Religion

[graceanne]

I'm agreeing with you that the symbolism is there. What I'm not getting is any input on the crossover from a religious attitude to a sexual one

That's cause I dont see one. I do not get a sexual thrill at the sight of Jesus suffering. I don't have any crusifiction fantasy's. I do not consider my devotion to Him a facest of my masochism. I think I'm a masochist cause I was abused, not cause I'm a Christian.

 

[RJMasters]

Okay, these are your beliefs, and I respect them. They're not in his words when he was alive. They're in the thoughts about him after he died.

Lao Tzu also wrote amazing stuff. He left a manuscript and skipped town.

Still good stuff.

The words of Christ to my money are some of the wisest ever written. His crucifiction is a brutal, horrific footnote.

Glorifying it, to me, glorifies destruction rather than creation.

Jesus is not dead. That is what makes him the Lord of Life and Death. That is what easter is really about. Yes the crucifiction was brutal and ugly. But you speak as though that was the end. That was not the end, and that is really what the message of easter is about. All of the christian faith hangs upon one fact and one fact alone. Jesus either rose from the dead or he didn't.

If he didn't then he has no power to save anyone. If he did, then he is Lord and Master of both Life and Death, and that makes him different than any other person who ever lived.

So when you talk to those who believe in Jesus Christ, please understand we do not see him as someone who died 2000 years ago. We see him as being very much alive today.

Many dance around the issue and agree that he was a good and moral leader, but the only question that really matters is...do you believe that he rose from the dead or not. Because only one who has conquered death has the power to offer hope to those who face it. And that is why these three remain

Faith, Hope and Love. The greatest of these is love which Christ demonstrated to us and proved that neather death nor life nor anything could seperate us from the love of God. He said it, then he proved it. He was no weak man. You want to talk about dominance? He spoke and the wind obeyed him. His touch cured those who were blind or deseased. Those with demons threw themselves at his feet knowing the power he had over them. He walked with character and a strength of a holy spirit. He not only talk the talk, but walked the walk.

People can twist the christian faith any way they choose to, but when you cut away all the BS, everything hangs upon a simple of question of did he raise from the dead or not?

 

[Recidiva]

Jesus is not dead. That is what makes him the Lord of Life and Death. That is what easter is really about. Yes the crucifiction was brutal and ugly. But you speak as though that was the end. That was not the end, and that is really what the message of easter is about. All of the christian faith hangs upon one fact and one fact alone. Jesus either rose from the dead or he didn't.

If he didn't then he has no power to save anyone. If he did, then he is Lord and Master of both Life and Death, and that makes him different than any other person who ever lived.

So when you talk to those who believe in Jesus Christ, please understand we do not see him as someone who died 2000 years ago. We see him as being very much alive today.

Many dance around the issue and agree that he was a good and moral leader, but the only question that really matters is...do you believe that he rose from the dead or not. Because only one who has conquered death has the power to offer hope to those who face it. And that is why these three remain

Faith, Hope and Love. The greatest of these is love which Christ demonstrated to us and proved that neather death nor life nor anything could seperate us from the love of God. He said it, then he proved it. He was no weak man. You want to talk about dominance? He spoke and the wind obeyed him. His touch cured those who were blind or deseased. Those with demons threw themselves at his feet knowing the power he had over them. He walked with character and a strength of a holy spirit. He not only talk the talk, but walked the walk.

People can twist the christian faith any way they choose to, but when you cut away all the BS, everything hangs upon a simple of question of did he raise from the dead or not?

Historically the date of Easter is determined by a pagan calendar and celebrates the festival of Ostara. We're getting into history and personal faith here, which isn't exactly where I wanted to go.

So I won't.

 

[RJMasters]

Historically the date of Easter is determined by a pagan calendar and celebrates the festival of Ostara. We're getting into history and personal faith here, which isn't exactly where I wanted to go.

So I won't.

Actually you made some assumptions. I think you are finding out that those assumptions are not neccessarily true. Not all Christians hold up the cross and the crucifixtion as a bloody calling card. Nor do I think you will find many fixated upon the suffering of Christ because they don't have a well adjusted sex life.

Normally I enjoy many of your posts, however I think you threw yourself off a cliff with this one. It is unreasonable of you to suggest the motivation behind why people do turn to religion and bloody symbolism and myartdom, and think it could be divorced from personal faith. You attempt to paint the motivation as some form of sadomasichism. It isn't. And if you understood the Christian faith at all, you wouldn't have even suggested such a thing.

