/ religious controls and other modern means of suppression make tantric understandings either "just for women" or something that isn't all that readily available. Betty Dodson was a taboo buster and brought many people back to understanding their sexual selves. Conversations and connections within the realm of sex, self-centered sex and true desire need to be happening. Who we are and where we come from, a woman's body, vagina, cunt, uterus is something that we will do well not to ignore any longer. To ignore this reality is one more way that we are disembodied from ourselves.
I intend to keep the conversation going. Eric has a valuable focus on this as well. An important part of this is about the balance of male and female within. Also needed is respect for other people, without the influences of the politically correct way to condemn men or sex or desire. As a sex coach I am astonished at times, at the plethora of ways that people carry around shame and confusion about their bodies and their sexual desires. This is not our natural state. It is generational and cultural programing.
"As a sex coach I am astonished at times, at the plethora of ways that people carry around shame and confusion about their bodies and their sexual desires. This is not our natural state. It is generational and cultural programing. "
Definitely NOT our natural state, as observed repeatedly by people researching indigenous cultures around the world, e.g. Wilhelm Reich and the Trobriand Islanders. And even many European cultures outside the Northwest European mold which has had the by-far dominant influence upon American "culture" and which grew to dominate the world, or contemporary mass societies in Asia, Africa and Latin America.
Growing up in the '60s, i saw the programing shift, yet in many ways repeating the past, "repressive desublimation" is one way to describe it. Implied sexuality given approval, but only in a spectacular way, OK for the people depicted, and "if you play by the rules maybe you could do well and get to do that too." With a reality that my generation was supposedly sexually active, yet most of the guys i knew (i was an engineering major back then, had fewer and fewer women in my classes the further i went, none past my second) were not partnered, most were not even dating casualty. Before graduating college, my only experience was professionals.
And even in the mid '70s, when i was an anarchist/left-communist (Small "c") activist, my milieu was largely men, many of whom were frequently dateless, never mind relationships. Same re my Deadhead circles. The sexual revolution was something i read about more than saw. Then i got coupled in '78, the early looseness dissipated, was part of a monogamous couple, till we separated in '91, at which point the "AIDS"-driven counterrevolution was on full tilt. Part of the reason i held on to an obviously failing relationship as long as i did, fear of being back on the heap again.
I’m hashing this out. Like I said this is not the way I was trained. So now you’re inspiring me to dissect this instead of taking it at text book value. AND yes, it is most definitely being designed these days to be a hazard for men. Yet another finger pointing from feminists to say that men have been the problem for far too long.
Google under Oxford Language for
Consent:
noun: permission for something to happen or agreement to do something.
verb: give permission for something to happen.
and for Desire:
noun: a strong feeling of wanting to have something or wishing for something to happen.
verb: strongly wish for or want (something).
There's more to this than a dictionary meaning. But with these in mind, consent looks like it can include telling someone what you might think they want to hear. And that something might be a thing you may not like - hence the resentment or change of mind after the fact comes across contractually or even legally these days, as an ok response. If someone doesn’t want to take responsibility for their true desires, and makes a habit of consenting to please other people, the other person gets blind sighted into a confusing situation down the road that might lead to an unsuitable outcome.
Putting desire into the forefront, when both people express an honest desire, they can both be moving towards where they want to be. Simple, for the most part, and to the point.
The whole digital disembodiment thing is such an unnoticed undercurrent within the general public. And the combo of this topic with the Crank Yankers segments is something to notice. The robotic response that some people have in their jobs prevents them from even noticing that they are being duped.
Sort of a “Mr. Smith Effect” * from the matrix* meets Crank Yankers. I was talking to Jen P the other day. She was really upset that a friend tried to convince her that it is no big deal to suddenly go back to hang out with the people that 2, 3 years ago considered her a deadly threat because she refused to believe in the whole lockdown narrative. Let bygones be bygones, it’s all over now. That made me think of something in Eric’s interview with Dr Mark Bailey. Paraphrasing here. But he mentioned how there’s a push to just ignore the way we were all treated starting in 2020. Marks response about this was that if we decide it was all ok, that sets us all up to be treated the same way “next week”.
