Are human males naturally frivolous? I’ve come across a new word to describe non-serious behavior by public servants, performative. It’s a performance but not really. Why? Because it is pointless.

The law frowns on frivolity as an unwarranted distraction that merits sanction. Though, why what used to mean approval now means punishment is a puzzlement.

Catholicism in my cross hairs

I am aware that I am increasingly intemperate when it comes to Catholicism. There was, actually good reason to be suspicious of Catholic religious who enslaved natives and stole their children. Moreover, the recent wholesale abuse of boys is also inexcusable. The only positive might be the prompt to ask whether males abusing males is a normal component of male hegemony. The Republican operatives “fondling” of his driver’s genitalia might be an indicator. As women well know, there is a difference between interest and abuse.
Invading a person’s personal space is intimidating. But then, that is what confession ritualizes, isn’t it? Confession and forgiveness aim to intimidate and subordinate. What about those who induce shameful behavior? How do we deal with them?

The Quest for Power

The quest for power arises from a sense of impotence, which is either endemic or culturally imposed. Regardless the etiology, impotence seems more prevalent among males. Ergo the impulse towards male hegemony.
What makes this quest so fruitless is not just that it is never satisfied, but it has no object. Flicking a light switch has more influence.
Continue reading

Re: rule of law

Ms. Maddow;
Former conservative Justice Anthony M. Kennedy frequently preached that “the rule of law binds government and all its officials.” Prosecutors, even the admirable Letitia James, seem not to believe that when they keep repeating “no-one is above the law.” In fact, the ordinary natural person who has not consented to perform certain acts, is only subject to the injunction not to insult or injure someone else. Almost all laws apply to governmental (corporate) entities and the subsidiary entities (commercial corporations, organizations and partnerships, including marriages) in which persons voluntarily participate.
Continue reading


There is something ironic about shared guilt erasing the individual sense of guilt. Or is it a matter of the glue of communion everpowering the individual sense of guilt. Ah yes, we have the model of the celebration of the communal sacrifice in the eucharist. For sure, because he did not resist, Jesus was responsible for being killed. That’s the very model of blame the victim. The focus on the mystery of transubstantiation, the real issue is disguised.

How does this work with a person who feels not guilt or violation of self-restraint to begin with? The narcissist is not brainwashed nor intellectually deficient. Is self-awareness the basis of self-restraint? If so, then is it the narcissist’s lack of restraint and guilt what attracts followers? The followers do not expect the cult leader to turn on them. So, when he does, it comes as a surprise and they do not believe it.