You are not geting what you want, because your original premise is wrong. All people are doing it sharing in their own way the real motivation behind what they believe and how they view the symbolism of the cross. As you are finding out, it doesn't line up with what you purposed at all.

PS: I really don't care what date we choose to select to celebrate the death burial and ressurection of Christ. We could celebrate it in June for all I care. Its not the date but the meaning behind it and what it means to those who are of the Christian faith. So it doesn't bother me at all if it happens to fall upon the same day that others observe their rituals and beliefs. All that matters to me is that these are the days that have been selected and observed and it doesn't have to be any more complicated than that.

 

[Recidiva]

Actually you made some assumptions. I think you are finding out that those assumptions are not neccessarily true. Not all Christians hold up the cross and the crucifixtion as a bloody calling card. Nor do I think you will find many fixated upon the suffering of Christ because they don't have a well adjusted sex life.

Normally I enjoy many of your posts, however I think you threw yourself off a cliff with this one. It is unreasonable of you to suggest the motivation behind why people do turn to religion and bloody symbolism and myartdom, and think it could be divorced from personal faith. You attempt to paint the motivation as some form of sadomasichism. It isn't. And if you understood the Christian faith at all, you wouldn't have even suggested such a thing.

You are not geting what you want, because your original premise is wrong. All people are doing it sharing in their own way the real motivation behind what they believe and how they view the symbolism of the cross. As you are finding out, it doesn't line up with what you purposed at all.

This is the conversation I'd rather have instead of a catechism. I have a deep respect for the religion and the traditions and I have even more evidence of a passionate connection than I did at the beginning of the thread.

If you think the original premise is incorrect, then perhaps you could reread it. I was asking this community not to get a religious seminar, but to ask people's experiences and observations, and compare to their counterparts. If there's only one voice responding, then I'm providing the counterpoint to it.

And as to threads going off course due to a flawed initial premise, have you read threads lately?

 

[jadefirefly]

I'm confuzzled.

I want to be sure that I understand the question, rather than just blithering on. Are we curious about why some people throw themselves into religion to express latent sadomasochistic desires? Or are we specifically discussing why people maintain images in their worship of violent, painful scenes?

I am somewhat religious, but I'm kind of the equivalent of an E. and C. christian... I remember to celebrate major holidays.

Sometimes.

If I'm reminded ahead of time...

But I'm totally lacking any actual sadomasochistic tendencies in my worship, sooooo... I'm confuzzled.

 

[Recidiva]

I'm confuzzled.

I want to be sure that I understand the question, rather than just blithering on. Are we curious about why some people throw themselves into religion to express latent sadomasochistic desires? Or are we specifically discussing why people maintain images in their worship of violent, painful scenes?

I am somewhat religious, but I'm kind of the equivalent of an E. and C. christian... I remember to celebrate major holidays.

Sometimes.

If I'm reminded ahead of time...

But I'm totally lacking any actual sadomasochistic tendencies in my worship, sooooo... I'm confuzzled.

For my part, it's not putting down religion. It's not putting down sadomasochism. It's an observation that those who do not seem to be able to express sadomasochism socially (if they have it) might invest that into their religion.

I asked those who had a religious background, whether or not they noticed this and/or were influenced by that dynamic.

I already know my answer, and I think it's sound, so I'm engaging in a discussion about these tendencies and whether this is one of the main roads a sexually repressed person can take, there's religion as an outlet.

This does not reflect on the religion or the religion's followers. In fact I didn't even say only Christianity. That's where the response has been coming from, though, so I responded to that one specifically.

 

[leeroy jenkins]

A bloody guy on a cross induces love and forgiveness?

I've always seen this used as guilt. "Christ died on the cross for your sins"

Its about submission to another will, he did not want to bare the pain or humilation of the cross but because he submits his will before GOD he did just that. That is what true love is on GOD part enacted through the flesh of Jesus and also his divinity.

 

[jadefirefly]

For my part, it's not putting down religion. It's not putting down sadomasochism. It's an observation that those who do not seem to be able to express sadomasochism socially (if they have it) might invest that into their religion.

I asked those who had a religious background, whether or not they noticed this and/or were influenced by that dynamic.