Tantra Studio. I really, really enjoyed Eric sharing his insights from Betty Dodson conversations and beyond. I will be writing about this as time goes by. One thing I wanted to bring up for now was how Eric talks about consent being political. That really took me by surprise. Stepping back and noticing the full spectrum of what is occurring around what people call consent is a lot more sinister than the perspectives within my education. It’s presented educationally in a manner of being open and honest with another. But it’s becoming more and more acceptable to change ones story after the fact and to justify that decision based on the rules of consent.
*(Mr Smith Effect: tell the truth in a conversation, especially about things considered conspiratorial and Mr Smith enters the body of the other person you are talking to, to attack and discredit you because you are suddenly a threat to the matrix. These are the people that become “the police of mind control” that holds together a false reality)
My position is that "consent" is a legalistic concept that is not applicable to anything vaguely related to lovemaking. With sexual and affectual contact, the appropriate criteria are trust, desire and availability. To frame this as "consent" is to miss the point of a wholly voluntary exploration.
Thank you for clarifying this Eric. This is a mind bender for me. Still processing that whole concept. It was always taught in my world as a way to build trust. And as I have heard you say about other things like sex, "if it becomes political, it's not about Sex, it's about something else". Never thought of consent as political or legalistic. But consent has been captured culturally by something other than trust, desire and availability.
The question in any sexual situation is, "Do you want to be doing this?" and not "Do you consent to this?" Yes, "consent" has been captured, and it is treated contractually. If we place this into the context of a human exchange, we can end up with consent but not desire — which is consent subject to revocation after the fact.
In New York and other places, agreement to any contract can be revoked within 72 hours. So a "consent contract" is not appropriate to such a situation.
The concept is also seen as a ruse in that it is never fully engaged. For example, if sex can be revoked **during** a sexual act, the concept is meaningless. But "I don't want to be doing this" remains meaningful, and present-centered, and can contain "no."
I started to see "consent" as a scrim when the concept started to become "enthusiastic consent," which is wholly abstract. Can you imagine a "victim" saying to a jury, "Yes, I gave consent, but it was not enthusiastic, therefore, this was rape."
So often consent is touted as a solution to gaslighting and victimhood. But as I am seeing here, if it is contractual, it can in essence promote these concepts as acceptable.
Let's put it this way: under the "consent" doctrine, no means no. But yes does not mean yes. Listen carefully to the discussions and you will hear that there is never really a yes. In my experience, the concept is a trap -- in particular, for men.
Eric, thanks for introducing me to the Crank Yankers! What’s not to love about muppet-like puppets in absurdly funny risqué situations?!? I love the CY cat so much. A friend who loves Crank Yankers thanked me for reminding him about this show. We have been watching it all morning, and he says I have now diminished his productivity for the dayI 😂 🤣
P.S. I look forward to listening to the May 12 & May 19 Planet Waves show! I have only gotten as far as the Crank Yankers yet. I am a puppeteer, btw!
It is missing from social interactions, which is dismal.
I am realizing that you are perhaps referencing a specific doctrine that I am unfamiliar with. Researching consent doctrine I am finding things about age of consent and medical consent doctrines. I do not see a consent doctrine around sexual activity. Could you share your source?
Affirmative Consent is defined as the act of willingly and verbally agreeing to engage in specific sexual conduct. The following are clarifying points: Affirmative Consent must be obtained each and every time there is sexual activity.
AFFIRMATIVE CONSENT understanding of the sexual activity:
The person who initiates sexual conduct is responsible for verbally asking for the affirmative consent of individual(s) involved.
The person with whom sexual conduct is initiated must verbally express affirmative consent or lack of “consent.”
Each new level of sexual activity requires affirmative consent.
Use of agreed upon forms of communication such as gestures or safe words is acceptable but must be discussed and verbally agreed to by all parties before sexual activity occurs.
Affirmative Consent is required regardless of the parties’ relationship, prior sexual history, or current activity (e.g. grinding on the dance floor is not consent for further sexual activity).
In order for affirmative consent to be valid, all parties must have unimpaired judgment and a shared understanding of the nature of the act to which they are consenting, including the use of safer sex practices.
A person cannot give affirmative consent while sleeping.
