The Annunaki and Homosexuality - Why it is Natural

[thetruth90]

Nov 22, 2018 21:04:47 GMT -5 zarahan said:

Mutwa has also discovered that reptilian aliens dwell among us, and some white people agree ..

The infamous of Mali Dogon also have the same story of Reptilian extraterrestrials visiting them. The Zulu themselves were not at all ignorant of homosexuality...in fact;

"He (Shake Zulu) made his soldiers remain celibate. With the exception of those already married, he made sexual abstinence mandatory. Many believe that Shaka was a homosexual who had some procreative issues. Would such issues tie into his lifestyle demands for his troops?"

blackthen.com/16-things-that-made-african-king-shaka-zulu-one-of-the-greatest-military-minds-in-history/

As for "gay" animals they are not so at all. What you generally have are outliers, or anomalies, or immatures
at play. Among millions of animals there will always be some outliers, anomalies or marginals. In most instances,
so-called "gay beasts" go on to assume their normal functions, with those of opposite sex.

I'm not too sure about your rationale regarding the occurrence of homosexuality in animals ("nature" as the homosexualologist say). Regardless of why you're saying that it occurs the fact of the matter is that it occurs! These animals of the same sex do in fact have a bonding life love relationship. Here is the write up from wikipedia;

"Homosexual behavior in animals is sexual behavior among non-human species that is interpreted as homosexual or bisexual. This may include same-sex sexual activity, courtship, affection, pair bonding, and parenting among same-sex animal pairs.[1][2][3][4] Research indicates that various forms of this are found in every major geographic region and every major animal group. The sexual behavior of non-human animals takes many different forms, even within the same species, though homosexual behavior is best known from social species.

Scientists perceive homosexual behavior in animals to different degrees. The motivations for and implications of these behaviors have yet to be fully understood, since most species have yet to be fully studied.[5] According to Bruce Bagemihl, the animal kingdom engages in homosexual behavior "with much greater sexual diversity – including homosexual, bisexual and nonreproductive sex – than the scientific community and society at large have previously been willing to accept."[6] Bagemihl adds, however, that this is "necessarily an account of human interpretations of these phenomena".[7] Simon LeVay introduced caveat that "although homosexual behavior is very common in the animal world, it seems to be very uncommon that individual animals have a long-lasting predisposition to engage in such behavior to the exclusion of heterosexual activities. Thus, a homosexual orientation, if one can speak of such thing in animals, seems to be a rarity."[8] One species in which exclusive homosexual orientation occurs, however, is that of domesticated sheep (Ovis aries).[9][10] "About 10% of rams (males), refuse to mate with ewes (females) but do readily mate with other rams."[10]


According to Bagemihl (1999), same-sex behavior (comprising courtship, sexual, pair-bonding, and parental activities) has been documented in over 450 species of animals worldwide.[11]

Among humans in various parts of the world there have been outliers and anomalies, and marginal exceptions that have been tolerated.

I make the argument that there was no such intolerance prior to the spreading of Abrahamic religions. When we get out of Africa (to the places where Africans migrated to) we see that there is no such attempt by the West to hide homosexual behaviors. In fact early anthropologist held the common belief that "Africans were primitive" and for that reason we did not have any reason for sex other than the most basic outcome which is procreation. 

"AMONG THE MANY MYTHS EUROPEANS HAVE CREATED ABOUT AFRICA, the myth that homosexuality is absent

or incidental in African societies is one of the oldest and most enduring. For Europeans, black

Africans, of all the native peoples of the world, most epitomized “primitive man.” Since primitive

man was supposed to be close to nature, ruled by instinct, and culturally unsophisticated, he had to

be heterosexual, his sexual energies and outlets devoted exclusively to their “natural” purpose: biological

reproduction. If black Africans were the most primitive people in all humanity— if they

were, indeed, human, which some debated— then they had to be the most heterosexual." - Boys wives and Female Husbands

The religious Portuguese had accounts of cross dressing young men throughout what is modern day Senegal being "rampant" (or some derogatory comment towards their prevalence). Senegalese under the inferiority complex brought on by Islam and France feel the need to feverishly deny how they were prior to the European's arrival. 