I already know my answer, and I think it's sound, so I'm engaging in a discussion about these tendencies and whether this is one of the main roads a sexually repressed person can take, there's religion as an outlet.

This does not reflect on the religion or the religion's followers. In fact I didn't even say only Christianity. That's where the response has been coming from, though, so I responded to that one specifically.

Do you think that if they do choose to express their tendencies through religion instead of a healthy sexual outlet, that it still manifests itself as sadomasochism? Or more as a sort of religious fervor?

I'm curious because for the most part, it'd be awfully hard to express oneself in a sadomasochistic way in my belief set, but it'd be interesting to see someone try. Provided nobody actually got hurt of course.

 

[RJMasters]

This is the conversation I'd rather have instead of a catechism. I have a deep respect for the religion and the traditions and I have even more evidence of a passionate connection than I did at the beginning of the thread.

If you think the original premise is incorrect, then perhaps you could reread it. I was asking this community not to get a religious seminar, but to ask people's experiences and observations, and compare to their counterparts. If there's only one voice responding, then I'm providing the counterpoint to it.

And as to threads going off course due to a flawed initial premise, have you read threads lately?

Chuckles. Yes I have. The word broken compass comes to mind.

Your original post:

I'm under the impression that many sadomasochistic people that don't adopt a healthy reflective sex life will use religion as the next best thing.

Weather you meant to or not this is poorly worded as it is clear you are under the "impression" that those who do not adopt a healthy sex life will use religion as the next best thing.

From there...you go on to purpose....

Indulging it in an ecstatic or mythic way rather than personalizing the impulse.

The inference is that based on what I called the flawed original premise...thos who do not have a well adjusted sex life turn to religion as the next best thing in order to vicariously live through the suffering elements which seem to be prevelant in many of the religions today.

You then make a true statement

but there is always a sect of any religion that is going to find the most violent or bloody image and use it as their calling card.

But then you specify an example. Namely the symbol of Christianity is Chrsit bleeding on the cross.

I never understood how in the Bible, there are to be no graven images, except the most well known symbol of Christianity is Christ bleeding on his cross.

Though you did not want a religious seminar, you got one. Why did you get one? Because people are saying "hey, my faith does not stem from some faulty sexlife". They are saying they don't fixate, view or use the bloody cross as you suggest. And you get the religious seminar because people are explaining the real motivation behind why they have faith, which has nothing to do with what you purposed.

So in my opinion the thread is on track, because people are just saying in their own way, your "impression" is faulty...or at the very least they are saying, your impression is wrong as far as it concerns me and here is why.

That's my take on it

 

[catalina_francisco]

I'm agreeing with you that the symbolism is there. What I'm not getting is any input on the crossover from a religious attitude to a sexual one

Interesting point or two here, firstly I am a Buddhist who can appreciate and respect the rights of all religions to have their own beliefs (in fact I see strong similarities between most of the theologies and their stories for want of a better word)...secondly, I don't and never have thought of tying my religious or spiritiual beliefs to my choices in sexuality. I am comfortable in my sexual choices and do not feel the need to find a reason like religion to justify or explain it, nor does one replace or attone for the other. I also am not sure I agree with your thoughts that all religions, somewhere have a bloody image they use to promote their beliefs.

Catalina

 

[leeroy jenkins]

I am just glad I am not the only one here that thinks that faith and bdsm can go hand in hand thanks guys.

 

[Recidiva]

Do you think that if they do choose to express their tendencies through religion instead of a healthy sexual outlet, that it still manifests itself as sadomasochism? Or more as a sort of religious fervor?

I'm curious because for the most part, it'd be awfully hard to express oneself in a sadomasochistic way in my belief set, but it'd be interesting to see someone try. Provided nobody actually got hurt of course.

The accent of the conversation would be an expression of sadomasochism across a social base.

There aren't many ways to express sadomasochism socially. Sexuality is one. Religious fervor is another.

Unfortunately it seems that sadomasochism somewhere along the way here has been associated with "a bad thing" or that I'm saying it's a bad thing.

If I'd wanted to stigmatize it, I'd have asked otherwhere than the group that would have the most insight into sadomasochism, not religion.