Silence conveys a lack of affirmative consent.
At any and all times when affirmative consent is withdrawn or not explicitly agreed to, the sexual activity must stop immediately.
All parties must disclose personal risk factors and known STIs.
<< Each new level of sexual activity requires affirmative consent. >>
What exactly is a "level of sexual activity"? First base, second base, etc? What if your left foot is your most erogenous zone? Do you have to declare that?
Also, this set of regulations would prohibit sexual contact between people who do not speak the same language. Would they need to hire a translator?
during the "metoo" travesty, it became apparent that someone could be "metooed" for seeking affirmative consent. Under the "metoo doctrine," mere sexual speech became tantamount to rape or assault, for the purposes of destroying a man's reputation or career, by which I do NOT mean harassment but rather making a friendly pass. So this was a typical wanting it both ways double bind for men: do not seek consent and you're finished. Seek consent and it's just as bad, if she says it is. This is why the whole concept is a trap.
Horrific indeed. I'm not even a man and I've been terrified to flirt most of the time because of the ideology around sexual harassment over the past few years. I was actually given a "how dare you" from a man that I flirted with that I knew for a fact was attracted to me because he told me he was interested. We were both attracted to one another but he felt betrayed somehow. That really shut me down to men for a long time.
I can not imagine the stress that takes men to, because this nonsense is mostly geared towards men.
OK - looking at a few articles on the Antioch Sexual Offense prevention policy, I am very familiar with this attitude. There are people that feel that a brief touch to someones arm or shoulder that was not previously discussed and consented to is a microaggression or possibly even assault.
By it I mean the pseudo feminist concept of "consent" that you might trace back to the Antioch College rules of the early 1990s -- an essential historical reference point in this discussion.
It was a hot topic just as i was thrown back into the world of singles, already dealing with the AIDS scare narrative, a fraud in hindsight but almost everyone believed it back then, even my radical political circles.
Thanks, Eric!
I've never watched Comedy Central (or South Park) and I realllly don't like crank fone calls and have rarely found them funny, but am looking forward to the show. My hubs watches tv...I find it incredibly boring and if I'm not watching something that's educational or enlightening, I can't set still for it. The last program we watched together that I really enjoyed was Black Sails on HBO. It was fun to compare what I know about the history of the Golden Age of Piracy (which is quite a bit) to what they portrayed in the show. For a TV show, they didn't do a terrible job.
I'm super extra boring...
There's no pizza delivery where I live and the last time I "ordered a pizza" (which I had to make a 30 mile round trip to pick up) was about November of 2019. I've made them at home, from scratch since we changed our diet and went to 100% organic. My whole wheat sourdough pizza crust is pretty darn good!
I left Twatter in Dec of 2017 when they told everyone they'd be "followed" and banned for what they said on OTHER platforms. I made a new account in 2019 for two months and deleted it. I can't stand that place...IG either and the only reason I'm still on FB is because of the "memories" (I'm a mom) and my sis's and mom (and aunts and cousins) are on there.
Ahhh... That's why I had to stop using my hellfone. I felt invaded. And it makes sense why I've become so darn "choosy" about who/what I'm listening to lately and explains my need to unplug from the internet on a regular basis. I value my identity too much and our electronic media seems very "de-personing" to me.
My camera's are disabled. I have one that I'm able to take pics and vids with, but it lives in a faraday bag. No smart appliances and nothing but trail cams out here in the boondocks, thank goodness. They've got enough spy balloons up. I'm certainly not going to assist them.
Okay...yeah. No. I still don't like prank calls. I had to fast forward as I found them irritating. My sense of humor is extremely uptight and sometimes non-existent. Very dry in an odd way. I'm ruled by Mercury and prefer sarcasm in the haughtiest sense. Most thing's I find extremely funny goes over people's heads.
Rude, I know...but just being honest.
Hi Janice, I am “ruled” by Mercury too - (sun & moon!), but I hate sarcasm. My brother who is 4 minutes older than me loves sarcasm and has mastered the art! I am fascinated by how subjective humor is. Maybe what we find funny gives away the secret of our psyches! 🤓
I watched the first two skits first before I listened to your entire show. I thought they were extremely funny. When I found out later they were prank calls and one character was a real person, it was even funnier.
