09-15-2013, 10:40 PM
chapter from the book "codes of moral matrices" 2012 :
'American Psychological Association admits: “Sexual orientation has not been conclusively found to be determined by any particular factor or factors, and the timing of the emergence, recognition, and expression of one’s sexual orientation varies among individuals.†Here is another confession from the same source: “Sometimes straight people discover they are attracted to their own gender, sometimes gay people discover they like some of the opposite gender, and sometimes bisexuals realize they strongly prefer one gender or the other.â€Â
Last 50 years a lot of researchers was trying to convert gays into heterosexuals having hundreds scientific or “spiritual†experiments. But no one, I repeat, no one has ever tried on scientific experimentation converting straight people to gay or bisexual. Too bad because turning straight person into bisexual is relatively easy, whereas making hetero man from gay is extremely difficult. Let's look at why.
First, the background.
In the 60s attempts of gay conversion to heterosexual were common in psychology. Poor gays shoved in ice baths, hit by electricity, clamped on a diet, this is a lot of literature about it. In the 70s, the science opened the hormones and immediately started claiming, it's all about them and pricked human gays with horse doses of testosterone – the conversion have not achieved. After that, somewhere in the 80s, progressive doctors started to speak about fetal abnormalities in development, and since neither really confirm or deny it is impossible, our society established a political compromise – the prosecution of gays stopped on the grounds that their “abnormalities " are natural, due to the simple fact that all attempts to treat them scientifically failed. Moreover, statistics collection on gays has found no hormonal or genetic patterns.
"Naturalness" of gays as a scientific opinion, is extremely important for the present state of western society, because it protects the developing bisexual moral code and saves gays from persecution and public condemnation. Despite there is no firm evidence for such conclusion, just the opposite. But as long as the myth plays important role in modern political life, the legend is tenacious and strong, even in gay community. Even the fact that nobody tried to convert hetero human to gay, tells us that dominating opinion about hetero orientation as a normality and gayness as a sickness, is still prevailing, while the reality is ironic and complete opposite – bisexuality is human genetic normality.
So, why the conversion is so hard? When any doctor is trying to treat patient from any illness, he/she should know medical normality to determinate the sickness and treat the disease. But what if the doctor is sick himself? When religious healer attempts to “cure†homosexual it looks like left limping man teaching right limping person how to break a leg.
In contemporary North America, there are dozens of religious schools for "treatment" of sex orientation. Howling and luring, pastors encourage the love of Christ to treat wayward sodomites and lesbians. It would seem like a drivel, but we should not jump to conclusions.
The fact that these schools honestly publish the results - is that 5% of the children of Christ are really "cured", get married and have children with the opposite sex. Moreover, they write blogs on the Internet - mostly religious texts. Interestingly, the same 5% is the usual result of missionary activity in a developed society - only five of the 100 are susceptible for religious propaganda. It turns out that if a person believes in Christ in earnest, he/she just changes the sex orientation - an issue that not everyone can believe in Christ that deeply. But for us it’s important to note, that if it’s impossible to convert a gay man into a straight, simply no 5% would exist at all.
About 90% of all women serving sentences in jail, all over the world, gain experience of lesbian relations. Around 30% of them, after release, keep up the good work. Fans of gay’s "Naturalness" quietly turn a blind eye - a political compromise is more important. After all, if homosexuality is contagious, then it must be fought. And homosexuality is really contagious as any progressive idea, and is spread the same way - as an idea, identification. One can grasp the ideological pattern easily, but to forget the same at will is much more difficult, especially awarded sexually.
And here we encounter the problem of what is considered normal, especially moral normality. I will support the Darwinists, saying that any relationships are meaningless unless they are used for the needs of the reproductive cycle. That is, the rest of the population dies out, sooner or later. It’s very hard to argue this point, but…
But the problem is that monogamy, which is our major family form, is dying. In 2001, for the first time in human history, the number of unmarried exceeded married, in developed countries. We are clearly entering a different standard of gender and family structure without anyone knows what kind of standard it is. The new form of marriage is so unusual that one will have to get used to it for a long time - both gay and straight. The fact is that the new family is based on bisexuality - heterosexual or gay for this purpose does not fit, but the current generation of gay people performs important role of preparing the public to accept mass bisexual normality.
