Invasion of the Temple

What is should have been was a simple task. My mind transfixed on the target, I knew where to go and what I wanted. A simple derivative of primal hunter instinct where you transport yourself to the hunting ground, find your target, acquire it then move to your sanctuary with your prize. Almost like an elite athlete, where the mental processes are have been exercised and the appropriate equipment and logistics are loaded and all is needed is a physical process.

Enter evolution, where the hunting ground is no longer a series of geological obstacles full of fauna and flora but a building filled with separate hunting grounds to cater for the hunter and the gatherer alike. However, nature holds the ace in reminding you who is master. While enroot to my predestinated hunting ground where I was sure my prize would lay, Mother nature calls to me on a primal level. Though you may be in this artificial hunting ground where convenience is the ethos to this semi organized world, she requires you to subjugate yourself by purging your excess bodily fluid and reminding you that you of her making and design regardless of your environment.

To this calling I answer on my way to my purpose. While in ancient times a tree or patch of earth would have sufficed, man in his wisdom has built temples to honor Mother Nature to her mastery of all. These temples are segregated into the most basic of divisions, sex. The most primal of divisions that excludes race, religion or culture only on what one has or has not between their legs. Each temple designed to allow the most hygienically acceptable way to return to Mother Nature her reminder that we are human.

With the difference with physiology, the male temple holds a stainless steel shrine which is a unique trait to the male temple. In recent times there has been an addition, where at this shrine, at eye level, they will put notices or advertisements. While these usually contain messages on sexual health or male related products, I prepared to give Mother Nature my offering and was confronted by a message from the government. “To Violence Against Women, Australia Says No!” a message that has been rammed down my throat by all forms of media in recent times. Then it dawns on me, my status in humanity because of the appendage I hold in my hand at this shrine.

This appendage makes you a villain. Because of it you have to pay taxes for a message you already practice but it seems that you need to be reminded because this monster in your loins. If you are not reminded you may be subject to this animal taking control of you and making you a woman beating beast. Regardless of your past where you have stepped in to defend someone regardless of their sex, regardless that you find it personally distasteful to consciously harm another human being. You are a monster and in this shrine you hold the source of all human evil.


I then think that I am over thinking the situation, when it dawns on me that this shrine is also the start of the male desensitization process. Regardless of the bodily process that requires attention, the female temple gives you a private cubical. While the male temple may contain a few of these, it is only for where the commonness of the bodies and the function are the same. Other than that the males are given an economical alternative. A place where you are stripped of all modesty and required to stand next to another with the most private of body parts exposed. We are taught to think nothing of it as we stand there side by side at this cheep alternative to having our own private cubical to keep our modesty.

But to this message that is now flashed at me while I stand subjugated before this shrine it strikes me that I am a second class citizen. I am supposed to live in a country that advocates political correctness. Yet I am confronted by a message by the government telling me that only men are capable of violence. Yet they make this assertion without any statistical facts. So an unfounded assertion is being given tax funding and trying to divide men by providing a call number so that males can dob in other males that have hit a woman. With the circle of men that I associate with I have never seen a violent act against a woman though I have seen the reverse. In my past I have had to give aid to men that have been assaulted by women and seen how males think it shameful to take it any further. There is no report of assault to the authorities and no retribution to the offender.

Now there is no argument if the advertising campaign said “To Violence, Australia Says No”, but it is clear that the Feminists have invaded the ranks of government and don’t want any opposition when they take up arms and invade the artificial insemination clinics and arbitrarily execute the male race form the earth. It will not be long before they amend the common law right to defend your own life to defend yourself only against male attacks so that it will be illegal to harm a woman even when she twists that knife in your gut and if you do the penalty will be death anyway. To put a politically incorrect sign in the male toilet is just the same as putting a guillotine in there, or have I accidently stumbled on the next phase of feminist world domination. I do not advocate unwarranted violence against anyone nor do I appreciate holding my genitals and being branded the only cause of violence in this world. I you are going to make an assertion about the amount of domestic violence in this world and who the perpetrators are, then at least grace me with the proof to support your claim or are the Feminists who invade the male temple too afraid of the statistical proof that females are just as capable of harming a human being as a male?

I just think that these feminist cretins are envious that they cannot use a urinal.

Alter of Blood

In the age of the Conquistadors when the Spanish first explored the lands of South America, they observed in horror as the Incas would offer human sacrifices to their gods in order for the sun to rise the next day. With their warring with neighboring tribes, their prisoners would be taken to the top of a stone pyramid and their beating heats removed from their chests. It was a fate some of the Conquistadors would experience firsthand. While many other cultures throughout history offered human sacrifice to appease their gods, the Incas were among the last. Or were they?

