23759Re: Celebrating Rudolf Steiner's Death Day
- Apr 1, 2006Mike Helser wrote:
> If RS was right, and sex and Love are indeed mutually exclusive,then
> maybe that's why he left us a corps to feed on. My X Buddhistbuddies
> were always be meditating of death and rotting corpses to quelltheir
> sexual desires. Perhaps if we weren't all buzzing and crawlingaround
> this corps, we'd all be out sport-fucking like crazey..:-O------------------------------
Thanks for appreciating my metaphors. I always loved the upgrade that
Marshall McLuhan gave to the statement made 2 centuries ago by the
great Limey poet Robert Browning:
"Man's reach must exceed his grasp, or else, what's a heaven for?"
Mercurial oracle Marshy Mac Luhan changed that to:
"Man's reach must exceed his grasp, or else what's a metaphor?"
Nyuk! Nyuk! Nyuk!
Anyway, I must first give you a short lesson in speaking the dialect
of Classical Anthroposophese. You expressed yourself in the rather
coarse vernacular, using the term "sport-fucking."
The f-word in Classical Anthroposophese is not 4 letters, but 8, to
wit: "fructify." So, in future anthro-social gatherings, be they 3-
fold or not, or whether here online or in an actual study group, you
might try impressing your comrades by saying: "sport-fructification"
or "sport-fructifying" or even the most formal expression of
all: "undergoing a process, as it were, of sport-fructification."
I am fascinated, in a very Spock-like way (and I could be subtly
referring here to Benjy's sister Marjorie), with your correlation
between meditating on corpses and quelling those rather insistent
desires of a fructifactory nature. I assume you may be referring to
the Hindu vow of "brahmacharya," which is not just sexual celibacy,
but refraining from eating meat and other coarse sensual stuff. But
all that seems to be such a "guy thing" and also pretty atavistic.
But the truth is, I could actually more easily imagine my own
parents "undergoing, as it were, a process of mutual fructifcation"
than I ever could imagine Rudolf Steiner playing "hide the pickle"
with any woman, be it Marie the Dour, or even Lovely Ita, Ita babe,
(sing it: ". . . where would I be without you? Give us a wink and
make me think of you. . . . Lovely Ita, Ita-babe!).
(I was once exiled from a study group in Tennessee when an old S98
post of mine surfaced where I had speculated on the idea that the
real love of Rudy's life was not Marie, but Ita! Sigh! Ah, so much
for neo-Platonic romanticism. )
So here we have this unsettling, disquieting possibility that the
entire corpus (not corpse now) of anthroposophy, the entire
Gesamtausgabe, could have been founded on the repression of Rudolf
Steiner's fructificatorial urges. But wait, there is a new sexual
revolution going on and Rudolf Steiner may someday be canonized as
the patron saint of this very "brahmacharyan" movement called
ASEXUALITY. Check out this website for info
After all, since the asexuals have a T-shirt now, then they have to
be an official and bona fide social movement, right? Now check out
their Yahoo group, which you can read without subscribing as you can
As of today they have 589 members, as compared to 232 on A_T.
Oh and their slogan on the T-shirt reads:
ASEXUALITY: NOT JUST FOR AMOEBAS ANYMORE!
But now back to repression. Years ago, in the heyday of Steiner98,
the erudite techno-scholar William Irwin Thompson happened to fall
down the rabbit hole of S98. I had accused him then of calling
Steiner queer. While dusting himself off, Billy, aka, WIT, related
to us that it was not he, but rather the New Age historian Rick
Tarnas, who had actually made the remark that he thought Rudolf
Steiner was a "repressed homosexual."
Now, when the angels let me, I will pontificate on the spiritual-
scientific principles of homosexuality. But they involve the rather
complicated cross-pollination, as it were, (even cross-dressing? )
No, better say, cross-weaving, as it were, of the male and female
etheric-physical sheathes analogous to the way vision works through
the optic chiasma. Interestingly enough, the phenomenon, as far as I
can surmise --- with a straight face and a flaccid "lower larynx," as
it were --- is neither genetic nor karmic in origin. However, if you
would like to observe Goetheanistically, the phenomena of gayness and
lesbianhood, do go out and see the movie Transamerica, where Felicity
Huffman won the best Actress Oscar for portraying a pre-operative
transsexual man becoming a woman.