Apparently Zulu shaman has secret knowledge of various Caucasoid aliens in Africa...

Where did you read that? I've never heard him state that in his interviews, nor can find an archive of any type proclaiming those as his statements. 

The only thing wrong with the story of Annunaki, with various claims of lost temples, pyramids and palaces in southern Africa
200,000 years ago, is that these mysterious buildings and artifacts have never been found.

You've already noted Adam's calendar man;



 

Claimants like white

writer M. Tellinger, point to relatively recent stone calendar circles from the 1600s, claiming they go back200,000
years. Having few witnesses, or ancient witness documentation, or credible archaeological evidence, Tellinger tries to
work around the giant holes in his theory by claiming that the secrets were revealed to him by Zulu shaman Credo Mutwa.

Do you honestly think that mainstream white academia would rally behind a claim that Bantu Africans in South Africa were responsible (or at least inheritors of it from an ancestral race) for the oldest man made structure on Earth. Further the implications would show how black people are from a divine source, where as Caucasians wouldn't fit in the narrative. In short of course they will not acknowledge it unless they can bump the dates back to somewhere during AD times   

This is the same Credo Mutwa who in his earlier book "My People My Africa," was advocating an accommodation with apartheid.
Certainly the secret revelation of Mutwa puts things on a religious plane, which is fine as far as religious belief.
But it is not credible as far as African history.

Is the goal to thoroughly access his claims or to discredit him? 

According to white Tellinger, the ancient "Adams Calendar" was created by "Caucasoid" deity Enki. But Enki exhibits very little
"gayness."

We know that white people lie! We know that with all evidence that the "rogue" white explorers bring we must take it in with a grain of salt. None of my theory regarding homosexuality deals with Tellinger, so you trying to tie him to it is quite weak! 

The San, have a religious framework that is nothing like the Caucasoid shennigans of Enki.

You've been shown their homosexual cave arts in Zimbabwe in my first post, but you're haven't acknowledged that for what it is. 

[thetruth90]

Nov 22, 2018 21:05:50 GMT -5 zarahan said:

Nzinga had become ngola, or king, by succeeding her brother, which
was not unusual in a matrilineal society like the Mbundu’s. Less lypical was the fact that she had
ordered her nephew’s death to prevent him from claiming his father’s title. Nzinga proceeded to
organize a guerilla army and personally led her warriors into battle. She successfully outmaneuvered
the Portuguese for nearly four decades (Sweetman 1971,1984: 39-47).
In the late 1640s, a Dutch military attache observed firsthand what must have struck him as the
strange organization of her court. As ngola, Nzinga was not “queen” but “king” of her people. She
ruled dressed as a man, surrounded by a harem of young men who dressed as women and were her
“wives.” Wherever she appeared, her subjects fell to their knees and kissed the ground (Dapper
1670: 238). Nzinga managed to preserved Ndongo independence for a generation.

Sure, but Nzinga's case only confirms the above about outliers, anomalies and marginal exceptions. Hers was
a temporary outlier performance, a role play, that emphasized that she was just as strong a ruler
as any man. This role play was logical given women's roles at the time, and aided her political agenda.
But after the role play performance was over, things returned to normal. Joan of Arc likewise dressed
as a man to aid recruitment to her political plans, but after the game ran its course, things returned
to normal- again outliers, exceptions and temporary anomalies, before normalcy returned. No queen
after Nzinga did likewise, nor did female leaders in the post-Joan wars after, get up on horses and ride
about the battlefield as Joan of Arc did. The temporary performance was just that.

Honestly she sounds like a typical stud today, with divine authority over her kingdom. It's humorous to say the least if you think that you can explain the gay in every reported instance of homosexuality in pre-colonial. 