 

[Recidiva]

Interesting point or two here, firstly I am a Buddhist who can appreciate and respect the rights of all religions to have their own beliefs (in fact I see strong similarities between most of the theologies and their stories for want of a better word)...secondly, I don't and never have thought of tying my religious or spiritiual beliefs to my choices in sexuality. I am comfortable in my sexual choices and do not feel the need to find a reason like religion to justify or explain it, nor does one replace or attone for the other. I also am not sure I agree with your thoughts that all religions, somewhere have a bloody image they use to promote their beliefs.

Catalina

There are even buddhists who self-immolate.

 

[catalina_francisco]

There are even buddhists who self-immolate.

Despite your feeling this is not the place to find people who have expert knowledge on religion, I think you might be surprised to find many do. As to that point, I am aware of it. I still never see why people feel the need to try and find why people choose SM as if there is some reason needed other than you just plain old like and crave it. It really is not that difficult to understand, nor does it have to have some deep, dark, underlying gap or tragedy in a person's life to drive them to it.

Catalina

 

[Recidiva]

Despite your feeling this is not the place to find people who have expert knowledge on religion, I think you might be surprised to find many do. As to that point, I am aware of it. I still never see why people feel the need to try and find why people choose SM as if there is some reason needed other than you just plain old like and crave it. It really is not that difficult to understand, nor does it have to have some deep, dark, underlying gap or tragedy in a person's life to drive them to it.

Catalina

Again, I'm not anti religion.

I'm not anti SM.

Regardless of how it's being portrayed, my interest is in the areas I'd mentioned. Many religions have developed self-flagellating rituals, even ritual crucifiction. This isn't talking about those who go to Church on Sunday as if it were a deep, dark subverted thing.

I haven't mentioned any of the common practices, more the fringe of the ecstatic and the ritualized aspects of pain that are common in many, many religious traditions, Christianity present but not nearly the most extravagant.

 

[catalina_francisco]

From my thinking, I would argue there are many ways to express your SM needs in social context apart from BDSM and religion....for instance, sport - especially when you look at the highly physical and extreme sports; armed forces; dead end jobs and careers when there is another choice; careers or jobs which require more than usual effort, often workaholicism to name just a couple.

Catalina

 

[Recidiva]

From my thinking, I would argue there are many ways to express your SM needs in social context apart from BDSM and religion....for instance, sport - especially when you look at the highly physical and extreme sports; armed forces; dead end jobs and careers when there is another choice; careers or jobs which require more than usual effort, often workaholicism to name just a couple.

Catalina

I agree, and those are definite outlets. Just not as interesting to me or dramatic.

 

[catalina_francisco]

I agree, and those are definite outlets. Just not as interesting to me or dramatic.

But you didn't specify it had to be personally interesting or dramatic to you, you just said there didn't seem to be any other way to express SM socially other than BDSM or religion...unless in doing half a dozen things at once I have missed something again. Anyway, you might find this thread of interest, and a couple of others that for some reason have not made it to the library.

Catalina

 

[FurryFury]

How many people here have a religious background or rejected one?

I'm under the impression that many sadomasochistic people that don't adopt a healthy reflective sex life will use religion as the next best thing.

Indulging it in an ecstatic or mythic way rather than personalizing the impulse.

I am not anti-religion, but there is always a sect of any religion that is going to find the most violent or bloody image and use it as their calling card.

I never understood how in the Bible, there are to be no graven images, except the most well known symbol of Christianity is Christ bleeding on his cross.

I have a very religious background which I have rejected.

I'm not sure I qualify as a sadomasochistic person though some would say I do. *grins*

To me, religion can be very reassuring. I find myself even now, occasionally praying to a god I'm not sure exists or cares the way I want to be cared for, or bargining with the powers that be. It's hard not to do so at certain times.
At those times, when I see that I am doing that, I think, no wonder so many are so religious, it would be so convenient, and safe feeling to really believe and somehow have faith in a greater power, if only I could truly do that.

I'm not anti-religion but I'm pretty anti-organized religion. I prefer the term spiritual in regards to myself.

I don't believe in the bible the imagine of Christ bleeding on the cross is meant to be a graven image at all. That is something organized religion has done with the image.

Whose to say. by the way, that Jesus, if he existed, as much as he hated the necessity of it, didn't enjoy somehow being the ONE to save us all? We don't know what he was thinking. Sure he asked that this cup be taken from him, were it possible, that is written but there is so much we don't know. That is, if we believe the bible and the gospels at all.

