51. But there's the rub! Life is never cut and dried in terms of one set of criteria. There are two genders, and they are opposites. The female gender, issuing from a particle-based vacuum, is structured in such a way as to be orientated towards the not-self at the expense of the self, to be objective and outgoing, and therefore to especially esteem what a sensible transvaluation, instituted by males, would deem either absolutely criminal or relatively criminal, depending whether it had reference primarily to the outer light of metachemical sensuality or to the outer dark of chemical sensuality, but which, in untransvaluated vein, they would be more inclined to take for granted as manifestations of pro-notself behaviour at the elemental levels of either fire or water, as the case may be.

52. The male gender, issuing from a wavicle-centred plenum, is structured in such a way, on the other hand, as to be orientated towards the self at the expense of the not-self, to be subjective and ingoing or introspective, and therefore to especially esteem what a sensual disposition, conditioned by females, would have difficulty recognizing as either relatively graceful or absolutely graceful, depending whether it had reference primarily to the inner dark of physical sensibility or to the inner light of metaphysical sensibility, but which, in transvaluated vein, they would be more inclined to take for granted as manifestations of pro-self behaviour at the elemental levels of either vegetation (earth) or air, as the case may be.

53. So much for the light and the dark, which comes not only in two upper-class manifestations commensurate with absolute crime and absolute grace, metachemistry and metaphysics, but also in two lower-class manifestations commensurate with relative crime and relative grace, chemistry and physics. Both the outer forms of the light and dark will be deemed and appear good if unchallenged by contrary values and therefore free to be at large in relation to pro-notself behaviour at either class level. Both the inner forms of the light and dark will be deemed and seem wise if unchallenged by contrary values and therefore free to be at large in relation to pro-self behaviour at either class level.

54. But you cannot have it both ways, not even on a class basis, within the same society, much less the individuals of which a society is predominantly composed and which we recognize as one thing or another. If the outer light/dark is free then the inner light/dark will be taboo and effectively 'beyond the pale', to be disparaged as evil or foolish, as the case may be. But if, by contrast, the inner light/dark is free then the outer light/dark will be taboo and effectively 'beneath the pale', to be disparaged as foolish or evil, depending once again on the context.

55. Where, then, does the relationship of light to darkness and of darkness to light fit-in with any given context? For we have been generalizing in terms of light 'above' and 'darkness' below, when, in point of fact, light and dark hang together with contrary biases in both contexts, as well as in all elements.

56. There is the darkness which is subordinate, in antimetaphysical terms, to the metachemical outer dark, and which we can identify with absolute sin, and there is the darkness which, in antiphysical terms, is subordinate to the chemical outer dark, which we can identify with relative sin.

57. Contrariwise, there is the light which is subordinate, in antichemical terms, to the physical inner light, and which we can identify with relative punishment, and there is the light which is subordinate, in antimetachemical terms, to the metaphysical inner light, which we can identify with absolute punishment.

58. But the light is always psyche and the dark always soma, so when we distinguish between outer and inner forms of the light we are distinguishing between outer and inner forms of psyche, whereas when we distinguish between outer and inner forms of the dark we are distinguishing between outer and inner forms of soma.

59. To further complicate this distinction, it must be remembered that females are objectively structured in such a way as to prefer the darkness to the light; for, issuing in will and/or spirit from a vacuum, they signify the triumph of matter over mind or, in equivalent non-Wildean terminology, of soma over psyche, whether in absolute or relative, most particle/least wavicle or more (relative to most) particle/less (relative to least) wavicle terms. Therefore they are more partial to soma than psyche, to being kind (if sensually free) to not-self or to being cruel (if sensibly bound) to not-self.

60. Males, on the other hand, are subjectively structured in such a way as to prefer the light to the darkness; for, issuing in ego and/or soul from a plenum, they signify the triumph of mind over matter or, again in equivalent terminology, of psyche over soma, whether in relative or absolute, more (relative to most) wavicle/less (relative to least) particle or most wavicle/least particle terms. Therefore they are more partial to psyche than soma, to being kind (if sensibly free) to the self or to being cruel (if sensually bound) to the self.

61. Therefore just as darkness is more congenial to a female than to a male, so light is more congenial to a male than to a female; for the one gender operates on the basis of a somatic predilection and the other on the basis of a psychic predilection, and they can never be complementary but remain throughout life antagonistic in terms which lead, intermittently or otherwise, to the triumph of the one gender over the other, whether females in sensuality or males in sensibility, and the subordination of the vanquished gender to what appears to be a complementary position to the hegemonic gender but which, because appearances can be deceptive, is bound sooner or later to be resented and, if possible, rejected in favour of either a counter-evolutionary struggle in the interests of devolution on the part of females or a counter-devolutionary struggle in the interests of evolution on the part of males.

62. Therefore whilst in metachemistry the absolute outer darkness takes precedence over the absolute outer light as a pro-notself female gender norm, its antimetaphysical 'complement' will likewise be emphasizing soma at the expense of psyche under hegemonic female pressures and be at loggerheads with its gender reality of psyche absolutely preceding and predominating (in a most wavicle/least particle subatomic ratio) over soma.

63. Likewise whilst in chemistry the relative outer darkness takes precedence over the relative outer light as a pro-notself female gender norm, its antiphysical 'complement' will likewise be emphasizing soma at the expense of psyche under hegemonic female pressures and be at loggerheads with its gender reality of psyche relatively preceding and predominating (in a more - compared to most - wavicle/less - compared to least - particle subatomic ratio) over soma.

