For Honour

Honour is often misinformed; it's a value issue that is ripe for abuse. For example, hard rape, is the result of an ambivalent practice, of Honour. Ambivalent, means, dual outcomes, or, two effects. In U.S.A, rape is a solid beef (respectable) but in my country, and others, the opposite. A rapist invites being murdered, in my country, if they relate how much enjoyment their victim loved experiencing: that's a statement that precedes the rapist getting murdered, however, the rapist is not insane; they are extremely correct. If you understand rape, from a clinicians view: from the perspective of the one who actually brings the victim to actual healing, & restores them to functionality, you would know that victims of both genders are more certainly guaranteed to experience intense orgasm during rape, & are absolutely not likely to experience that much intensity, outside of physical violence. So, the rapist is correct, & society is ignorant, & doesn't even know the true story of the experience of the victims or anything about the event. The problem, with rape, is that it, alone, satisfies the average, majority person's definition of "best sex ever." Hands down. Only rape satisfies that definition, and, it fulfills that definition, 1000 times stronger than consensual sex ever could. And, that is not the problem of rape. The problem is that the event is a package. Of that, plus physical violence. Plus violation. Plus betrayal. It's the ambivalence, of the rapist, that is the problem. They aim at the absolute best sex. But, they attain that, violently. They accomplish great love, with great violence. And, because both truths are communicated, absolutely, victims suffer trauma, until they are helped to stop assuming love is violent; until they are helped to split the experience, into two realizations: firstly, that love is powerful, and, secondly, that love is never anything except loving. With those two realizations helping them process being raped, they stop being traumatized by the memory, because, they no longer interpret intense pleasure, as good, or valuable, automatically, and, they learn to identify that evil people abuse pleasure, as often as they abuse pain. So, they are no longer in a state of perpetual dissonance.

Anyway, as I said, the issue of Honour, is ripe for abuse. Honour, is one sub-type, of many, if a class of issues, called, value issues. And, as with all issues, each issue, has it's definition, and it has it's practices. Aka, application, or, workings out of. Because Human beings are both mind, & soul, that is why issues are defined the way they are, and that is how come the definitions always have consequence, because the human mind creates neutral, non-judgemental, abstract, symbolic patterns, that represent life. And then, the patterns, that exist in the mind, are the forms, which are fulfilled. The human body works out, or works within the patterns, & symbolic forms. 

So, that is also why issues are issues. "Issue" in the dictionary, has the implications, of an inevitable consequence. For example, the movement of rain water, fallen from the clouds, where gravity continually moves the water towards the sea, but, the sea evaporates, due to low elevation having higher temperatures, so, the issue, issuing forth, is an eternal issue, because, cold, dry air, which is the only air that high elevation produces, is continually rising, and, due to the properties of the interactions of gasses, hot, heavy air continually must fill that void. But, upon reaching elevation, hot, heavy air is cooled, due to rising, and, releases it's humidity as rain. Which falls, to produce rivers, which returns the water to the sea, where the cycle begins again, anew.

That Is one full definition, of one issue. Given, as a demonstration,  of how all issues are defined. I want you to take special care, to notice, in the definition of how the issue takes shape, that the definition, is non-judgemental, and, the definition can not be abused, to judge. 

The only possible relevant facts, within the valid definition, of the issue of water, on the planet Earth, are, Einstein's law of relativity, which gives us a model for gravity, the law of thermodynamics, which gives us a model, for modeling energy, &, potentially, we may include the kinetic molecular theory of gases. 

So, take special note, of the fact, that:

1. The definition is amoral. It is neutral. It is symbolic. A definition can not contain moral, or ethical information. It can not, and never does. 

2. The definition, describes cause, & effect, using things like absolute laws, & universal constants. That is how come it manages to be what it is, which is, a pattern, and, a pattern is neither good, nor bad. It is not evil, or moral. It is not entangled with the senses, it is a creation of the brain, and, the brain doesn't know good from evil. Brain function, is, mathematically, base 2. Base 2, is a mathematical description, of a number system with only two possible numbers. The brain is not even binary. It is base 2. There is only signal, or no signal. Pattern, or, no pattern. On. Or, not on. Electrical charge, or, no input. 

So, when the brain creates it's definition of the pattern of an issue, it creates something that is only one thing. It deals, only, in On, & Off, so, the definition of an issue is always simple, simple, simple. 