"In most cases, alternative gender statuses constituted lifelong identities. 1n contrast, roles in age differentiated

same-sex relations were temporary, at least for the younger partners, who eventually

graduated to adult status, and to the active role in same-sex intercourse. Even so, the role of the

younger partner— and in some places the older partner— was labeled with a distinct term, and relationships

sometimes persisted well into the adult years of the younger partner. Boy-wives in traditional

Azande culture were called ndongo-techi-la, while in southern Africa they were called

tinkonkana, nkhonsthana, and nkonkana. In contemporary Lesotho, older and young women in same sex

relationships are called “mummy” and “baby.” These labels provide the basis of a social identity.

To refer to oneself by one of them was to indicate both one’s involvement in same-sex relationships

and one’s role (sexual and social) within them. While identities based on age-differentiated

relations are certainly different from contemporary “gay” identity, which entails a political stance

as well as a social identity, their existence problematizes the claim that sexual identities are

uniquely Western or modern." - Boy wives and Female husbands

It's crazy how many of you accuse Europeans of being in denial about the truth on numerous subject, but you all are like children...tribal children when it comes to this. The silly denial of truth regarding who we are is why people call Negroes dumb. This is the only race (outside of religious zealots) who actively hate segments of their population for non political issues. 



There is an uncanny correlation between the World populations who clearly come from black people and the deliberate poisoning of their minds against homosexuality. Many of our people don't know that their minds are poisoned with learned hatred. There is only one culprit.

[thetruth90]

Nov 22, 2018 21:18:48 GMT -5 zarahan said:

First, not everyone who dressed or acted as a member of the opposite sex was gay. Most tribes recognized men who preferred to do stuff women did and vice versa,

SIR!



I don't know where you're from, but anywhere that I have lived a man who dresses as a woman is considered among other things "a "f*g"). I've never heard anyone else try to justify cross dressers as anything other than a homosexual. If you have to guess what's going on in those situations then it's likely what it appears.

Second, Every Indian society did NOT give "gay" people a high place in their society. SOME Indian tribes recognized "two-spirit" people, and granted them tolerance, and some special ritual roles, but they did not necessarily grant them a high place in the culture- special ritual slots perhaps, but overall prestigious? Not necessarily. Its a diverse picture, and as noted previously above, some 2-spirits were not gay. The Lakota or "Sioux" oft seen as among the more tolerant, sometimes placed the "two spirit people" particularly the men who were seen as weaker and more effeminate, APART from the main gathering of warriors- and put them near the camp of women, which was often not as well cared for, and considered LESS PRESTIGIOUS than the mainstream warrior camp.
culturallyboundgender.wordpress.com/2013/03/09/toward-an-end-to-appropriation-of-indigenous-two-spirit-people-in-trans-politics-the-relationship-between-third-gender-roles-and-patriarchy/

Well DUH!!!



A "twink"...tend (those who are outwards about it) to dainty and submissive. Why would you ever a twink who wants to out feminize women on the front lines of war? Not all young gay dudes are docile however. The quote that I provided from the Ghanian who referenced the words of her grandmother makes it clear, that in Africa pederasty (WHERE THE GREEKS GOT IT FROM..) was the thing to do among soldiers to strengthen their bonds during war. She even brought up metaphysical believes AMONG AFRICANS with regards to energy being transferred to the next solider via anal sex.

The picture is mixed. The anthropological literature shows mixed/switch gendered people as held in esteem AT TIMES, but it ALSO shows the opposite- ridicule and scorn. THis is the flip side we seldom hear about. FOr example:

It's sad watching my people trying to justify evil. No they were not considered taboo.

"Alongside the sources that refer to berdaches as honored or accepted, there are others that describe negative responses. The Papago "scorned" berdaches;l3S the Cocopa "apparently disliked" them.136 The Choctaws held them "in great contempt,"137 the Seven Nations "in the most sovereign contempt."

Notice you actually referenced one of the infamous "traitor" tribes who were considered "civilized" by the Europeans. You use obviously European (even joined the Confederacy and hunted down and tortured run away slaves) influenced Native Americans out of all of them to make this point. No please try again, with people who were not obviously tainted by European values.