I found it interesting that the Gospel of Judas was released this week. It says nothing one wouldn't expect but it's still interesting. It's too bad many of the other gospels have been banned for so long. It makes me think the organized religions were afraid of a more whole "truth" being out here. It's nice to see that is becoming less so in the world today.

Fury

 

[Netzach]

Being outside the fold, I can point out that the hero who is tortured, died, (sometimes resurrected in some fashion, sometimes not) is a really old yarn, way older than Jesus. It definitely capitalizes on human emotion and rallies people behind what they believe in, it points to our own failings and ultimately pussy nature that could not muster this same bravery, it serves a ton of purposes.

I've found religiousness or lack thereof to be a giant question mark among the ranks of the perverse I've worked with. I can never assume what I'm going to get. Men have an amazing ability to compartmentalize, I never knew how well.

 

[Recidiva]

Being outside the fold, I can point out that the hero who is tortured, died, (sometimes resurrected in some fashion, sometimes not) is a really old yarn, way older than Jesus. It definitely capitalizes on human emotion and rallies people behind what they believe in, it points to our own failings and ultimately pussy nature that could not muster this same bravery, it serves a ton of purposes.

I've found religiousness or lack thereof to be a giant question mark among the ranks of the perverse I've worked with. I can never assume what I'm going to get. Men have an amazing ability to compartmentalize, I never knew how well.

I'm in and out of the folds...

I suppose literally and figuratively, Jane of all trades, Mistress of none, but as fascinated by faith as I am sexuality.

Is someone taking place in a flagellation ceremony, a piercing ceremony, or some other religious group event, do they associate that with masochism?

Even if to an outsider it clearly is ritual masochism, can they identify with that, or does the social correctness of following tradition "absolve" them of what might be otherwise taboo?

 

[Netzach]

I'm in and out of the folds...

I suppose literally and figuratively, Jane of all trades, Mistress of none, but as fascinated by faith as I am sexuality.

Is someone taking place in a flagellation ceremony, a piercing ceremony, or some other religious group event, do they associate that with masochism?

Even if to an outsider it clearly is ritual masochism, can they identify with that, or does the social correctness of following tradition "absolve" them of what might be otherwise taboo?

Well, that's a beef I have with the western body mod cults that see what they are doing in a continuum with a lot of non-western ceremonial and ritual practices. I don't think that I can experience remotely the same thing having my cheeks pierced that someone might in Bali, or that a hook suspension on me has any relevance to the Sun Dance. The physics are the same, sure, but the cultural context, background, and way of thinking that brings about those physics are completely and irreconcilably *different*

Those things do not waddle and quack the same way - the relationships are superficial to the point of pointlessness. I don't think that a Balinese guy having his cheeks pierced would be thinking about taboo at all - I don't think that it's an excuse or an outlet for any kind of behavior as much as it would be correct worship and participation.

 

[Recidiva]

Well, that's a beef I have with the western body mod cults that see what they are doing in a continuum with a lot of non-western ceremonial and ritual practices. I don't think that I can experience remotely the same thing having my cheeks pierced that someone might in Bali, or that a hook suspension on me has any relevance to the Sun Dance. The physics are the same, sure, but the cultural context, background, and way of thinking that brings about those physics are completely and irreconcilably *different*

Those things do not waddle and quack the same way - the relationships are superficial to the point of pointlessness. I don't think that a Balinese guy having his cheeks pierced would be thinking about taboo at all - I don't think that it's an excuse or an outlet for any kind of behavior as much as it would be correct worship and participation.

I agree.

That's why it's an ecstatic trance experience.

Many of which are done to transcend pain, not revel in it. But they still have the pain in common as a devotion and a sacrifice.

The context makes all the difference, culturally and socially. But as each individual makes up their own context also, the lines blur. Scarification and rites of passage, people who undertake these with devotion and commitment to their tribe or their traditions.

So pain as an offering is universal.

 

[Pure]

Comments on Recidiva's question:

Some of the high points of the discussion, first.

R: For my part, it's not putting down religion. It's not putting down sadomasochism. It's an observation that those who do not seem to be able to express sadomasochism socially (if they have it) might invest that into their religion.

I asked those who had a religious background, whether or not they noticed this and/or were influenced by that dynamic.

I already know my answer, and I think it's sound, so I'm engaging in a discussion about these tendencies and whether this is one of the main roads a sexually repressed person can take, there's religion as an outlet.