Anyway, the issue of Honour, is a value issue. And, the part about honour, that is in question, to be examined, by me, this morning, Is whether or not honour, as a symbol, is a representative, of absolute value. Ok? My point of analysis, is to look at applying various concepts of various ways people independently, personally define their definition of honour. And, I'll be looking at the consequences, because of their personal definition.

So, when I raise the topic of honour, right? I have invoked either the concept, or, the presentation of an application, has evoked a contemplation of the concept. .so, pretend with me, for a moment, that you and I are contemplative, and that we give a fuck, about origins, and, for whatever good reason, & motive, let's play pretend, even if we are not, that you and I  are both motivating, by mutual agreement, towards realizing a true(true-er) symbolic definition of Honor. Either because we are good people, fixing it before it breaks, or, because some atrocity has happened, and, our present moment definition if honour, as it turns out, turns out we are in support of rape, by agreement. Either way, let's forget why we chose this, and let's choose this.

Is honour absolute? Right? If I marry someone, later on, today, and, I promise to honor my commitment, have I created anything that is unchangeable? Have I created something that is eternal? Have I? And, please assume I will be abundantly, eternally successful, at fulfilling my word. But, EVEN SO,  when i committed myself, to an unconditional, eternal commitment point, what are the inevitable consequences, of the pattern, of the symbol, of the idea manifested? What is the application?

And, if you say that my fulfillment of honour, must absolutely dictate that my values become absolutes(unchanging constants, like gravity, & the speed of light), then, you are right, but you are only as right as a rapist Is. Because, for the rapist, and the victim, both, the value, of rape sex, is a fixed constant. It is a known value. Women orgasm, during rape, who can NEVER achieve orgasm, at any other time in their life. And, the rapist defines honour, that the good value of rape sex justifies the violence required to get there. The rapist, views rape sex by it's value, as absolutely valuable. And they are right. They are absolutely correct. They don't know anything about the negative consequences of physical violence, and, they have zero awareness, of the absolutely unprecedented, unforeseeable nuclear bomb of insanity that is set off, when absolute proof of love, co-exists, in a moment with absolute proof of violence. So, they are only partly right.

A rapist is correct, that sex is honorable. But, they are 💯 wrong to assume that that is absolutely true. Sex is not honorable, absolutely. Never, ever, ever, is it always honorable.

So, follow along, by stretching past your dissonance, & tolerate your pain. In order to keep up with the arguments. The question is, what is the relationship between true Honor, aka, the definition of the pattern, called Honor.....what is the relationship between Honor, and absolution? 

How does Honor relate, to absolutes? If I promise you, to Honor you, forever, can I fulfill my honour? Absolutely? Can I act out my Honor of you, absolutely? Can I do It, in all conditions? In every circumstance? Regardless of the conditions? Regardless of the circumstance?

Ok. Let's take the pattern of that question, and let's use that pattern, to expand our understanding of the issue. If I successfully marry you, tonight, let's say. Now, if the definition of Honor, intersects with absolutes, then, when I married you, which, the ceremony is usually a public pledge, demonstrating a fact that has already been I'm existence, for a long time, prior, however, at whatever point one person married another, whether ceremonial, or, sexually, or, by way of deep, intimate conversation, regardless of the five W's, let's say it happened. Now, is there anything, between us, that you, or i would say, even if just in theory, but, we would want something we say *should*****  or that we want to or can or can not believe *could**** be true...did anything become absolutely true, between us? If we both get therapy and read lots of books and check off all the boxes, and do our best, is an absolute fact, one of the possible, potential consequences? 

If you're not a rapist, or, if you are pre-aware of the philosophical first principles that underpin the NATURAL (always present, always true) philosophy, behind the lawful enforcement of inalienable, inviolable, omni-present, unconditionally present basic human rights, & priviledges, then, your answer to all if these questions, of whether or not my honour should be a permanent, unchanging high value assignment, to anything....your answer, is a resounding NO! (As well as a powerfully unspoken desire to have valid justofication supporting your need for the answer to be YES) 

So, If I marry you, you want my value assignment to be high. And you want it to be fixed. Right? High valuation, & you want it to be an absolute constant. A permanently, exclusively, unconditionally high value assignment.....that's what you want from me. And, you want to reap the benefit of all of the consequences, of a system where an absolutely high value assignment, attached to the definition of who you are, as a person, is the unchanging constant. You want that to be my TRUTH. Not my commitment point

 My REALITY. Right?