64. Conversely, whilst in physics the relative inner light takes precedence over the relative inner darkness as a pro-self male gender norm, its antichemical 'complement' will likewise be emphasizing psyche at the expense of soma under hegemonic male pressures and be at loggerheads with its gender reality of soma relatively preceding and predominating (in a more - compared to most - particle/less - compared to least - wavicle subatomic ratio) over psyche.

65. Similarly, whilst in metaphysics the absolute inner light takes precedence over the absolute inner darkness as a pro-self male gender norm, its antimetachemical 'complement' will likewise be emphasizing psyche at the expense of soma under hegemonic male pressures and be at loggerheads with its gender reality of soma absolutely preceding and predominating (in a most particle/least wavicle subatomic ratio) over psyche.

66. Clearly, whilst all these positions will suit the hegemonic gender, be it female in sensuality or male in sensibility, none of them will ideally suit the subordinate gender, be it male in sensuality or female in sensibility. For males will continue to be creatures for whom psyche takes precedence over soma, the light over the dark, even when obliged, under hegemonic female pressures, to sinfully emphasize soma at the expense of psyche, and females, conversely, continue to be creatures for whom soma takes precedence over psyche, the dark over the light, even when obliged, under hegemonic male pressures, to gracefully or, more correctly, punishingly emphasize psyche at the expense of soma.

67. None of these positions can be sustained indefinitely, for they can only result in societal unrest and the revolt, in sensuality, of males against females or, in sensibility, of females against males. For an apparent complementarity fostered upon the hegemonic triumph of the one gender over the other is still a long way from being essential, or germane to the nature of gender relations. That which issues in somatic precedence from either Devil the Mother or Woman the Mother, depending on the class bias, can hardly be commensurate with what issues in psychic precedence from either Man the Father or God the Father; for alpha and omega are opposites and therefore antagonistic towards one another.

68. Therefore if outright Heathen and Christian alternatives are not really viable, because likely to breed gender discontent, how does society arrive at a more or less viable solution to the problem of inherent gender antagonism, a solution likely to make for stability rather than instability in society at large?

69. The answer to this question returns us, once again, to our class and elemental diagonals, the ascending diagonal from sin to grace, and the descending diagonal from crime to punishment, albeit one can detect a distinction between those societies which, in church-hegemonic vein, foster the former at the expense of crime and punishment, and those societies which, in state-hegemonic vein, foster the latter at the expense of sin and grace.

70. As we have seen, the subordinate state corollary to sin and grace is, in equally transvaluated vein, pseudo-crime and pseudo-punishment, whereas the subordinate church corollary to crime and punishment is likewise pseudo-sin and pseudo-grace. Therefore the ascending axis, to take the Church first, is divisible not merely between sin and grace - how could it be? - but also, in subordinate vein, between pseudo-crime and pseudo-punishment, whereas the descending axis of state hegemonic criteria is divisible not merely between crime and punishment - how could it be? - but also, in subordinate vein, between pseudo-sin and pseudo-grace.

71. Not, then, a simple chemical hegemony over antiphysics, like relative crime over relative sin, but the antiphysical subversion of chemistry at the graceful behest of metaphysics 'on high', so that the Church remains hegemonic at the expense of the State, subjective values at the expense of objective ones, and grace conditions sin to the exclusion, to all intents and purposes, of relative crime.

72. Nor, therefore, a simple physical hegemony over antichemistry, like relative grace over relative punishment, but the antichemical subversion of physics at the criminal behest of metachemistry 'on high', so that the State remains hegemonic at the expense of the Church, objective values at the expense of subjective ones, and crime conditions punishment to the exclusion, to all intents and purposes, of relative grace.

73. Therefore the ascending diagonal is no more simply from bureaucracy to theocracy, chemistry to metaphysics, than the descending diagonal is from autocracy to democracy, metachemistry to physics. The former is effectively from the meritocratic subversion of bureaucracy to theocracy, and the latter from autocracy to the plutocratic subversion of democracy.

74. For how else could one sustain the hegemony of the one gender over the other than by mixing the circumstances not only between the classes, but between the elements in which each gender operates? The male gender achieves a more or less stable triumph over the female gender in the rising diagonal from sin to grace, the sinful subversion of crime at grace's theocratic behest; for although sin follows from a nominal female hegemony conditioning to somatic emphasis at the expense of psyche, the existence of free psyche in the metaphysical 'above' ensures that the folly of bound psyche to free soma for males is acknowledged and granted the possibility of penitential recognition - something it would be unlikely to achieve in the event of an outright female hegemony conditioning to somatic emphasis from a standpoint that, being chemically free in state-hegemonic vein, was able to call the criminal shots at the expense or even to the exclusion of sin.

75. For it is the sensibility of metaphysical grace that shows the antiphysical sensuality of pro-notself behaviour up as sin by twisting the emphasis back from soma to psyche and rendering the folly of bound psyche conspicuously self-evident, evident, that is, as anti-self behaviour which can only be rectified in and by grace, as and when one turns as a male from sin to the psychic freedom of metaphysical grace and is saved from the world of sinful corruption, a corruption rendered all the more poignant against a background which faces up to the male reality of psyche preceding and predominating over soma and therefore exposes the anomaly, from a male standpoint, of somatic emphasis.