Put simply, those countries that are unable to accept homosexuality as a new normality, doomed to extinction. It would seem why homosexuality is necessary for reproduction? As it turns out – it is vital. The fact that all social relations in the higher apes use homosexuality to strengthen relations in the herd - in common chimpanzees this way hierarchy is constructed, in Bonobo apes the inverted hierarchy of domain (matriarchy) built on the same homosexual connections.
The destruction of monogamy is inevitable - wife will not support the unequal relations in the family in the absence of hunger and violence, while equal relations between genders are utopian, just like communism. The new family is built on the principles of Bonobo, and respectively, we have to raise children to be bisexual, as strange as it may seem to homophobes.
Matriarchy, as a stable family structure, requires a finely tuned set of conditions for a successful operation, and one of these conditions is the lack of competition between males. Such gender exclusion from the competition is not new - in a strictly hierarchical structures competition between females is vanishingly small. You can take any society where property inheritance is absent and find out what women have nothing to compete for, because their rights are about zero - criminal environment, barbarian tribes.
"Gay" as an identifier, it’s a role that was born only in the 20th century, although homosexuality is as old as mankind, and only needs to combat heteronormativity. Only in the 20th century one began to call homosexuals “gayâ€Â, only in the 20th century, they began to fight for their rights, and they will disappear as identity only within the victory - when the division and oppression based on sexual orientation disappears.
From the point of view of the moral matrices theory the conversion of straight to gay and back, is a matter of ideology change and to develop a new reflex platform to address a flow of the sex instinct. "Reflex platform" is what excites you. I recall the basic thesis that sexual orientation has a reflex origin, and can be instilled just as saliva of Pavlov's dogs, depending on moral matrix of society. Let’s talk about it a bit.
I love Japanese udon soup with octopus and shrimp, which my friends look extremely suspicious - do not stir a tentacle. But any sane person would say that the taste is the result of habit and established way of life. And it is absolutely right.
Can I forget how delicious Japanese eat soup? No, I cannot. And when you think about a particular dish, you salivate excessively, since the image and taste of a favorite food has already been introduced in the form of reflection - thinking is not necessary, it is checked. Grandmother's ravioli is delicious. Once the image of ravioli flashed in my head - the stomach immediately responds.
This is your taste orientation - dumpling.
But if you get pickled toad for the breakfast, you would probably scratch your head before putting it in your mouth. The stomach will be silent. The fact is that the toad, as the food, is unknown to you, and you do not know how to eat it. Moreover, without the knowledge and traditions HOW TO EAT toad your experimentation likely will end in failure, although the French guzzle it with pleasure. And yet, without a strong hunger to force myself to eat toads very hard, I checked myself. The body maintains a strict conservatism in food preferences - if a certain set of products is enough questionable foods are usually denied.
Quite clearly that the human neural network in our brain optimizes the functionality of any mental process, memorizing sequences of required reactions, physical or mental, thus quickening the process and making it less expensive in terms of resources. This optimized reaction in psychology called the conditioned reflex. This function is used to optimize our function everywhere - sports, balance and driving, language and translation, writing, reading ... In fact, this function is the basis of our higher intelligence compared to other terrestrial animals. But nothing comes for free.
Such technological luxury, as the optimization of the logical process requires not only a large brain, but also a dynamic way of organizing memory with data indexing. Many of what other animals pass in the genetic code as predefined behaviour by inheritance, humanity carries into the social customs and culture, because it changes all the time. But as kids, we can learn a civilization from scratch - not the best way, but nothing else invented so far. Civilization sets in us thousands of reflexes, opinions, logical chains, called the mind.
Against the background of such apparent universality of the human brain, quite clear, that sexual orientation is a dynamically loadable behavior, defined in culture, but not in the body of the child. Since the targets of this orientation and shapes are constantly changing. And it does not mean that it's easy to change at will.
Indeed, if sexual orientation is “hard to change†reflex, it is worth considering what other reflexes are not subject of change by human will, as it downloads itself directly from the society. Not far to seek – reflex of beauty.
I hope that no one will argue that beauty is fully defined in the culture, that is, in the dynamic part of the human “operating systemâ€Â. Different ages and different civilizations set their standards of beauty, and no one standard, not even the youth, was stable for all human cultures.
Do you know what is beautiful and what is not? Of course yes. Do you know how do you know? Hell, no.