The elderly couple playing strip poker in the background....too funny.
If I was one generation below, I may have gotten into South Park. But I think even then I would have needed subtitles. I can't understand what they are saying.
I was a fan of SNL back in the hay day when it first started.
Thanks for your Friday night shows....even if the subject is as outrageous as what was done to us, what "we" were subjected to, and the lack of five minutes of deep thinking, and now Virus? what virus? So what if we kept you for seeing your grandkids for 7 friggen months!!! Now, it's all good. Right? NOOOOO!
And Alex Berenson turned out like so many others to be a fear peddling, star stuck Ass hat.
But your voice is soothing and your diction perfect, and I really like you!
Marlene
With South Park, the place to start is the feature film -- Bigger, Longer, Uncut. It's a musical. It's wholly outrageous. And 25 years later, it's still a fucking scream. All I can say is -- highly recommended...and though I don't usually advocate for anything on schedule 1, a hit of weed or a gummy take it to another level. South Park is like the Pink Floyd of the 21st century.
Ah, they are real prank calls! I did not know that. That does it make it even funnier!
yes that is the whole point. Perhaps listen to my segment; I go into some of the details, and speculate about how their process works, from beyond what I have read.
My comments. Good discussion of the hidden environment we live in, the domination of society by the digital communications. Good example of pizza places getting orders vis cell phones, with data collected on the callers, choices, patterns of individual callers and when calls come in in large/small numbers. All getting processed. People live in a bubble environment, lack the ability or even the desire to analyze, compare, verify what they read/hear/see. A Substack post by Alex Berenson who poses as a hard core critic of the “COVID” narrative who nonetheless upholds the idea of a public health threat from the “Ebola virus,” which like “SARS-CoV-2” has never been shown to exist via isolation and purification. Berenson refused to answer Coppolino’s inquiries re proof for “Ebola.” Everything has been reduced to “opinion,” as if there no longer are facts, or objective truth.
Quote from a 1976 work by Marshall McLuhan, as to how electric media, starting with radio and getting more so with subsequent media technologies, is body-invasive. Instatnt involvement mans suppression of the body and of individuality, we all become indistinguishable, replaceable parts of a mass audience. The last three years have been mass promotion for a society functioning on the basis of digital IDs and Central Bank Digital Currencies. Something i had not heard of before, how on Vashon Island (in Puget Sound, off Seattle), a “hip” enclave, there were posses over the last 3 years hounding people not adhering to masking mandates.
People show little awareness of what has gone the last 3 years, or much of a desire to look at it. I can relate. A FB friend hassled me a bit for not being willing to go hang out at a weekly Dead music event i used to be a part of, saying she has forgiven the venue and the “community” at large for demanding adherence to shots mandates, she just wants to get on. What kind of “community” is this, willing to practice medical apartheid and follow the dictates of authorities without any proof? What comes next is rule by AI, CBDC. People have demonstrated the willingness to obey. Knowledge is power, gives us the ability to make choices, though we have to choose to do so!
I enjoyed hearing them and the music, the result of various collaborations of Brian Eno and David Byrne.
Crank Yankers was funny, though at times i felt annoyed on behalf of the pranked. The tantra discussion with Iva Veazey. Eric suggested it's up to women to teach tantra to men. I know of no woman who would be remotely interested, certainly not my peers, not sexually minded at all, not women who are significantly younger than my 75. So, once again, excellent theory, thin on practice, especially in this time of growing isolation,
Strongly agree about the need to get past guilt and shame. Consent is political, wanting is human, i like that. Porn involves no rape? Not according to some commentators, who have stated all porn is rape.
also not to teach tantra, but to teach sex. presently the sum total of the "teaching" is that no means no. You cannot drive to california that way.
But i AM in California. 😂
I know what you mean. It's like saying nothing more about writing other than that u and v are different letters.
Experience is not propelled by NO. Experience is propelled by YES and regulated by NO. If you sit in a parking space and step on the brakes, you never get to Alaska.
Well, there's more than one way not to get to Alaska, but that aside, I love the way you put this!!!!!