That's where your Yes comes from. You want honour to set high values, independent of you, that remain fixed, no matter what, as a high value assignment

 

However, we talked about that. A rapist does that. Right? That's how you end up with rape. 

So, what is the substance, of your denial? Because, we proved that unconditionally high, permanently high value assignments and attachments, enables both marriage, as well as rape. So, that will never do. We need something better, than one person valuing. 

So what is the substance, to your denial? Why should Honor never be absolute? Why should Honor be a variable, instead of a fact? Yes? Why should it be contextual, instead?

Well, first off, let's be honest, about the idea of me marrying you, later on tonight..... you probably immediately ruled out the possibility. You cancelled the pattern of the idea immediately. You saw no value, no truth, and, you looked, and you saw no quality, aka, no GOOD value, aka justification, aka merit, aka, benefit, in a manifestation of the symbols I mentioned, because you saw no manifestation, of any of what I mentioned, at all. Right?  

So, here I am talking about choosing to honour you, and, you cancelled the possibility if it ever happening

 

So, let's ask ourselves, is the issue of Honour, a personal issue? Is it TRULY something that only ONE person can accomplish?  Can i commit to honour you, & absolutely follow through? 

Yes. And no. What you don't know, is that, me personally, I already treat absolutely everyone exactly the same. In my head, the value of each person is fixed. And, that is not something I did, for no reason. I actually see the proof and evidence, and the reality of every person's value, as a person. My honour of everyone is not just me valuing everyone highly. It is also a fact, of who everyone is. So, my honour, my value assignment, is always being validated by the reality external to me. And, the definition of value. And, everything (everyone) I know is constantly validating my definition of value. I mean, CONSTANTLY. You have no idea. People i know, are FOREVER proving me right. They are praising me, validating me, attesting to me, so on. And so forth.

However, honour is not an objective. I can not commit it, without support. I can not, and I DO NOT honour you, if you don't show up, to be honored. I do not value anyone, who does not show up, to be valued. So, honour Is, or rather, it can be an absolutely high valuing. However. Honor only gets practiced, with consent. If there is consensus (all in agreement. All showing up, to experience the agreement) then, the high value, and the high valuation, and the high valuing, that Honor represents, have the possibility of being a possibility. 

However, only the lover is loveable. Do you understand? If something or someone is not loveable, they CAN NOT be loved!  So, if we agreed, consensually, that we should Honor each other, Honor is a commitment point. However, it's only an abstract pattern. It's an unreal idea. That agreement is not a reality. It is merely a pattern, in the mind. 

We could talk, until we realize we share the same patterns. We could talk until we agree that our patterns are desireable. We could talk until we realize our patterns are true. We could talk until we realize that the truth of who we are now has consequences and we can talk until we realize that who we are to each other has evolved from beyond who we are being, and we could talk about being who we are to each other, to each other. 

However, Honor is a matter of presence. In order for the value of Honor to be practiced, there are dependencies. Something valuable has to happen. Two people have to be present. Two have to both show up. Intentionally, and actually. Then, honour can take place.

And, there are conditions. Honor, is not a fact, but it depends on the conditions. If I show up, or, if you show up, for the sake of Honor, maybe I don't show up. Right? Was honor your motivation? Turns out....no. it wasn't. The possibility of honour was your motivation..  and, if I agreed to show up, and didn't, what did I do? I dishonoured you. I violated you.

And, let's say two people both showed up. Does that mean that the event is honoring? Absolutely NO! Because, the word honour, has no implications. It is an all inclusive word. When i say Honor, It only means that someone showed up. The word doesn't define what took place. It only defines that something CAN take place. So, dishonor, and Honor., are now possible, because two people showed up. 

So, what if you take that showing up we did, and what if you do nothing of value, within that Time and space? What If that? Well, then, I can honour you. I can not even Honor Honor itself. Because the possibility for good value is spent, and gone, and there is nothing of value because of it. Or, you could take the fact of both of our presence and fulfill that honour with violence. Right? And, should I Honor violence? Can i? Did Jesus Honor the men who murdered him? Could he have. ??? The answer is no!  No honoring took place! 

And, let's go back to our marriage. You're always free to, so, what if, after I have committed to be in love with you, forever, what if do not do anything that I love? Can i make that commitment, and fulfill it, on my own? Or, is that fulfillment conditional upon both of us? 