The Apache treated berdaches respectfully when they were present, but ridiculed them behind their backs.143 Although the Zuni accepted their berdache, "there was some joking and laughing about his ability to attract the young men to his home."144 In some groups, berdaches' partners were also ridiculed or despised...

Such a distinction is meaningful because, as we already noted, not all berdaches were homosexual, and not all individuals who engaged in homosexual acts were berdaches... Among the Mohave, ridicule focused on the male berdache's claims to have a female anatomy rather than on his supposed cowardice. Mohave berdaches themselves teased other men for being cowardly,14" something they would not have done had they themselves been vulnerable to this accusation. Sometimes a berdache's partners were ridiculed, even though they did engage in combat.."

[/i][/quote]

If you'd never seen Spartacus then you should watch the season with Barca.



Barca was one of the if not the top warrior on the roster. He had "twink" boyfriend who was "dainty". He told him to act he had a set of balls in one episode when Barca was going off to war. Those situations are common to this day among gay people (fem and masculine). You're not homosexual (presumably), so I think of you like a white person trying to tell an experienced black American about what live is like living in the racist United States. It doesn't work.

[zarahan]

Regardless of why you're saying that it occurs the fact of the matter is that it occurs!

Yes I agree it occurs among animals, but it is marginal to the animal world before, and
the mainstream of the various species, even among the domesticated sheep. ANd not
all of what looks to be "homosexual" is so. You have various juveniles and
immatures doing sex play, but upon maturity, go on to mate normally,
just like the mainstream of the species. So as your own info says- quote:
"Thus, a homosexual orientation, if one can speak of such thing in
animals, seems to be a rarity."[8]

Likewise another article says:
"But while hundreds of species have been documented doing it on isolated
occasions, only a handful have made it a habitual part of their lives, says Vasey."
(Paul Vasey, Professor of Psychology, of the University of Lethbridge in Alberta, Canada).


the myth that homosexuality is absent or incidental in African societies is one
of the oldest and most enduring.

Agreed it is a myth, and I have argued with people on this on Egyptsearch before.
Just like people on every continent, homosexuals also appear in Africa. Sure.
No argument there. You are correct.


You've been shown their homosexual cave arts in Zimbabwe in my first post, but you're haven't acknowledged that for what it is.

Sure. I have no doubt various grafitti, by various San, appears in the caves. No argument there.
I had said that their religious beliefs were far from the shennigans of the myth of Enki, which
Credo Mutwa is trying to link Africans on with. The Enki thing is primarily Sumerian from the
Middle East, not southern African.

[zarahan]

I don't know where you're from, but anywhere that I have lived a man who dresses as a woman is considered among other things "a "f*g"). I've never heard anyone else try to justify cross dressers as anything other than a homosexual. If you have to guess what's going on in those situations then it's likely what it appears.

But you are again showing that you are misinterpreting the complexity of non-European
cultures. As already shown various people who cross-dressed were not necessarily
homosexual. Some were shamans doing a particular performance, some were normal
heteros who disliked war and juvenile male hijinks and preferred certain things women
traditionally were good at, and so on. SOME were gay, but others were not. It should
not be assumed that cross-dressing equals homosexuality. YOu are attempting to impose
a "white" concept from your understanding, on the complex reality of the rest of the world.

[zarahan]

I make the argument that there was no such intolerance prior to the spreading of Abrahamic religions.

Your argument here completely fails, because one of the major pre-Christian
religions of the ancient world, condemned homosexuality. Specifically Zoroasntiansim,
which became the makor religion of ANcient Persia. As one history notes:

"Zoroastrianism, the teachings of Zarathustra, is the most homophobic ancient faith known to
modern scholarship. The fateful Zoroastrian doctrine (that all homosexuals, active or passive,
are inherently demonic, and must be put to death when detected)"..
--Encyclopedia of Homosexuality, Vol 1

Indeed some pro-gay writers argue that the Jews learnt intolerance from this source when they came
back from Persia (Babylon). "[intolerance] was to make its way into the religious tradition of the
Jews, who escaped their Babylonian captivity under Persian rule in 538 b.c." (- VOl 1.)