I'm listing the places I want to drive. Let's add the coast of northern Maine; Port Jefferson; and the Finger Lakes in NY.
that sounds lovely
Well, I know of no study that shows that porn leads to rape. That was the claim of Dworkin; it sounded "good" but no evidence. There was also the argument that all heterosexual sex is rape — which is itself an aggressive and violent thought form.
However, I would say that porn is disembodied sex; it's fantasy rather than imagination; and that can lead to a hollowing out of one's sense of self, and a lessening of the desire to connect — and therefore contributes to the overall violence created by digital conditions.
I didn't remotely mean to imply i agreed with the "porn leads to rape" BS. Sorry if anyone took it as my agreement. I could say some things, being a recovered porn addict, but would prefer first seeing there was interest in reading what i had to say.
I my wildest hallucinations I would never have thought you thought that! But I did want to address the point...
Were it so, i'd be behind bars for life. :-)
haha...or you'd be like Eldridge. Soul on Ice!
Soul on Dry Ice.
Jeffery, I really appreciate your take on how most are affected by our electronic and corrupt banking world. "people have demonstrated a willingness to obey". This runs deep in society.
Interesting that you find that there are no women that you know of that would be interested in being a tantra teacher to men. While this seems to have been a strength for cultures in times gone by from what I have read, the guilt /media manipulation/ religious controls and other modern means of suppression make tantric understandings either "just for women" or something that isn't all that readily available. Betty Dodson was a taboo buster and brought many people back to understanding their sexual selves. Conversations and connections within the realm of sex, self-centered sex and true desire need to be happening. Who we are and where we come from, a woman's body, vagina, cunt, uterus is something that we will do well not to ignore any longer. To ignore this reality is one more way that we are disembodied from ourselves.
I intend to keep the conversation going. Eric has a valuable focus on this as well. An important part of this is about the balance of male and female within. Also needed is respect for other people, without the influences of the politically correct way to condemn men or sex or desire. As a sex coach I am astonished at times, at the plethora of ways that people carry around shame and confusion about their bodies and their sexual desires. This is not our natural state. It is generational and cultural programing.
Iva, i highly appreciate this comment. I will comment about it, later, once i digest it further.
"As a sex coach I am astonished at times, at the plethora of ways that people carry around shame and confusion about their bodies and their sexual desires. This is not our natural state. It is generational and cultural programing. "
Definitely NOT our natural state, as observed repeatedly by people researching indigenous cultures around the world, e.g. Wilhelm Reich and the Trobriand Islanders. And even many European cultures outside the Northwest European mold which has had the by-far dominant influence upon American "culture" and which grew to dominate the world, or contemporary mass societies in Asia, Africa and Latin America.
Growing up in the '60s, i saw the programing shift, yet in many ways repeating the past, "repressive desublimation" is one way to describe it. Implied sexuality given approval, but only in a spectacular way, OK for the people depicted, and "if you play by the rules maybe you could do well and get to do that too." With a reality that my generation was supposedly sexually active, yet most of the guys i knew (i was an engineering major back then, had fewer and fewer women in my classes the further i went, none past my second) were not partnered, most were not even dating casualty. Before graduating college, my only experience was professionals.
And even in the mid '70s, when i was an anarchist/left-communist (Small "c") activist, my milieu was largely men, many of whom were frequently dateless, never mind relationships. Same re my Deadhead circles. The sexual revolution was something i read about more than saw. Then i got coupled in '78, the early looseness dissipated, was part of a monogamous couple, till we separated in '91, at which point the "AIDS"-driven counterrevolution was on full tilt. Part of the reason i held on to an obviously failing relationship as long as i did, fear of being back on the heap again.
I’m hashing this out. Like I said this is not the way I was trained. So now you’re inspiring me to dissect this instead of taking it at text book value. AND yes, it is most definitely being designed these days to be a hazard for men. Yet another finger pointing from feminists to say that men have been the problem for far too long.
Google under Oxford Language for
Consent:
noun: permission for something to happen or agreement to do something.
verb: give permission for something to happen.
and for Desire:
noun: a strong feeling of wanting to have something or wishing for something to happen.
verb: strongly wish for or want (something).
