01-13/11/12

The domination of ego and soul by will and spirit is a fact of life that follows from the primary nature of the female and the secondary nature of the male, the former soma over psyche (body over mind), and the latter psyche over soma (mind over body).

Any man, any adult male, who doesn't want to be dominated by will and spirit had better not seek the company of women!

Nothing is more important in life to me than how I think, and what I do to record these thoughts, whether for my own benefit or, indirectly, for the benefit of others.

The thinker cushions his soul with thoughts that flow from his mind like the outer manifestations of feeling.

There is something godly about words, but not heavenly, since the feeling remains within, burning away in the darkness of self from which the light of revealed truth flies on godly wings, or at least appears to do so.

I find it impossible not to believe that there is a direct connection between the so-called Holocaust, or systematic extermination of European Jewry under the Nazis, and the ensuing foundation of the State of Israel. Without the Nazi-instigated mass internment and extermination of Europe's Jews there would not, paradoxically, have been enough Jews in Palestine to fight for and eventually achieve, at the Arabs' expense, an Israeli State. To me, it seems disingenuous to draw no connection between the founding of the State of Israel and the Holocaust that led tens if not hundreds of thousands of Jews to leave Europe for an uncertain future in the Middle East. A case, from a Jewish standpoint, of good out of evil?

Average people are much more likely to try and bring anyone culturally and morally superior down than to try and rise to his level of cultural and moral accomplishment. Equalitarianism may seem to work as a theory (as a manifestation of bourgeois decadence) of equal opportunity irrespective of class or race or gender or whatever, but in practice people resent superiority because they know, in their heart of hearts, that it is beyond them and effectively unattainable by them and simply prefer to drag things down to the lowest-common-denominator in what becomes a kind of plebeian concept of egalitarianism. Hence their self-serving opposition to superior people and the corresponding necessity of such people to defend themselves, by whatever means in their power, from the reactionary instincts of average or even sub-average people, many of whom are, in any case, likely to be women who, in the nature of things, subscribe to a different mindset, hostile to male independence through culture.

That man who writes for the masses, putting commerce above self, is no artist but an enemy of Truth – in short, an artiste.

Living in the same house as a dysfunctional Bangladeshi family is the nearest I come to experience of the term 'hell on earth'. You don't like them, they know one doesn't like them, resentments fester, breeding long-standing animosities. An invidious situation in which ethnic incompatibility is constantly to the forefront of one's mind. One feels constantly under threat, like a sensible kind of animal being driven from its natural or, at any rate, habitual habitat by foreign creatures whose screaming want of sensibility or any kind of self-respecting common sense is apt testimony to a fundamentally more barbarous not to say philistine disposition seemingly incapable of sitting still or remaining quiet for any meaningful period of time. How the hell I ended-up in this situation is still something of a mystery to me!

They have a way, these Bangladeshis or, at any rate, the one who happens to be my landlord, of engineering circumstances, whether with regard to ugly dark-brown heavy doors with closures that cause them to slam or to ill-fitting bathroom and toilet fixtures (sic) or, indeed, to the installation of the overhead floor to their attic refurbishment that creaks mysteriously every time they walk across or stand waveringly upon it, that enables them to maximize cruelty and a kind of race-motivated oppression whose underlying effect is to both humiliate and undermine one, as well, certainly in my case, as to get one out – I have been told to leave on more than one occasion and only for responding somewhat indignantly to the sorts of provocations it were impossible to ignore - and thereby have the place to themselves, or to persons akin to themselves who would not regularly listen to Western – including classical – music, etc.

Over the years I have noted how their encroachments upon this house have expanded and led to a corresponding change in their psychology or attitude towards one, as to white people in general. Now that they are in the majority here the boot, as it were, is on the other foot, and their attitudes are far less deferential or subservient than used to be the case. But is this not a natural outcome, proof, as it were, of a law of nature in motion as the stronger gradually drive out or undermine the weaker, not least in terms of numbers? The notion of racial equality is a convenient smoke-screen for enabling such peoples to first obtain a foothold and then, by degrees, having consolidated and extended it, to begin turning the screw on others not of their race, so that they more or less have it their own way. Facts are facts, and they don't permit of any argument or refutation, whatever the expedient lies and falsehoods of self-serving politicians may say.