Since the load of beauty is performed by unconscious copying, its control is not delegated to the conscious level of the individual. The same thing happens with sex orientation and gender definition. The matrix does not trust people in matters of beauty, sex and sexual orientation, and controls these processes directly.
Therefore carriers of beauty are much more social - they have to copy the latest versions of prettiness definition.
Is there are any other reflexes, set against our will or desire? Yes, it's the whole group of prohibitive barriers. Parents forbade us walk outside naked and we have strong internal problems when being exposed in the public expecting punishment. Breaking this reflex puts us into a state of stress, increases blood pressure causing face blushing.
Such prohibitive barrier might be called a moral barrier, as overcoming the barrier puts the human into excessive stress without reasonable cause. For example, the simple realization that the action is illegal automatically stops most people from its performance, while the minority that still carries a wrongful act is under stress disobeying moral barrier. Note that the cold-blooded criminal, looting and killing without remorse, is under the control of another moral matrix in which the loot is just a job. Moral barrier in this criminal matrix can be disrupted if the thief will do something which is beyond one's dignity, like being caught while stealing from his own - the moral code of thieves is followed very strictly.
In addition to moral barriers restraining reflex can just ruin your appetite. My wife found a hair in dumpling around 10 years ago and since then never eats them.
And herself, at will, she can’t abolish this reflex.
I interviewed, Jean, 24 years old, from the city of St. Catharines, Ontario. At age 21, this guy has a very lovely girlfriend, then one day she got drunk and started to show interest in others guys in the bar. Jean, like any monogamist, got jealous causing a drunken brawl in a bar where he got beaten; his girlfriend told him that he is gay and his penis small, after all. Funny story, isn’t it?
The guy went through depression, engaged himself in taekwondo and decided to become gay counting his penis as not long enough. Men didn’t attract him sexually, so he found an idea to start with couples, mostly those where the man wants to have a "sandwich." And what happened? By the time of our conversation, he already had some successful contacts with his gender. Fantastic, but person just wanted to become gay and did what he wanted.
Another one of my good friends, after a failure with white woman, began to date exclusively Asians, as his failures were associated with the image of a white girl. He married Chinese woman after all.
So, as one can see, all our sexual targets are shifting, changing, and replacing colors, smells, sounds. And amazingly enough they have inner rule of development - installation of sexual target goes only though passive channel, but tangible result (awareness) appears on the active.
Therefore, trying to imagine the possible target in sexual perspective won’t work in many cases, if the target is not on active channel. This is typically happen to hetero/gay(mono-sexual) person which tries to imagine sexual scenes with unattractive gender – for example, when I was homophobic I couldn’t imagine men as sexual target.
In fact gay/straight division is fundamentally wrong; any mono-sexuality is limitation of natural dual sexual connectivity which is required for modern matriarchic society. But for the general understanding let me describe how certain moral types can be converted to each other.
To organize us in different type of groups our nature uses behavioural patterns shaping sexual tradition. The patterns are violence [hierarchy], prohibition [exclusivity] and free sexual broadcasting [attentionalism].
To put an end to the endless disputes about improvable claim that "gays are a mistake of natural constitution", I offer to serious researchers real and not speculative evidence. This evidence is repeatable experiment, which is used in many sciences to prove a point. The experiment is how to open human passive sexual channel in heterosexual men – shortly speaking, how to become gay.
Like any researcher, I had this experience with myself, being 47 years old, happily married heterosexual man with children. Any gay fantasies or experience were completely absent and all pro-gay conclusions in the book obtained exclusively using logic. More than that, up to 2005-2006, I was homophobic, with distinct negative bias and contempt against gay people.
As a result of the following exercises, I succeeded to open my own passive channel and could realize sexual attraction woman’s way (or gay way). The process has taken 6 month as the methodology being developed on the way.
In the final result, I made a specific awareness of sexual affection to a man, and a passive sympathy. A man who sees a beautiful woman [beauty is defined in the matrix], excites immediately having a reward for realizing particular target. The passive channel is not working this way, especially undeveloped. Seeing a nice man, I felt that I wanted him to pay attention to me, that's all. The feeling is new and easily recognizable, so anybody who is trying would understand it momentarily.
