#noncelibate

[beyond-mogai-pride-flags]

Noncelibate Pride Flag

Noncelibate (noun: noncelibacy; adjectival: noncelibatary; abbreviation: noncel): someone who is not celibate; not practicing celibacy; engaging in sexual activity; an individual with an active sexual life; or a person who is NOT celspec (on the celibatary spectrum).

[neopronouns]

Would sex favorable/futuent/noncelibate asexuality be subliden?

i assume you mean subtliden — i'd say yes, and the same goes for sex-repulsed/etc. allosexuals!

[zerogate]

Yoga comes from the root Yuj, to yoke, or join together, and its practices unite individual consciousness with the source of consciousness beyond all concepts of “I” or “mine.” The joyful awareness arising from the practice of Tantric yogas is never an end in itself, but a means for expanding deeper into the vast, open, nondual nature of anatta, or egolessness.

Before leaving Kathmandu, Hamid and I had gone to see Chatral Rinpoche in Pharping, at the cave where Padmasambhava had attained liberation together with his consort Sakyadevi. The daughter of a Nepalese queen who died in childbirth, Sakyadevi was reputedly raised from infanthood by monkeys in the forests surrounding an ancient temple dedicated to the great goddess Vajrayogini. Padmasambhava first saw her perched on the branch of a tree and dressed in nothing more than leaves; he immediately recognized her as an ideal spiritual companion.

The narratives of Padmasambhava describe his numerous liaisons as parables of the Tantric path, in which desire is transmuted into radiant compassion and expanding levels of spiritual awareness. In Tibet, when ministers threatened to cast Padmasambhava into the Tsangpo for his disregard for conventional morality, he retreated to an ice-bound cave with Yeshe Tsogyal, the Tibetan emperor’s youngest queen. Practicing under his guidance, she attained enlightenment through tummo, the yoga of mystic heat.

According to Tantric precepts, practices such as tummo dissolve the illusion of an isolated, independent self. When practiced in union or through visualization, desire itself transforms into luminous rapture, and becomes an offering of joy, beyond conceptions of self and other. Tertons, the male and female treasure revealers, often developed their intuitive powers to their highest capacity through consorts who served as channels or intermediaries between the adept and the full expanse of reality. In accord with Tantric vows, they almost invariably kept their consorts’ identities secret or referred to them only obliquely. Yet as Padmasambhava declared in one of the neyigs, no one following the code of a monk would ever be able to open the doors to Pemako’s innermost realms: they remained the province of the noncelibate yogi-terton.

As his consort, Yeshe Tsogyal declared “Let male aid female, female aid male; let each penetrate the other as in weaving... merge emptiness with bliss... and allow the vital essences to pervade your being... Realize the fruit of passion, the Great Bliss (Mahasukha) ... and let doubts and confusion disappear!”

When I had first approached lamas for instruction in these secret yogas, they told me they could be dangerous. They’re similiar to a snake in a hollow piece of bamboo, I was told: one can fall to the lowest hells or travel upward to the highest Buddha Realms. In other words, the bliss may either inflate the ego and result in spiritual complacency or dissolve all sense of separation and lead deeper into the mystery of sunyata, or emptiness. (“Translating sunyata as Emptiness,” wrote Octavio Paz, “is something worse than a misuse of language; it is a spiritual infidelity.”)

As desire without compassion sabotages the subtle unfolding of higher states of awareness, the yogas of union are often regarded as the most deceptive of all Tantric practices. If practiced correctly, however, and the woman’s energies penetrate the male’s, neural energies flow through a fractal network of synaptic pathways called tsa (nadis), dissolving subtle physiological, psychological, and energetic impediments and uniting at the heart center, the nexus of the body’s estimated seventy-five trillion cells. In the illuminated heart, illusions of separateness vanish and, what Buddha called avidya, or not really seeing, transforms into a radiant realization of the dynamic interconnectedness that unifies all life.

[...]

With or without a consort, practitioners of the inner Tantric yogas arouse the dormant energy in the lower chakras and cause it to rise like a flame through the body’s central meridian, “melting” the luminous secretions (tigle) in the brain which, in turn, stream down like nectar (dudtsi) and give rise to increasingly subtle states of consciousness and, ultimately, to the realization of the nondual expanse of emptiness and luminosity, the Clear Light, held to be the mind’s innermost essence.

In the 1980s, in order to delve more deeply into these arcane practices, I studied in South India with a Tantric master who placed me on a diet of cinnabar and gold dust. My assigned consort, Uma Devi, had been raised in a temple since the age of six. In the weeks before initiation, she lived on crushed rose petals and powdered pearls that had been dried under the rays of the moon. In later retreats, I used preparations from the Chandramaharoshana Tantra that transform seminal essences into a bioluminescence that lifts the mind from habitual perceptions of time and space.