And, I'm not saying anything about sex!!!!!! The topic is honour. But, marriage is a commitment, to Honor. It is not a commitment to have sex. It is a commitment to Honor. And, so, what if we don't have sex? Ok? What if you decide against it? What are the consequences, in terms of honour? In terms of Honor, the second that you stopped honoring our sexuality, assuming you had, previously, is the exact moment when it came impossible to Honor you. That's the moment that either of us being married to each other, ended. We are no longer married.

And, what if I commit to love you. But. You're not committed to love? Right? Ok? When I committed to marry you, that was conditional, and dependent upon you being someone who loves love and chooses it. My success, in loving you, depends upon your success, in loving love. If you fail, then, my commitment ceases to exist. And, almost all of the problems that everyone is experiencing, in their marriages, is because they believe that they are still married, in fact, when, the facts prove that they are not. So, they persist, in what is NOT marriage.

Now, what if we are not doing a marriage? Should we tend to the manifestation, or should we hold, to the truth? We should tend, not to the fulfillments of the definitions, but, we should tend to the definitions themselves. So, should we manage our sex? Should we agree to a schedule? Should we make it happen? 

Absolutely not. We should live our agreement, not make any agreement. The truth is, if you don't define marriage, as conditional, & with dependencies, then, you could meet the love of your life, and pass them by, like two ships in the night. Because, your definition of the issue, is what makes it possible to see what is true about reality.  If you don't tend to your definitions of the issues, then, nothing can ever happen, for you, nor with you, always and forever.  If you don't know the pattern of the definition of the issue. You are blind, and can not see it happening anywhere, even when it is happening everywhere.

Here's maybe the tough thing about marriage. It's an in the moment thing. It doesn't exist, on a timeline. It's either fully true, in the present moment or, it's not. So, the very hard thing, is for people to take their definitions of marriage, about being lifelong, and for them to re-define marriage, as a truth that is true of the moment. A truth that becomes crystallized, and frozen, for all time.....

So, the issue is not what should we do about marriage. It's actually that finding and meeting a person who naturally fulfills the pattern, of marriage, you both, naturally, is the least likely event, in a life timeline. Of all the things to ever happen, the chances of meeting someone with whom you establish that pattern with, are so very low, that you have better chances of winning the Powerball lottery, twice a day, for life. 

So, if the chances of marriage being the truth of the event, between two people, is so impossibly impossible, in terms of potential possibilities, then, is the issue really about marriage? No it's not. The problem, within the issue, is the human tendency to look at something that probably can't happen, and the problem is that humans are most certain to react to something that is outside of the realm of possible, with lies and self-deception. The problem in the issue, is not marriage itself. A real marriage is as rare as walking the woods and running up on TWO unicorns fucking. So, that means, that what most people will believe is their marriage, was certainly  never a marriage and never going to be one,  no matter what, so, that guaranteed certainty. That there is not a participation. But a lie....that dictates what should be done about it. Nothing. Separation, likely. Honesty. Acceptance. That sort of thing.

It means, we should Honor divorce, higher than the Honor of marriage. Because, we should Honor people who want to commit to being wrong, because, if we Honor them ending a relationship that should have never been, that should not be, then, we are honoring the suffering it would have to be, if they did not divorce, successfully. We would have to Honor people deciding they were wrong, more highly than we Honor people proving to be right. Because, honour, being about both good and bad, Honor, is about the doing the right thing, in success, in failure. In pain, and in pleasure. 

True Honor, involves being responsible to everything. The rapist is only honorable, to the greatness of the love of rape sex. However, they betray Honor, because, they refuse to acknowledge the violence which is non-negotiably part of the issue. True Honor, actually involves being able to successfully manage everything, and, also honorable manage nothing.  Honor does NOT mean that there is value. Like all value issues, the question is, what is the value? When I informed my abuser/rapist/stalker, that I had no Honor for them to have a place in my life, they are not people for whom Honor is optional. They failed to honour the absence of a sexual option. They failed to honour the truth that I relayed and related to them. They thought that the Honor to themselves, justified raping past my inability to Honor them. And, it took them twelve years, to stop raping me. To realize that forcing me to have to Honor them, violently, was always, and only ever going to be the evil that I had warned them of, before the start. I guess it was their learning curve, being kind of hard to navigate, however, it took me all of 12 years, to teach my rapists that rape is not only love. It probably required twelve years, of continually confronting them, with the truth, because of how incapable they were of integrating the foundational fact that rape is love. 😮‍💨😬😶