This initial reaction to opening passive channel is identical to the reaction of shy young girl who pleased that somebody paying attention to her without having sexual images of men in her imagination – very often “innocent†girl is not capable of being sexually aroused by visual stimulus due simple lack of experience. The same happens to heterosexual man who is trying to imagine his own gender as sexual target. Representation of sexual targets in mind is depending on already tested or well inspired images, and if the image is not metabolized by brain, then the picture will fail to support the arousal.
For example, my experience with women has always been limited to the white race, and Black women were seen to me just as a gay man perception of women - beautiful pictures, which do not wake up my desire. So it was up until at work, I have not come across black woman who actively flirted within permissible boundaries - that is included in the half-joking sexual protocol adopted today in the western civilization. And despite the fact that in the beginning it I didn’t like it much, but two months later, I just got used to it. At first I was just polite answering her flirtation jokes, but then I noticed that I was pleased by fact of flirting. The next step was the appearance of beautiful blacks in my mind, although I simply never had - the image has been learned and has appeared on the active channel. Because she proved to me that she supports the same sex record as I do, my subconscious has included her attributes in the list of targets for copulation. Not very romantic, is it?
That is, if in the result of specified below experiment, you will want someone of your own gender – the test can be considered complete. If you continue, then after a while, this gender will appear in your imagination in the form of passive and active fantasies. The more, the channel will be more open - you will feel sexual attraction to your own gender in everyday life.
Thus, in order to convert a gay person to straight and back, one needs to realize that there are no gay and straight per se. A division between "gay" and “straight†has been imposed by traditional culture for the separation of right and wrong behavior – and in terms of monogamy, it's absolutely true. Remembering that any person has his own dominative matrix, let’s see how hierarchical gay is different from matriarchic.
Because “gay†or “straight†are just learnable patterns there are millions ways how to study them but there is always people who can’t swim or ride the bike- and nothing is wrong about it. Usually behind inability to learn stands some negative experience building the restrictive barrier in mind and for such cases voluntary desire to convert won’t help, however not all the conversion types need agreement of the person.
Conversion to hierarchy.
In pure hierarchy, such as criminal gang, the violence tampers both active and passive channel. The bandit is easily groveling before the power (waiting violence on passive) and easily enjoying his power (violence on exit).
For conversion of any human to this moral matrix one should be constantly beaten and insulted, and
............................................
'
'American Psychological Association admits: “Sexual orientation has not been conclusively found to be determined by any particular factor or factors, and the timing of the emergence, recognition, and expression of one’s sexual orientation varies among individuals.†Here is another confession from the same source: “Sometimes straight people discover they are attracted to their own gender, sometimes gay people discover they like some of the opposite gender, and sometimes bisexuals realize they strongly prefer one gender or the other.â€Â
Last 50 years a lot of researchers was trying to convert gays into heterosexuals having hundreds scientific or “spiritual†experiments. But no one, I repeat, no one has ever tried on scientific experimentation converting straight people to gay or bisexual. Too bad because turning straight person into bisexual is relatively easy, whereas making hetero man from gay is extremely difficult. Let's look at why.
First, the background.
In the 60s attempts of gay conversion to heterosexual were common in psychology. Poor gays shoved in ice baths, hit by electricity, clamped on a diet, this is a lot of literature about it. In the 70s, the science opened the hormones and immediately started claiming, it's all about them and pricked human gays with horse doses of testosterone – the conversion have not achieved. After that, somewhere in the 80s, progressive doctors started to speak about fetal abnormalities in development, and since neither really confirm or deny it is impossible, our society established a political compromise – the prosecution of gays stopped on the grounds that their “abnormalities " are natural, due to the simple fact that all attempts to treat them scientifically failed. Moreover, statistics collection on gays has found no hormonal or genetic patterns.
"Naturalness" of gays as a scientific opinion, is extremely important for the present state of western society, because it protects the developing bisexual moral code and saves gays from persecution and public condemnation. Despite there is no firm evidence for such conclusion, just the opposite. But as long as the myth plays important role in modern political life, the legend is tenacious and strong, even in gay community. Even the fact that nobody tried to convert hetero human to gay, tells us that dominating opinion about hetero orientation as a normality and gayness as a sickness, is still prevailing, while the reality is ironic and complete opposite – bisexuality is human genetic normality.
So, why the conversion is so hard? When any doctor is trying to treat patient from any illness, he/she should know medical normality to determinate the sickness and treat the disease. But what if the doctor is sick himself? When religious healer attempts to “cure†homosexual it looks like left limping man teaching right limping person how to break a leg.