Hamid had eaten the same alchemical preparations of purified mercury and gold with a girl of exceptional beauty from India’s northeastern frontier named Minring. Minring had come to Nepal to work as a pilot for one of the kingdom’s airline companies. Despite her training at a Texas school of aviation, Minring was deeply connected to her tribal roots in Nagaland. Soon after she’d returned from America, fellow villagers had killed her uncle as he devoured a goat on a night when he had allegedly transformed into a tiger. It’s still commonly held in India’s northeast frontier that certain human beings have a propensity for turning—literally—into wild animals. According to Minring, her aunt and nephews had locked her uncle in his room at night on full moons, but in the mornings the inside of his bedroom door would be gouged with claw marks.

Minring’s remarkable stories—along with the fact that her maternal grandfather had the largest collection of human heads in their ancestral village—had impressed Hamid sufficiently that he relented to her requests for a formal consecretion of their union. Bhakha Tulku performed the rite, giving them five-feathered arrows of long life to hold in their hands and seating them on the moulting skin of a Himalayan brown bear that he had brought back to Kathmandu from Powo. After performing the ritual, Bhakha Tulku had his doubts. “Lopa girls are too wild,” he told me after the ceremony, “they rarely stay with one man.”

-- Ian Baker, The Heart of the World

[isobug]

Though polyerosy is originally about attraction, erosy alone is similar to oriented anattractional, in which instead of attraction we talk about affection, amory, amato-relationships, gamy, practice, activities/acts, sex drive/life, libido, desire, stimulus, erotic love, partnering, etc. So an erosous ace would be that, similar to a futuent or noncelibate ace, but using erosy specifically (some may prefer a word over the other, even with the same definition/being the same concept).

Amory isn't just about attraction either.

Thank you for the clarification! I've posted the flag here, thank you for the rq

[yhwhrulz777]

As the US United Methodist Church continues to lose congregations over its acceptance of same-sex marriage and ordination of noncelibate homosexuals, 58 churches in Louisiana officially disaffiliated from the denomination at the weekend, the Christian Post (CP) reports.

[ruki--mukami]

Does virgin blood taste better than others?

"It doesn't taste better than noncelibate blood per se, but I do derive great satisfaction in sucking a virgin's life force knowing that the flavor will change because of me and not some other filthy cur who thinks he can lay claim to my prey. There is no greater way of devoting oneself to their master by sacrificing both the first and every subsequent fornication thereafter to him, after all. Let me be the first and only man to have you all to myself, showing you who you belong to. I'll train you thoroughly on how to take me in inch for inch."

[cromulentenough]

Where would each go in the political square chart?

Involuntarily celibate

Voluntarily celibate

Voluntarily noncelibate

Involuntarily noncelibate

volcels are usually religious people so auth right, incels are lib right, vol non celibate is just normies, so center probably? and the last one is rape victims which aren't really anywhere specific but maybe auth left in that there's probably some correlation for wanting to be tough on crime/ rape in particular.

[dwellordream]

“These cultural understandings of male and female reproductive “nature” become more complex when different religious beliefs emphasize different aspects of them. Such is the case with Jewish and Christian attitudes toward reproduction. The disparity between Jewish and Christian attitudes is well known and has been the root of many debates over the centuries. While Jews saw the commandment to procreate—“pru urvu” (be fertile and increase) (Gen. 1:28)—as an important foundation of Jewish belief, Christians did not. Many scholars have referred to this distinction as limiting the possibilities for comparison between Jewish and Christian family life, and as justification for studying each society separately.

Even scholars who have examined Jewish and Christian family institutions in tandem have emphasized the theological gap that exists in this context. The Christian preference for celibacy was central from its beginnings. Indeed, most of the extant medieval records dealing with attitudes toward procreation were written by the same small and select group that chose celibacy as its way of life. Men who lived in monastic frameworks understood their choice as an expression of their ability to refrain from worldly pleasures and remain pure. Women who chose to be nuns viewed their celibacy, especially if they were virgins, as a ticket to the male spiritual environment and an escape from their fate as women.

Yet despite the many references to these men and women in medieval literature, we must remember that this was not the majority choice. Most Christians throughout the ages were married, not celibate. Because they esteemed the ideal of celibacy, Christian society treated married life as the less ideal choice. Nevertheless, in their discussions of noncelibate married women, the medieval authors resembled their Jewish peers. The cultural significance of women as childbearers is also evident in these authors’ descriptions of women who forewent motherhood to become brides of Christ. As a number of scholars, especially Caroline Bynum, have shown, images of birth and of maternity are prominent in descriptions of all women, including those who do not actually give birth. Jews, as is well known, did not share this attitude toward celibacy. 