The facts of intolerant Zoroastrian doctrine are what they are, but if "passed on" argument is correct,
then it was really the NON Abrahamic pacesetters that really got the intolerance ball rolling.

[zarahan]

There is an uncanny correlation between the World populations who clearly come from black people and the deliberate poisoning of their minds against homosexuality. Many of our people don't know that their minds are poisoned with learned hatred. There is only one culprit.

Your argument contradicts itself. First you condemn the Abrahamic religions as uniquely intolerant, and
indeed condemn the white man for brainwashing the dumb negroes into hating homosexuality. But in fact,
if it is the white man that is so intolerant, how come then it is the white nations that are so vigorously
pushing open gay marriage and rights, and condemning African countries that do not follow suit? How
come it is white churches that are condemning the African churches for their strictures against homosexuality?
Your own map clearly contradicts your argument. Note that it is the primarily white countries where rights
and tolerance from homosexuality are the highest.

Second, it should not be assumed that dark people have any sort of "natural" affinity for homosexuality. They
are no better or worse than white or yellow people. In fact there is a long tradition of disfavor towards
homosexuality in various areas, long BEFORE any white people or Arabs showed up to bring Abrahamic religion.
One only has to look into the details, and they readily emerge. The Mbuti Pygmies for example long have strong
prohibitions against same-sex relations. Among the Nuer and Lango tribes of Uganda tribal laws stipulated
the death penalty for any engaging in homosexual acts. Among some Bantu in northern Kenya, homosexual acts
are considered to be a source of uncleaness and impurity. These strictures were in place BEFORE white people
or Arabs showed up. (James Neil, Origins of Same sex relations).

The same pattern applies to the Americas. It should not be automatically assumed that
Native Americans have any "special" affinity for homosexuality. One of the greatest Native
American cultures, the Aztecs, specifically had laws AGAINST homosexuality for example.
In fact homosexuality, along with incest and adultery was punishable by death under Aztec
law (A Natural History of Homosexuality- By Francis Mondimore). The coming of the Spanish
conquistadors therefore with their "Abrahamic relgion" was old news, and not needed for any
restrictions against homosexuality. Such were ALREADY in place long BEFORE any white people
showed up.

Any notion of kinder, gentler, dusky gay-loving peoples that were "ruined by the white man"
or "Abrahamic religions" or related variants of such notions, thus fails on this count as well.

[zarahan]

Honestly she [Nzinga] sounds like a typical stud today, with divine authority over her kingdom. It's humorous to say the least if you think that you can explain the gay in every reported instance of homosexuality in pre-colonial.

But here is where your understanding seems superficial. You seem to be attempting to impose 21st century
white gay cultural concepts on to what is clearly something quite different. It is clear from most
histories that Nzinga would do this not because of any homosexual meanings, but that
taking on male attire was a smart political move to impress as regards her political determination
and strength, not because she wanted to appear as a homosexual "stud." As a leader dealt
one of the toughest hands available, fighting both native enemies AND the European imperialists,
Nzinga pulled out all the stops and her behavior shows it, for she made alliances with the white
Dutch imperialists to continue the struggle against the Portuguese, playing one against the other,
even as she also had to fight INTERNAL enemies, in a culture that did not have many female warrior
leaders. It has nothing to do with any homosexual "studs."

You seem to be doing the same thing you accuse the white man of- imposing his concepts on a much
different cultural reality.

Its like white feminists who condemn black men as "lazy" and black women as "oppressed"
because they see some African cultures where women do mostly the farming and marketplace
buying and selling while men focus on hunting, war, metalwork and other "hard" crafts etc etc.
But the white feminists attempt to impose their EUrocentric white concepts on a quite
different African reality. The African women did not feel themselves "oppressed." They
actually were in quite a strong position. They felt men had their roles and women theirs.
And their role actually put them in the drivers seat. Via marketplace trading, they
controlled the bulk of the household money and even their husbands had to come to them for
ready cash to do some things. And they controlled the main food production, to which their
husbands had to toe the line if they wanted to eat, since hunting did not put food on the
table every day.