In contemporary North America, there are dozens of religious schools for "treatment" of sex orientation. Howling and luring, pastors encourage the love of Christ to treat wayward sodomites and lesbians. It would seem like a drivel, but we should not jump to conclusions.
The fact that these schools honestly publish the results - is that 5% of the children of Christ are really "cured", get married and have children with the opposite sex. Moreover, they write blogs on the Internet - mostly religious texts. Interestingly, the same 5% is the usual result of missionary activity in a developed society - only five of the 100 are susceptible for religious propaganda. It turns out that if a person believes in Christ in earnest, he/she just changes the sex orientation - an issue that not everyone can believe in Christ that deeply. But for us it’s important to note, that if it’s impossible to convert a gay man into a straight, simply no 5% would exist at all.
About 90% of all women serving sentences in jail, all over the world, gain experience of lesbian relations. Around 30% of them, after release, keep up the good work. Fans of gay’s "Naturalness" quietly turn a blind eye - a political compromise is more important. After all, if homosexuality is contagious, then it must be fought. And homosexuality is really contagious as any progressive idea, and is spread the same way - as an idea, identification. One can grasp the ideological pattern easily, but to forget the same at will is much more difficult, especially awarded sexually.
And here we encounter the problem of what is considered normal, especially moral normality. I will support the Darwinists, saying that any relationships are meaningless unless they are used for the needs of the reproductive cycle. That is, the rest of the population dies out, sooner or later. It’s very hard to argue this point, but…
But the problem is that monogamy, which is our major family form, is dying. In 2001, for the first time in human history, the number of unmarried exceeded married, in developed countries. We are clearly entering a different standard of gender and family structure without anyone knows what kind of standard it is. The new form of marriage is so unusual that one will have to get used to it for a long time - both gay and straight. The fact is that the new family is based on bisexuality - heterosexual or gay for this purpose does not fit, but the current generation of gay people performs important role of preparing the public to accept mass bisexual normality.
Put simply, those countries that are unable to accept homosexuality as a new normality, doomed to extinction. It would seem why homosexuality is necessary for reproduction? As it turns out – it is vital. The fact that all social relations in the higher apes use homosexuality to strengthen relations in the herd - in common chimpanzees this way hierarchy is constructed, in Bonobo apes the inverted hierarchy of domain (matriarchy) built on the same homosexual connections.
The destruction of monogamy is inevitable - wife will not support the unequal relations in the family in the absence of hunger and violence, while equal relations between genders are utopian, just like communism. The new family is built on the principles of Bonobo, and respectively, we have to raise children to be bisexual, as strange as it may seem to homophobes.
Matriarchy, as a stable family structure, requires a finely tuned set of conditions for a successful operation, and one of these conditions is the lack of competition between males. Such gender exclusion from the competition is not new - in a strictly hierarchical structures competition between females is vanishingly small. You can take any society where property inheritance is absent and find out what women have nothing to compete for, because their rights are about zero - criminal environment, barbarian tribes.
"Gay" as an identifier, it’s a role that was born only in the 20th century, although homosexuality is as old as mankind, and only needs to combat heteronormativity. Only in the 20th century one began to call homosexuals “gayâ€Â, only in the 20th century, they began to fight for their rights, and they will disappear as identity only within the victory - when the division and oppression based on sexual orientation disappears.
From the point of view of the moral matrices theory the conversion of straight to gay and back, is a matter of ideology change and to develop a new reflex platform to address a flow of the sex instinct. "Reflex platform" is what excites you. I recall the basic thesis that sexual orientation has a reflex origin, and can be instilled just as saliva of Pavlov's dogs, depending on moral matrix of society. Let’s talk about it a bit.
I love Japanese udon soup with octopus and shrimp, which my friends look extremely suspicious - do not stir a tentacle. But any sane person would say that the taste is the result of habit and established way of life. And it is absolutely right.
Can I forget how delicious Japanese eat soup? No, I cannot. And when you think about a particular dish, you salivate excessively, since the image and taste of a favorite food has already been introduced in the form of reflection - thinking is not necessary, it is checked. Grandmother's ravioli is delicious. Once the image of ravioli flashed in my head - the stomach immediately responds.
This is your taste orientation - dumpling.