While only few Christians actually chose the monastic way of life, all saw this as an ideal, albeit one that posed too big a challenge for most. In contrast, all Jews saw procreation as an obligatory and positive commandment. Jewish and Christian attitudes toward the biblical commandment of procreation from antiquity through the Middle Ages have been examined in a recent study by Jeremy Cohen. Cohen examined Jewish and Christian attitudes toward the biblical command. His study altered the prevailing tendency to present Jewish and Christian attitudes as completely distinct. Cohen emphasized that in spite of their fundamental difference, there were also areas of similarity. 

For example, Cohen maintained that despite the ideal of celibacy, some Christian scholars included procreation as part of the ius naturalis (natural order). In other words, procreation was not simply a commandment to be interpreted allegorically, but one that had practical implications. Thus, Cohen demonstrates that among the eastern Church Fathers, procreation within a family framework was understood as a positive commandment. Procreation was often reassessed and discussed in Western Christian thought throughout the Middle Ages. While some claimed that procreation was a biblical commandment no longer relevant to Christian lives, other interpreters began to attribute more importance to the commandment to procreate within the marital framework. 

For example, in some cases, the biblical commandment was recited at the wedding ceremony. Thus, it became an important part of the blessing for a newlywed couple. This change in the ceremony was part of a major shift in Christian understandings of marriage that, in the twelfth century, made marriage one of the sacraments. At the same time, fertility became a far more important part of the church’s understandings of marriage. This change brought Jewish and Christian understandings of procreation somewhat closer. Studies concentrating on Christian society have emphasized the growing importance of marriage and family in medieval Christian theology and explained the changing significance accorded the family as a consequence.

In reality, we cannot determine which came first. Most certainly, thought and practice developed simultaneously and influenced each other. Marian devotion, as well as devotion to the other members of Jesus’ family, especially his grandmother Anna, were also part of the growing importance of family in medieval thought. These developments led to a more positive assessment of procreation in Christian thought. The increasing convergence of Christian theology and Jewish rabbinic legislation is not limited to attitudes toward procreation. Cohen and others have pointed to shared attitudes toward other aspects of sexual relations besides the question of whether the commandment pru urvu should be seen as practical or allegorical. 

For example, Cohen has shown that Jews and Christians shared similar understandings of the conjugal relationship. Based on the composition BaHalei haNefesh, written by R. Abraham b. David of Posquières (Ra’abad) in the twelfth century, Cohen shows how the Ra’abad’s explanations and justifications for sexual relations between a man and his wife are similar to those provided by theologians such as Ivo of Chartres (1040–1115), Gratian (d. 1160), and Thomas Aquinas (1224–1274). All these commentators, both Jewish and Christian, attributed great importance to the intent of the men engaging in sexual relations. Cohen argues that the Ra’abad linked the obligation of onah (conjugal obligations toward one’s wife) to the duty of procreation in a manner different than that of his predecessors, but resembling the approach of his Christian contemporaries. 

Ra’abad argued that if the intent behind the relations was pure, the deeds were too. And conversely, if the intent was not pure, the deeds were not either. Dalia Hoshen, who focused on the ideal relationships between men and women in the writings of Maimonides and the Ra’abad, promoted this idea more forcefully. She proposed that medieval Jewish sages saw celibacy in a more favorable manner than their predecessors and, consequently, restricted the conditions in which sexual relations were to be advocated. Putting these findings together, we see that while the importance of procreation within the marital framework grew in medieval Christian thought, Jewish authorities took an increasingly negative view of marital sexual relations performed with improper intent. 

Hoshen and Cohen concentrate on the philosophy of Maimonides and of the Rahabad, both of whom lived south of the areas of this study and far away from the locales of the theologians they cite—Paris, Bologna, and Köln. If we turn to northern France and especially Germany, we find that, although Ashkenazic Jews living in those countries attached great importance to procreation, some of the writings of Jews of those countries display a more positive approach to abstinence. For example, the author of Sefer Hasidim writes of a hasid who did not want to have sexual relations with his wife after the death of a Zaddik (righteous man).