Based on such things, a critic like Umar Johnson or the Black Muslims could possibly charge that you
are just as brainwashed by white homosexual culture or white feminist variants, as the allegedly dumb
negroes you criticize above.

[Tukuler al~Takruri]

Yep

Skewed Western feminist view rolled back.

Women in parts of Greater Africa clitorectomy and other cuttings.

Feminist consider all type cuttings genital mutilation.

This week a USA court upheld the cultural right to FGM.
www.npr.org/2018/11/21/669945997/judge-says-federal-law-against-female-genital-mutilation-violates-u-s-constituti

My opinion shouldn't outweigh a mentally fit person's cultural heritage.

[thetruth90]

Nov 22, 2018 22:24:42 GMT -5 zarahan said:

thetruth90 says:
Your understanding of homosexuality is rooted entirely on what Caucasians have taught you. You all don't have any doctrine against homosexuality coming out of Africa. If there was ever such a document on record then the Negroes at Sa-Neter studios would etch that doctrine in the sidewalk payments along their Harlem streets as a logical basis for their hatred against homosexuality. Not a one of them have ever produced any doctrine against it, so if the 42 ideals of Maat really stated that then we would be aware of it.

WHat you say seems incorrect or misleading on two counts.

1) There need not be an explicit doctrine if the activity in question is seen as marginal-

That makes no sense considering that many accounts detail just how open and prevalent homosexuality was in parts of Africa that today execute you for it. Here is one example again from the Wolof people of Senegal.

"The old Wolof name for homosexual men is gor-digen, or men-women. Armand Marie Corre, a French navy doctor stationed in Senegal in the 1870s, writes how he met many locals "with feminine dress and demeanour, who he was told, made their living from prostitution." Dr Corre referred to the Wolofs' appetite for "morbid eroticism" in his critical report; the oldest known written records of homosexuality in Senegal....In the 1930s, European reports about the exotic gor-digen increase in numbers, reflecting their visibility in the streets of Dakar. Traveller Geoffrey Gorer reports the men-women are "a common sight" and that "they do their best to deserve the epithet by their mannerisms, their dress and their make-up; some even dress their hair like women."....British historian Michael Crowder, travelling West Africa in the 1950s, was also puzzled by the visibility of the gor-digen and male prostitution in Dakar. Even on Place Prôtet - which is now Dakar's prestigious centre square Place de l'Indépendence - young Senegalese males openly waited to be picked up by elder men"

www.afrol.com/features/36319

This was the same group that Diop was from. He writes that they came directly from Kemet and provides proof for his claims. These people are ancient. What's interesting is that the same thing happens today when it comes to Tranny chasing "straight men". Richard Prior, Eddy Murphy, and Afrika Bambatta, Young Buck are the first to come to mind. 




This is an normal and ancient human sexual practice. Men today try to make excuses for their feelings and condemn other men for acting on the feeling that their petrified to live out. 

2) There is a clear holding against homosexuality in Egyptian ideals. While homosexuality was known in Egypt,
and in some places tolerated,the major thrust of Egyptian thought, the ideal of the virtuous man was to eschew
homosexuality, which was considered to be impure and defiling.

You say that, but there is no mention of that in the 42 ideals of Maat. None!!! If it an issue then it would certainly be in the ancient confessions, but it is not. 

This does not mean homosexuality did not happen- it did- but that the highest ideals of the society were set AGAINST IT, and the ancient Kemetians of Africa, put that in writing.

No it was not. In the first post is a video from a lecturer on Sa Neterer who mentions how one of the secret ways that ancient pharaohs would open their pineal gland was through anal sex. 