In this age we still offer prisoners for sacrifice to the gods of ineptitude. As atonement for mans inability to understand himself as a species. These prisons falsely call themselves correctional facilities when in reality they are nothing more than waiting rooms to a human waste disposal unit. A place to take human refuse that cannot be handled or corrected. For those countries that still practice capital punishment, we indulge in our ultimate failure. Here the ancient laws of Moses are evoked where vengeance is exacted on one by an inherited or elected aristocracy and the contempt for the precious gift of human life is displayed. While the condemned finds themselves in this position because they are convicted of committing a crime the powers believe the cost of human life is atonement for, it is a total contradiction to the ethos that no man is beyond redemption.

But where is the failure? Is the failure in the fact that it is so much easier to dispose of than to repair? That as we become more and more of a “throw away” society, that we can apply this practice to human life as well. After only decades from the horror of arbitrary extermination of a race because it was easier and more economical than the cost of relocation, has the human race not learned anything. Are the gods of economics so great that they should govern over life itself and if so what is the value of a human life?

Chivalry Vs Equality

Adding to the confusion of the modern male is the practice of the chivalry. So much so that it has almost become a forgotten art. There is an astonished look when displays of this old practice are evoked and some find it a point to criticize. A common mantra is that “Chivalry is dead” but what is this old lost art and why is it seen as a character attribute especially when the literal meaning of the word has nothing to do with the implied meaning.

The root of the word, “Chivalry”, is a French derivative of the Latten word “cabbalus”, which means horse (especially riding and pack horses). The French used the word, “Chivalry”, to describe the art of horse training, more aptly, the art of working with horses. It was an art taught to the nobility at the time and widely used by military and knights of the 14th Century. Hence a group of armored knights became known as chivalries.

So where does the literal meaning intersect with the popular meaning? It could be argued that it with knights and nobility showing graciousness to an animal, that the display of such traits on the battle field and to those considered as lesser s or subordinates saw the development to the popular meaning of today. The rank of knight was only superseded by Lord, regent or king / queen. To these they were to show courtesies but if they showed theses to a subordinate it was considered a chivalrous act.

While writing this peace I hear on the radio that there is a topic going to be discussed “Is chivalry necessary?” which is quite peculiar. I am then reminded of the modern day meaning of chivalry and how it in no way reflects its literal meaning or its derivative. It seems that the modern day meaning is the display of man honoring a woman by subjecting himself before her by acting as her servant and bodyguard, catering to her safety and comfort while still remaining strong. Chivalry it seems to have reversed its meaning. While the original meaning’s derivative was to show graciousness to a subordinate, today it seems that he must be a subordinate.
It is true that when meaning of this word became the domain to Knightly acts, it was a trait attributed mainly to men. Today it is considered to be a male trait, the ability to show a softer side to ones character while still possessing popular male traits. It is an open acknowledgement by males of the importance they place on the female species without compromising their masculinity.

With the inception of the ideals of equality, both sexes are considered of equal social status. The act of chivalry, in such an environment, can only be considered an act of patronization. There is no perceived subordinate class as there was in times of old. So to show graciousness to an equal, not a subordinate, can be seen as a mocking act. To this there is a division among women. Women want to be considered equals among men while still holding their powers of femininity over men. The want to be treated in the same manner as knight would treat a queen while holding the same position as him.

Chivalry has always been a way for masculine men to display their softer side by the way of deed rather than word. It has been a tool to show the revere in which men hold women. While it is a conundrum to act strong and soft at the same time it also a conundrum to show this old attitude in modern environment of political correctness.

We’re Not All The Same

This I have decided is the unified mantra of all women to prove that they are all individuals. It is ironic that they conform to the same words to prove individuality. It is also interesting to note when it is evoked. It is usually cried when an example of the sisterhood has not met with favor. Then, almost without taking pause to breath, the second mantra is cried “All men are bastards”.

I say this because of the reaction I got from my last blog. I take it as a form of success that my point has been driven home. Do I believe that not all women are the same? The simple answer is yes. By no stretch am I a misogynist, I pray that they are not all the same. From a male perspective I am used to the constant branding and white washing that comes with the sex. If common perceptions are to be believed, then I am a selfish, self-centered being who acts without reason to fulfill my own meaningless desires. I am the cause for all violence and am a scheming, and skillful liar.

With this I have no sensitivity or appreciation for beauty. I have no concept of the word love and that I believe the world revolves around me. What a load of “hogwash”, my efforts to show that the same distasteful traits exist in both sexes has been met with the mantra already stated.

So here is the point, if I can appreciate that not all women are the same then why do these brands given to me by virtue of my sex still apply. If I can appreciate that both women and men are individuals, it seems a little stretch that women can appreciate the same in males. We are not all “bastards”, romance is something that males indulge in. Seeing the beauty in the little things is an indulgence that is left to us. Using the smallest of resources we endeavor to make the seemingly ordinary, extraordinary. We do so by taking the risk to show that we have a gentle side and an appreciation of the world around us. Risking our perceived masculinity and is shown to someone we have trust in. Making it almost a cloak and dagger exercise. We risk the perception of being branded by that detestable label of not being masculine. Though the male brand contains some distasteful generalizations, it is the only one we have.