(For if you can catch such a person, before he, makes the,
er, "final cut," as it were, then much may be clarified in the
seer's (or is it sneer's?") inner spiritual perception of the inter-
twining astral-etheric-physical mysteries of the male and female. I
blush as I report this, but I must say, in all candor, that my
Goetheanistic observations --- seeing in thinking and thinking in
seeing --- of pre-op trannies, (known more colorfully as "chicks with
dicks") were simultaneously the most titillating and penetrating
clairsentient experiences of the entire course of my post-pubescent
Anyway, this whole Transamerica phenomenon, so mainstream out here in
the City of Angels, has inspired me to ask the most profound
questions of spiritual science I have come up with to date:
Does size matter in counterspace?
But now, let's get back home to the A_T group here. Robert Sardello
also fell down the S98 rabbit hole, and he gave us a fascinating
discussion of the sexual forces inherent on the Internet, which he
termed "cyber-dildonics." I agreed with him and pointed to the work
of Marshall McLuhan, who wrote about how the medium itself gradually
changes the content of the medium to express itself more honestly and
genuinely. (For example, when the movie medium first started, its
content was of live plays and opera; today, the content of movies is
much more determined by the actual medium of movies itself.)
So, given that we appear to each other here only through e-mail
messages, sans physical body contact, sans voice contact, sans
images; and, given that the essence/energy of this electronic medium
is of the fallen light and sound ethers, well, that's a lot of
What does come across very well is the ego and astral bodies; what is
filtered out the most is the physical body and to a large extent the
etheric. But, relatively speaking, I have noticed that over time,
when we get to know each other through repeated conversations, our
etheric bodies, which carry memory and habit, become strengthened.
The result is that we tune into each other more on an etheric level
than on a physical one. So you know what that means. It means that we
physical guys exhibit on this list our female etheric side, while the
physical ladies on this list, exhibit their more masculine etheric
I mean, look at the discussions that go on here. By and large, the
issues that excite the guys, are all expressed in a very measured
criss-crossing back and forth cyber-motion that always reminds me of
a bunch of old ladies sitting around together gossiping at a church
quilting bee. Notice how carefully the guys weave the patches and
guide the patchwork of etheric quilt of whatever subject is being
discussed. This is especially apparent when the critics get involved.
On the other side, when the ladies, those etheric hunks of macho men,
swagger in with their formidable astral cockleberries showing through
their etheric codpieces, all they have to do is say one word, and
they cut through all the quilting bullshit and send the giddy old
ladies into a near hysterical tizzy.
Finally, to get back to Buffalo Bob Sardello's idea of dildonics, my
other picture of this A_T group is that of a cyber bordello, where
Tarjei is the owner and Frank is the Madam. We physical guys are the
etheric "girls of the evening" as it were, and the physical ladies
are the etheric male clients, or "Johns" (Johannesses?) Most of the
entertainment consists of us etheric girlie-men doing striptease on
center stage. I myself am of the conservative old school, using the
fans like Sally Rand used to do. And occasionally I do swing around
that new-fangled pole.
Now this latter metaphor is for Joel's benefit. Joel, I must tell
you, you do have a nice pair of etheric hooters; you even have a
nicely shaped etheric ass, and you have done so much admirable work
in PoF and epistemology that the average John, or, Johannes, would
select you over so many others in the "stable." I mean, you really
know how to swing around that pole and get those dollar bills stuffed
into your Native American motif G-strings, etc., but but you are
violating a certain decorum of the bordello and I do believe you will
improve your attitude once I tell you about this. So consider this an
intervention of sorts, a kind of Texas 2-step around the pole.
Joel, if you would just come up on stage and do your striptease
routine like every other girlie-man here, everything would be fine.
But instead, you have the chutzpah, I guess it's some kind of
entitlement issue, where you come on stage and you take the bloody
dildo-lance of Amfortas and start immediately thrusting it into your
lower etheric sheath, and as if that weren't gross enough public
behavior, you actually feel entitled to payment from the customers,
for forcing them to watch your your vaunted spiritual experience of
the last third of a century.
Why even, Martha, with her New Mexican 10 gallon hat jauntily cocked,
as it were, told you in direct terms to stop with your autobiography
already. Listen to her, already! (Doesn't Martha remind you a lot of
Gary Cooper in High Noon? "Do not forsake me oh, my darling!...)
In other words, Joel, do come on stage and give us a nice striptease
about your experience, but please don't use your experience as a
dildo to pleasure yourself and expect not to be thrown out of the
OK, Mike, I'll end here. This should be more than enough to spark
discussion around the pole,or is it more patches for the quilting
bee? (As it were. )
Thomasina in the etheric
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>