[zarahan]

Yes, there are the homosexual prostitutes in Senegal, you are correct, but these are marginal to
the overall Senegalese society. As to Kemet, sure, some individuals, even the pharaohs did this
and that, but you miss the point that under the ideal of the society, under Maat, homosexuality was
considered to be immoral and impure, something to be avoided and set aside. So even if the gay Wolof
came from Egypt, they, along with Eddy Murphy, the homosexual prostitutes, the various transvestites,
etc would still be inconsistent with the declarations of virtue making up part of Maat.
-------------------------------------------

DATA - quote:

"Book of the Dead – The Book of the Dead is a compilation of funerary (tomb) texts, gathered together from the 18th-21st Dynasties (1552-945 B.C.), although it derives from earlier sources. These spells were meant to preserve and protect the body, particularly from terrifying demons who were believed to inhabit the region before reaching the blessed kingdom of Osiris. Chapter 125, titled “The Protestation of Guiltlessness,” included two sets of “negative confessions” that the deceased was to declare before Osiris and forty-two other gods, to show that he or she was worthy to be granted eternal life.20 The first series states straightforwardly certain actions that the deceased declares never to have committed, while the second series names and is addressed to specific deities, also disclaiming certain actions. Acts that are considered “impure” include everything from murder (A14), blaspheming a god (A8), using dishonest scales (A25), and committing adultery (B19), to lying (B9), being quarrelsome (B25), being loud-mouthed (B37), and making someone weep (A13). Clearly no one could say that he or she had never done any of these things! Perhaps Hans Goedicke is right (1967) when he suggested that the deceased only picked those declarations that could truthfully be made, while overlooking the others.21 In any case, four of the declarations are relevant to our discussion; the initial translations are by John Wilson (in J.B. Pritchard22):

(A20) “I have not had sexual relations with a boy.” Parkinson notes that this reads, “I did not nk a nkk(w),” which is best translated as “I did not sexually penetrate another male,” not indicating any age bracket.23 Later inscriptions in the temple at Edfu (in Memphis) and in a papyrus from Tanis stated that it was a taboo “to unite oneself with an hm [effeminate male] or with a nkk [passive homosexual].”24 Yet, other versions of A20 are more general, stating something like “I have not committed fornication.” (Budge, 1951) or “I have not copulated [illicitly].” (Allen, 1960; cf. Faulkner, 1972).25

(B27) “O His-Face-Behind-Him, who comes forth from Tep-het-djat, I have not been perverted; I have not had sexual relations with a boy .” Tep-het-djat was a sanctuary in the region of Memphis, the northern capital of Egypt (about 12 miles south of modern Cairo) during the Early Dynastic Period and Old Kingdom.26 Budge translates this confession as, “Hail, thou whose face is [turned] backwards, who comes forth from the Dwelling, I have not committed acts of impurity, neither have I lain with men.”27 Posener notes how homosexuality was forbidden in Memphis and two other nomes (provinces).28..

(A21) I have not defiled myself.” Because of its vagueness, Budge translates this as “I have not polluted myself [in the holy places of the god of my city].” – filling in from the Papyrus of Amenneb (British Museum, No. 9964).29 T.G. Allen translates from the Ryerson Papyrus (OIM No. 787, University of Chicago): “I have not been unchaste, as priest of the city-god.” – drawing from the Turin, Leyden T 2, and L 3074 Papyri.30

(B20) O Maa-Intef, who comes forth from the Temple of Min, I have not defiled myself.” Budge translates this as, “Hail, thou who lookest upon what is brought to him, who comest forth from the Temple of Amsu [Min], I have not committed a sin against purity.”31 Min, an Egpytian fertility god, was normally depicted with an erect penis, which sometimes he held in his left hand. Bunson notes that “his festivals were joyous occasions”32 and one wonders what that meant with a fertility god! As Posener notes, “The Egyptians, who devoted themselves enthusiastically to the pleasures of life, knew how to appreciate the art of ‘spending a merry day’ – to quote their expression.”33 Still, perhaps homosexual acts were frowned upon in the sacred precincts of Min, since they were, in fact, infertile.