But if you get pickled toad for the breakfast, you would probably scratch your head before putting it in your mouth. The stomach will be silent. The fact is that the toad, as the food, is unknown to you, and you do not know how to eat it. Moreover, without the knowledge and traditions HOW TO EAT toad your experimentation likely will end in failure, although the French guzzle it with pleasure. And yet, without a strong hunger to force myself to eat toads very hard, I checked myself. The body maintains a strict conservatism in food preferences - if a certain set of products is enough questionable foods are usually denied.
Quite clearly that the human neural network in our brain optimizes the functionality of any mental process, memorizing sequences of required reactions, physical or mental, thus quickening the process and making it less expensive in terms of resources. This optimized reaction in psychology called the conditioned reflex. This function is used to optimize our function everywhere - sports, balance and driving, language and translation, writing, reading ... In fact, this function is the basis of our higher intelligence compared to other terrestrial animals. But nothing comes for free.
Such technological luxury, as the optimization of the logical process requires not only a large brain, but also a dynamic way of organizing memory with data indexing. Many of what other animals pass in the genetic code as predefined behaviour by inheritance, humanity carries into the social customs and culture, because it changes all the time. But as kids, we can learn a civilization from scratch - not the best way, but nothing else invented so far. Civilization sets in us thousands of reflexes, opinions, logical chains, called the mind.
Against the background of such apparent universality of the human brain, quite clear, that sexual orientation is a dynamically loadable behavior, defined in culture, but not in the body of the child. Since the targets of this orientation and shapes are constantly changing. And it does not mean that it's easy to change at will.
Indeed, if sexual orientation is “hard to change†reflex, it is worth considering what other reflexes are not subject of change by human will, as it downloads itself directly from the society. Not far to seek – reflex of beauty.
I hope that no one will argue that beauty is fully defined in the culture, that is, in the dynamic part of the human “operating systemâ€Â. Different ages and different civilizations set their standards of beauty, and no one standard, not even the youth, was stable for all human cultures.
Do you know what is beautiful and what is not? Of course yes. Do you know how do you know? Hell, no.
Since the load of beauty is performed by unconscious copying, its control is not delegated to the conscious level of the individual. The same thing happens with sex orientation and gender definition. The matrix does not trust people in matters of beauty, sex and sexual orientation, and controls these processes directly.
Therefore carriers of beauty are much more social - they have to copy the latest versions of prettiness definition.
Is there are any other reflexes, set against our will or desire? Yes, it's the whole group of prohibitive barriers. Parents forbade us walk outside naked and we have strong internal problems when being exposed in the public expecting punishment. Breaking this reflex puts us into a state of stress, increases blood pressure causing face blushing.
Such prohibitive barrier might be called a moral barrier, as overcoming the barrier puts the human into excessive stress without reasonable cause. For example, the simple realization that the action is illegal automatically stops most people from its performance, while the minority that still carries a wrongful act is under stress disobeying moral barrier. Note that the cold-blooded criminal, looting and killing without remorse, is under the control of another moral matrix in which the loot is just a job. Moral barrier in this criminal matrix can be disrupted if the thief will do something which is beyond one's dignity, like being caught while stealing from his own - the moral code of thieves is followed very strictly.
In addition to moral barriers restraining reflex can just ruin your appetite. My wife found a hair in dumpling around 10 years ago and since then never eats them.
And herself, at will, she can’t abolish this reflex.
I interviewed, Jean, 24 years old, from the city of St. Catharines, Ontario. At age 21, this guy has a very lovely girlfriend, then one day she got drunk and started to show interest in others guys in the bar. Jean, like any monogamist, got jealous causing a drunken brawl in a bar where he got beaten; his girlfriend told him that he is gay and his penis small, after all. Funny story, isn’t it?
The guy went through depression, engaged himself in taekwondo and decided to become gay counting his penis as not long enough. Men didn’t attract him sexually, so he found an idea to start with couples, mostly those where the man wants to have a "sandwich." And what happened? By the time of our conversation, he already had some successful contacts with his gender. Fantastic, but person just wanted to become gay and did what he wanted.
Another one of my good friends, after a failure with white woman, began to date exclusively Asians, as his failures were associated with the image of a white girl. He married Chinese woman after all.
So, as one can see, all our sexual targets are shifting, changing, and replacing colors, smells, sounds. And amazingly enough they have inner rule of development - installation of sexual target goes only though passive channel, but tangible result (awareness) appears on the active.