There's more to this than a dictionary meaning. But with these in mind, consent looks like it can include telling someone what you might think they want to hear. And that something might be a thing you may not like - hence the resentment or change of mind after the fact comes across contractually or even legally these days, as an ok response. If someone doesn’t want to take responsibility for their true desires, and makes a habit of consenting to please other people, the other person gets blind sighted into a confusing situation down the road that might lead to an unsuitable outcome.
Putting desire into the forefront, when both people express an honest desire, they can both be moving towards where they want to be. Simple, for the most part, and to the point.
And under the consent doctrine, desire is prohibited. Or at least its open acknowledgement. This is a huge thing missing from social interactions.
Soo much in May 19th’s PWFM!
The whole digital disembodiment thing is such an unnoticed undercurrent within the general public. And the combo of this topic with the Crank Yankers segments is something to notice. The robotic response that some people have in their jobs prevents them from even noticing that they are being duped.
Sort of a “Mr. Smith Effect” * from the matrix* meets Crank Yankers. I was talking to Jen P the other day. She was really upset that a friend tried to convince her that it is no big deal to suddenly go back to hang out with the people that 2, 3 years ago considered her a deadly threat because she refused to believe in the whole lockdown narrative. Let bygones be bygones, it’s all over now. That made me think of something in Eric’s interview with Dr Mark Bailey. Paraphrasing here. But he mentioned how there’s a push to just ignore the way we were all treated starting in 2020. Marks response about this was that if we decide it was all ok, that sets us all up to be treated the same way “next week”.
Tantra Studio. I really, really enjoyed Eric sharing his insights from Betty Dodson conversations and beyond. I will be writing about this as time goes by. One thing I wanted to bring up for now was how Eric talks about consent being political. That really took me by surprise. Stepping back and noticing the full spectrum of what is occurring around what people call consent is a lot more sinister than the perspectives within my education. It’s presented educationally in a manner of being open and honest with another. But it’s becoming more and more acceptable to change ones story after the fact and to justify that decision based on the rules of consent.
*(Mr Smith Effect: tell the truth in a conversation, especially about things considered conspiratorial and Mr Smith enters the body of the other person you are talking to, to attack and discredit you because you are suddenly a threat to the matrix. These are the people that become “the police of mind control” that holds together a false reality)
hey Iva hello
My position is that "consent" is a legalistic concept that is not applicable to anything vaguely related to lovemaking. With sexual and affectual contact, the appropriate criteria are trust, desire and availability. To frame this as "consent" is to miss the point of a wholly voluntary exploration.
Thank you for clarifying this Eric. This is a mind bender for me. Still processing that whole concept. It was always taught in my world as a way to build trust. And as I have heard you say about other things like sex, "if it becomes political, it's not about Sex, it's about something else". Never thought of consent as political or legalistic. But consent has been captured culturally by something other than trust, desire and availability.
The question in any sexual situation is, "Do you want to be doing this?" and not "Do you consent to this?" Yes, "consent" has been captured, and it is treated contractually. If we place this into the context of a human exchange, we can end up with consent but not desire — which is consent subject to revocation after the fact.
In New York and other places, agreement to any contract can be revoked within 72 hours. So a "consent contract" is not appropriate to such a situation.
The concept is also seen as a ruse in that it is never fully engaged. For example, if sex can be revoked **during** a sexual act, the concept is meaningless. But "I don't want to be doing this" remains meaningful, and present-centered, and can contain "no."
I started to see "consent" as a scrim when the concept started to become "enthusiastic consent," which is wholly abstract. Can you imagine a "victim" saying to a jury, "Yes, I gave consent, but it was not enthusiastic, therefore, this was rape."
DESIRE is "enthusiastic consent."
So often consent is touted as a solution to gaslighting and victimhood. But as I am seeing here, if it is contractual, it can in essence promote these concepts as acceptable.
Let's put it this way: under the "consent" doctrine, no means no. But yes does not mean yes. Listen carefully to the discussions and you will hear that there is never really a yes. In my experience, the concept is a trap -- in particular, for men.
Iva, thanks for your segment, i made some comments in my general comments post.
When Eric says "if you have this in your natal chart"...