At certain points and in certain strata, then, the Book of the Dead does look upon both active and passive homosexuality as a “sexual taboo”34 and as “a deviation from Maat,”35 the goddess and path of universal harmony.36 .."
-------------------------

NOTES:

20. Mercatante, p. 24; Pritchard, p. 34-36. 21. Greenberg, p. 133. 22. Pritchard, p. 34; from Charles Maystre’s compilation, 1937. 23. Parkinson, p. 61-62. 24. Deakin, p. 33; Greenberg, p. 133. 25. Budge, p. 361; Allen, p. 196; cf. Faulkner, p. 31. 26. Greenberg, p. 132; Thompson, J.A., “Memphis,” ISBE, III,1986, p. 316-17. 27. Budge, p. 369-70. 28. Later the capital of Egypt was moved to Heracleopolis (in central Egypt) in the Middle Kingdom, and then to Thebes (in southern Egypt) in the 18th Dynasty; still throughout Egyptian history Memphis would remain an important religious and cultural center, only c. 80 miles from where the Israelites settled. Cf. Posener, p. 279; Thompson, p. 317. 29. Budge, p. 361. 30. Allen, p. 196,203. 31. Budge, p. 368. 32. Bunson, p. 248. 33. Posener, p. 260. 34. Montserrat, p. 140. 35. Parkinson, p. 62. 36. Shaw, p. 180.

REFERENCES:
Allen, T. George, ed., The Egyptian Book of the Dead Documents in the Oriental Institute Museum at the University of Chicago, 1960.
Budge, E.A. Wallis, The Book of the Dead, 1951.
Bunson, Margaret R., Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 2002.
Deakin, Terence, “Evidence for Homosexuality in Ancient Egypt,” International Journal of Greek Love, 1(1), 1965, p. 31-38.
Faulkner, Raymond, trans., The Ancient Egyptian Book of the Dead, 1990. Carol Andrews, ed.
Giles, F.J., Ikhnaton: Legend and History, 1970.
Greenberg, David, The Construction of Homosexuality, 1988.
Mercatante, Anthony S., Who’s Who in Egyptian Mythology, 2nd ed., 1995.
Montserrat, Dominic, Akhenaten: History, Fantasy, and Ancient Egypt, 2000.
Montserrat, Dominic, Sex and Society in Graeco-Roman Egypt, 1996.
Parkinson, R.B., “‘Homosexual’ Desire and Middle Kingdom Literature,” Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, vol. 81, 1995, p. 57-76.
Posener, Georges, Dictionary of Egyptian Civilization, English ed. 1959.
Pritchard, James B., Ancient Near Eastern Texts: Relating to the Old Testament, 3rd ed., 1969.
Shaw, Ian, Ancient Egypt: A Very Short Introduction, 2004.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You say that, but there is no mention of that in the 42 ideals of Maat. None!!! If it an issue then it would certainly be in the ancient confessions, but it is not.

All you have done is pull a graphic someone created off the web, which you are trying to pass off as
the sum total of Maat. Using that simplistic approach, since the graphic does not specifically mention
avoiding murder, then murdering people must therefore be OK. It does not specifically mention rape or sexual
exploitation, so then rape must be OK. That is the absurd "logic" you are pushing. You have not
produced any credible reference to Egyptian writings, or credible scholarship. But even taking
the graphic at face value, the following principle enunciated is consistent with what the ancient
held:

"I hold purity in high esteem."

It is clear that this principle takes in the extensive documentation referenced above, and the clear moral
declarations affirmed by the ancients. If you accept the principle that purity is to valued under Maat, then
you would not be seemingly trying to pass off erring pharaohs or commoners, or by even by extension the homosexual
prostitutes, celebrities and transvestites, as consistent with Maat.

[djoser-xyyman]

Associations of Bisexuality and Homosexuality with Handedness and Footedness: A Latent Variable Analysis Approach
Ulrich S. TranEmail authorMichael KossmeierMartin Voracek

link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-018-1346-9

[djoser-xyyman]

Speaking about what is natural


www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-JJDsWn-sw&feature=youtu.be

I never heard this stat. Only a few men is needed to impregnate ALL the women on the planet. See why women are so important to our species. Men are dispensable?