Therefore, trying to imagine the possible target in sexual perspective won’t work in many cases, if the target is not on active channel. This is typically happen to hetero/gay(mono-sexual) person which tries to imagine sexual scenes with unattractive gender – for example, when I was homophobic I couldn’t imagine men as sexual target.
In fact gay/straight division is fundamentally wrong; any mono-sexuality is limitation of natural dual sexual connectivity which is required for modern matriarchic society. But for the general understanding let me describe how certain moral types can be converted to each other.
To organize us in different type of groups our nature uses behavioural patterns shaping sexual tradition. The patterns are violence [hierarchy], prohibition [exclusivity] and free sexual broadcasting [attentionalism].
To put an end to the endless disputes about improvable claim that "gays are a mistake of natural constitution", I offer to serious researchers real and not speculative evidence. This evidence is repeatable experiment, which is used in many sciences to prove a point. The experiment is how to open human passive sexual channel in heterosexual men – shortly speaking, how to become gay.
Like any researcher, I had this experience with myself, being 47 years old, happily married heterosexual man with children. Any gay fantasies or experience were completely absent and all pro-gay conclusions in the book obtained exclusively using logic. More than that, up to 2005-2006, I was homophobic, with distinct negative bias and contempt against gay people.
As a result of the following exercises, I succeeded to open my own passive channel and could realize sexual attraction woman’s way (or gay way). The process has taken 6 month as the methodology being developed on the way.
In the final result, I made a specific awareness of sexual affection to a man, and a passive sympathy. A man who sees a beautiful woman [beauty is defined in the matrix], excites immediately having a reward for realizing particular target. The passive channel is not working this way, especially undeveloped. Seeing a nice man, I felt that I wanted him to pay attention to me, that's all. The feeling is new and easily recognizable, so anybody who is trying would understand it momentarily.
This initial reaction to opening passive channel is identical to the reaction of shy young girl who pleased that somebody paying attention to her without having sexual images of men in her imagination – very often “innocent†girl is not capable of being sexually aroused by visual stimulus due simple lack of experience. The same happens to heterosexual man who is trying to imagine his own gender as sexual target. Representation of sexual targets in mind is depending on already tested or well inspired images, and if the image is not metabolized by brain, then the picture will fail to support the arousal.
For example, my experience with women has always been limited to the white race, and Black women were seen to me just as a gay man perception of women - beautiful pictures, which do not wake up my desire. So it was up until at work, I have not come across black woman who actively flirted within permissible boundaries - that is included in the half-joking sexual protocol adopted today in the western civilization. And despite the fact that in the beginning it I didn’t like it much, but two months later, I just got used to it. At first I was just polite answering her flirtation jokes, but then I noticed that I was pleased by fact of flirting. The next step was the appearance of beautiful blacks in my mind, although I simply never had - the image has been learned and has appeared on the active channel. Because she proved to me that she supports the same sex record as I do, my subconscious has included her attributes in the list of targets for copulation. Not very romantic, is it?
That is, if in the result of specified below experiment, you will want someone of your own gender – the test can be considered complete. If you continue, then after a while, this gender will appear in your imagination in the form of passive and active fantasies. The more, the channel will be more open - you will feel sexual attraction to your own gender in everyday life.
Thus, in order to convert a gay person to straight and back, one needs to realize that there are no gay and straight per se. A division between "gay" and “straight†has been imposed by traditional culture for the separation of right and wrong behavior – and in terms of monogamy, it's absolutely true. Remembering that any person has his own dominative matrix, let’s see how hierarchical gay is different from matriarchic.
Because “gay†or “straight†are just learnable patterns there are millions ways how to study them but there is always people who can’t swim or ride the bike- and nothing is wrong about it. Usually behind inability to learn stands some negative experience building the restrictive barrier in mind and for such cases voluntary desire to convert won’t help, however not all the conversion types need agreement of the person.
Conversion to hierarchy.
In pure hierarchy, such as criminal gang, the violence tampers both active and passive channel. The bandit is easily groveling before the power (waiting violence on passive) and easily enjoying his power (violence on exit).
For conversion of any human to this moral matrix one should be constantly beaten and insulted, and
............................................
'
![[-]](https://gayspeak.com/images/duende_v3_local/collapse.png)