Grabs chart :
:-O
Pluto 1 degree in Libra, Mars 28 degrees of Pisces.
Purdy close to an opposition. Authority...oh boy.
Eric, thanks for introducing me to the Crank Yankers! What’s not to love about muppet-like puppets in absurdly funny risqué situations?!? I love the CY cat so much. A friend who loves Crank Yankers thanked me for reminding him about this show. We have been watching it all morning, and he says I have now diminished his productivity for the dayI 😂 🤣
P.S. I look forward to listening to the May 12 & May 19 Planet Waves show! I have only gotten as far as the Crank Yankers yet. I am a puppeteer, btw!
the effect is sheer terror to interact with other human beings.
Yes ma'am.
It is missing from social interactions, which is dismal.
I am realizing that you are perhaps referencing a specific doctrine that I am unfamiliar with. Researching consent doctrine I am finding things about age of consent and medical consent doctrines. I do not see a consent doctrine around sexual activity. Could you share your source?
Affirmative Consent
Affirmative Consent is defined as the act of willingly and verbally agreeing to engage in specific sexual conduct. The following are clarifying points: Affirmative Consent must be obtained each and every time there is sexual activity.
AFFIRMATIVE CONSENT understanding of the sexual activity:
The person who initiates sexual conduct is responsible for verbally asking for the affirmative consent of individual(s) involved.
The person with whom sexual conduct is initiated must verbally express affirmative consent or lack of “consent.”
Each new level of sexual activity requires affirmative consent.
Use of agreed upon forms of communication such as gestures or safe words is acceptable but must be discussed and verbally agreed to by all parties before sexual activity occurs.
Affirmative Consent is required regardless of the parties’ relationship, prior sexual history, or current activity (e.g. grinding on the dance floor is not consent for further sexual activity).
In order for affirmative consent to be valid, all parties must have unimpaired judgment and a shared understanding of the nature of the act to which they are consenting, including the use of safer sex practices.
A person cannot give affirmative consent while sleeping.
Silence conveys a lack of affirmative consent.
At any and all times when affirmative consent is withdrawn or not explicitly agreed to, the sexual activity must stop immediately.
All parties must disclose personal risk factors and known STIs.
https://antiochcollege.edu/campus-life/sexual-offense-prevention-policy-title-ix/
<< Each new level of sexual activity requires affirmative consent. >>
What exactly is a "level of sexual activity"? First base, second base, etc? What if your left foot is your most erogenous zone? Do you have to declare that?
Also, this set of regulations would prohibit sexual contact between people who do not speak the same language. Would they need to hire a translator?
during the "metoo" travesty, it became apparent that someone could be "metooed" for seeking affirmative consent. Under the "metoo doctrine," mere sexual speech became tantamount to rape or assault, for the purposes of destroying a man's reputation or career, by which I do NOT mean harassment but rather making a friendly pass. So this was a typical wanting it both ways double bind for men: do not seek consent and you're finished. Seek consent and it's just as bad, if she says it is. This is why the whole concept is a trap.
Horrific indeed. I'm not even a man and I've been terrified to flirt most of the time because of the ideology around sexual harassment over the past few years. I was actually given a "how dare you" from a man that I flirted with that I knew for a fact was attracted to me because he told me he was interested. We were both attracted to one another but he felt betrayed somehow. That really shut me down to men for a long time.
I can not imagine the stress that takes men to, because this nonsense is mostly geared towards men.
OK - looking at a few articles on the Antioch Sexual Offense prevention policy, I am very familiar with this attitude. There are people that feel that a brief touch to someones arm or shoulder that was not previously discussed and consented to is a microaggression or possibly even assault.
so now we may ask: what is the effect of that environment (rather than the stated intent)?
Is that stifling effect perhaps the hidden intent?!
"the effect is the intent" — eric mcluhan
"consent doctrine" is my own term.
By it I mean the pseudo feminist concept of "consent" that you might trace back to the Antioch College rules of the early 1990s -- an essential historical reference point in this discussion.
It was a hot topic just as i was thrown back into the world of singles, already dealing with the AIDS scare narrative, a fraud in hindsight but almost everyone believed it back then, even my radical political circles.