This does not reflect on the religion or the religion's followers. In fact I didn't even say only Christianity. That's where the response has been coming from, though, so I responded to that one specifically.

In another posting recidiva said, and RJM responded:
Recidiva: The words of Christ to my money are some of the wisest ever written. His crucifiction is a brutal, horrific footnote. Glorifying it, to me, glorifies destruction rather than creation.



RJM: //Jesus is not dead. That is what makes him the Lord of Life and Death. That is what easter is really about. Yes the crucifiction was brutal and ugly. But you speak as though that was the end. That was not the end, and that is really what the message of easter is about. All of the christian faith hangs upon one fact and one fact alone. Jesus either rose from the dead or he didn't.

If he didn't then he has no power to save anyone. If he did, then he is Lord and Master of both Life and Death, and that makes him different than any other person who ever lived.

So when you talk to those who believe in Jesus Christ, please understand we do not see him as someone who died 2000 years ago. We see him as being very much alive today.//

RJM continued:
//It is unreasonable of you to suggest the motivation behind why people do turn to religion and bloody symbolism and martyrdom, and think it could be divorced from personal faith. You attempt to paint the motivation as some form of sadomasochism. It isn't. And if you understood the Christian faith at all, you wouldn't have even suggested such a thing.

You are not getting what you want, because your original premise is wrong. All people are doing it sharing in their own way the real motivation behind what they believe and how they view the symbolism of the cross. As you are finding out, it doesn't line up with what you purposed[proposed?] at all. //

RJM continues, gloating,
//Though you did not want a religious seminar, you got one. Why did you get one? Because people are saying "hey, my faith does not stem from some faulty sexlife".//
------

I, Pure, reply: While I think Netzach is getting things back on track, I'd add a few comments as one of Christian background. That 'faith comes from a faulty sexlife' is surely a simplistic position I dont see in Recidiva. Indeed it's a sort of evangelical 'straw man' that does not bespeak much knowledge of Freud, Nietzsche and others.

As I read Recidiva, she starts only with the assumption that lots or all of us have 'SM' impulses, which she does not define, but apparently she sees in terms of inflicting pain or undergoing it linked with eroticism/
sexual arousal/etc. If you do not accept that, as many Christians do not, esp. evangelicals, the discussion cannot occur and certainly isn't ended by saying "Christ is my Lord and Master, joyfully risen at Easter and present forever."

As many writers, and several posters have noted, there IS a Xtian fascination with the symbol of the crucifix. Whether it evokes joyful thoughts of Easter or not, it's in hundreds of churches, with its drops of blood, wounds, piercing, etc. It is essentially an icon--not at depiction, not particularly historical (see the twists Mel Gibson put to it).

A wounded God or god figure, as Netzach says, is a recurrent human narrated motif, applying to Osiris and Dionysos among others. And the element of ecstatic reversal, life in death, resurrection, is often present, which is neither here nor there.

Simple denials cannot defeat a psychological inquiry. "I feel joy, looking at my crucified Savior."

One needs to look at writings and practices: Without going on, here are a couple. St. Thomas said that the rapture of those is heaven is increased by gazing at the sufferings of those in Hell.

Let us look at the phenomenon of Christian torture, be it in the Inquisition by Catholics or in New England by protestants. Look at punishments such a putting the person under a wooded platform, piling it with rocks until the person suffocates.

Now Recidiva did suggest (or ask about) some kind of transfer, i.e., that if you can't have a modern SM partner, you transfer that to religion.

That is not exactly saying 'poor sex life' is root, that some sadistic Xtian males didn't get any pussy. (Of course, the Inquisitors weren't supposed to, at least).

But I guess the point is that suppose there's no partner to whip, nor can you ask the Xtian wife to whip you. So those impulses 'go'somewhere. A bit like the lump in your carpet, or the steam in your pressure cooker. Where is that: Well, maybe into the religious imagery and themes (such as redemption through blood). Nowadays a Jerry Falwell, besides the wife, can hire 'hoes to regularly discipline him. I'd call that a manifestation of the desires we're talking about.

Freud's theory is that it's going to come out somehow, be it with the 'ho, or elsewhere on earth. In the heavenly visions of St. Theresa, she reports orgasms from being speared by the angel's arrow. RJM may not see it that way, but I say, "sometimes an arrow is not just an arrow."