This source, combined with the well documented attitude of Hasidei Ashkenaz that encouraged avoiding women as much as possible, seems to indicate a shared approach of Hasidei Ashkenaz and their Christian neighbors, an issue that Talya Fishman has recently raised in other contexts. These allusions to shared approaches are far from inconsequential. They point to shared beliefs and a common mentality. In spite of these points of contact, however, procreation was viewed as a central point of contention between Jews and Christians in the medieval world. For example, in polemical debates, it was often one of the issues discussed. In Sefer Nizahon Vetus, the Jews accost the monks and needle them on their stupidity and their concealed lustfulness. 

One of the issues the Jewish disputants mention is their doubt as to the possibility that anyone can live a truly celibate life. Thus in Sefer Nizahon Vetus, the Jews argue: Ask them: If the Christian priest is supposed to take the place of the biblical priest, why doesn’t he get married and have children like Aaron the High Priest? Moreover, the first commandment given to Adam dealt with being fruitful and multiplying, yet you refrain from this and instead pursue fornication and wine, which capture your fancy. The book discussed this matter again in another passage, where the Christian priests are compared to eunuchs who practice castration. They are accused of wallowing in licentiousness in secret. The author ends that part of the argument by stating: Furthermore it is written “Your wife shall be as a fruitful vine” (Ps. 128:3), and before that it is written, “Blessed is everyone that fears the Lord” (Ps. 128:1). 

Thus we see that having children is a mark of the God-fearing man. In this debate, the Jew argues over the spiritual character of celibate men, and the whole passage focuses on their decision not to marry and its consequences. Were they to debate with married Christian neighbors, however, this argument would not have been as powerful. Although these married Christian men might have admitted that there was yet another, higher level of devotion that they did not practice, nevertheless, they would have seen their bearing of children as a way of fulfilling the word of God, much as their Jewish contemporaries did.”

-  Elisheva Baumgarten, “Birth.” in Mothers and Children: Jewish Family Life in Medieval Europe

[bellasredchevy]

ok but im a christian (not a mormon but still) and im a noncelibate gay like the bible never really said anything homophobic/racist people just love twisting it so i dont think religion is the problem here some of the people practicing it are(although a lot of christians i know have become more accepting of gays and other minority's over the years)

is that something to celebrate? why is it taking christians several millennia to tolerate certain groups of people when jesus’ core principles are literally “love thy neighbor” and “don’t judge people”? if practicing organized religion brings you a sense of peace and community then by all means, engage, but don’t pretend like oppressive forces improving to become slightly less oppressive is something to be celebrated

[revelation19]

The workings of the celibate/sexual system of the Catholic church will be clearly exposed if celibacy is defined and discussed. This is why discourse terrifies those who hide behind undefined celibacy as a shield, who maintain power at the price of the perpetuation of imprecision and duplicity at the sacrifice of radical self-honesty. 'Terror' is the word that best captures the Catholic church's reaction to any discourse on celibacy. More precisely, terror is the emotion that explains the assiduous avoidance of any significant discourse about celibacy and even the express command not to discuss that which they claim to hold in highest esteem. The terror emanates from an intuited threat to survival - not of celibate practice or achievement, but of a system of power and from fear of the exposure of noncelibate practice inherent in the function and structure of a system called celibate without discrete definition.

A.W. Richard Sipe

“Sex, Priests, & Power: Anatomy of a Crisis”

[endtimeheadlines]

United Methodist Church upholds position against homosexuality, same-sex marriage

(CP) – The United Methodist Church will maintain its official position that homosexuality is contrary to Christian teaching, in a decision following days of contentious debate over the issue. For the past several years, the UMC has been embroiled in an emotional debate over whether to change its stance, as outlined in its Book of Discipline, labeling homosexuality “incompatible with Christian teaching.”

Delegates at the UMC special session of General Conference, representing all of the global denomination, voted Tuesday to reject a measure called the “One Church Plan,” which would have allowed regional bodies of the denomination to determine their position on homosexuality. Instead, delegates approved the “Traditional Plan” in a vote of 438-384. The Plan maintains the denomination’s stance against homosexuality, gay marriage, and the ordination of noncelibate homosexuals while promising to better enforce those rules. READ MORE

[urbanchristiannews]

United Methodist Regional Body Enforces Ban on Noncelibate Homosexual Clergy After First Resisting Church Rule

United Methodist Regional Body Enforces Ban on Noncelibate Homosexual Clergy After First Resisting Church Rule

A regional body of the United Methodist Church that previously refused to enforce the denomination’s ban on noncelibate homosexual clergy has upheld the ordination standards.

In 2016, the Baltimore-Washington Annual Conference of the UMC joined a few other regional bodies in refusing to enforce the UMC Book of Discipline’s ban on clergy who are “self-avowed practicing homosexuals.”

However, in a…