That said, my detestation of these people is, frankly, worrying and even sickening, particularly since they are not on a West European level, much less a British or Irish one, but on a level below even the East Europeans who have, in the guise of various Poles, featured here fairly prominently in recent years. One wonders what they are doing here, these Bangladeshis, but then one remembers that the British had an Empire which embraced the totality of what was once India, and that when exploiters and profiteers are no longer able to conduct their affairs overseas they will, as it were, tighten their imperial belts and encourage immigration from their former colonies in order to have the Darwinian benefit of cheap labour and enhanced competition for jobs, houses, rented accommodation, and so on, right on their doorstep, albeit not in such close proximity to themselves as to be directly affected in the manner described on these pages. What began on a mercantile basis must needs continue on such terms, no matter how modified, when your whole ethos centres, commercially, on economic gain, whether imperially or capitalistically.

You can't make an ideal out of something which is not an ideal to begin with! Liberal tolerance, which is often flaunted as an ideal, is in fact the product of bourgeois imperialism and the scramble for riches (economically-fuelled humanism) in foreign lands which led Britain to empire and to the colonial exploitation of vast swathes of the world's territory, whose peoples were rarely if ever humanistic.

The net result, several generations later, is the swamping of British humanism by the descendants of those very peoples whom their ancestors systematically enslaved through conquest and expropriation. Their liberal tolerance has come home with a vengeance, or, more correctly, is now under fire from peoples whose tolerance of things British is minimal, if not virtually non-existent. The 'one nation' rhetoric of ambitious politicians is, frankly, the one thing modern Britain is not and, in a sense, never was, since Ireland, Scotland, and Wales would consider themselves nations in their own right, even if politically joined to England within the United Kingdom (of Great Britain and so-called Northern Ireland). But when you consider the competing and often conflicting ethnicities which have emerged from the British Empire, then even without the influx of foreigners from the former East Bloc countries and elsewhere in both Europe and the world at large, the pretensions to Britain being a nation, never mind 'one nation', are even more farcical. Surely with politicians like these, whether or not directly responsible for the current mess, you can only see things continuing to go from bad to worse, with more vote-cadging rhetoric continuing to fly in the face of reality.

Great philosophy can be written in the most appalling of domestic conditions or circumstances – proof, if anything, that the mind can transcend the corporeal torments of the world.

I have always detested tuxedos (dinner jackets) and bow ties, with their triangular implications reminiscent of the worst, most blatant forms of architectural aediculation. The so-called 'alpha male', or pseudo-male, with alpha-orientated predilections.

Artists writing, composing, painting, etc., through themselves for other artists … simply because the masses wouldn't be interested in what they're doing. Eventually, some of it will enter the mainstream but, to start with, all art, any serious cultural activity that is any good, is unpopular, ignored if not scorned by the female-dominated masses.

The only duty the artist has is to himself, his art, not to society which, being fundamentally female in character, would kill him or it off as a matter of natural course. It is only because fine art rises above society that it occasionally gets noticed.

For the artist, self-censure is a kind of suicide. You censure yourself at the expense of your art or, what amounts to the same, your truth, which may well coincide with the Truth. Taboo subjects are for politicians, not artists, who only have to consider the relevance of what they have to say to their art, and of how well or accurately they are saying it.

Job-worthiness, to use a colloquial term, has always struck me as being signally repulsive, like being recruited and regimented by somebody or something else for purposes that have no bearing on anything else.

The aristocrat, or pseudo-theocrat, defers to the autocrat like truth or, rather, pseudo-truth to beauty, mistaking beauty for truth – something I have always regarded as an Anglican fatality.

In my youth I read a lot more than I thought. These days, I think a lot more than I read.

A precondition of being respected as a writer is to live in a Catholic country. No use living in Britain, where, in consequence of their female-dominated utilitarianism, they expect you to have a day-job as well!

While speeches by bow-tie wearers is perfectly respectable in Britain, writings by open-collared individuals is anything but....

Nothing flatters the bow-tie wearing speakers more than to have their speeches read by men in conventional button-covering ties, the sort of men who are unlikely to think too deeply or critically about what has been spoken but, when push comes to proverbial shove, can almost invariably be depended upon to endorse it, like parliamentarians sucking-up to the monarchy in what seems to me something akin to a Faustian pact.

For most men, women are the solution. For me, they are the problem.

The German word feind, approximating to 'enemy' but really being closer to 'fiend' (a great term to have for an 'enemy'), is far superior, in my opinion, to 'enemy' as a term for delineating those with whom one is at war. No wonder the Germans have killed so many 'enemies' in past wars. For feind is an immensely potent term that puts those with whom one is at war in a light, or perspective, which the rather more clinical term 'enemy' doesn't do. The enemy are, in effect, fiends who can be expected to behave fiendishly, and with whom, in consequence, there can be no compromise, let alone mercy, even if this does occasionally lead to the commission of excesses or even atrocities.

One of the earliest uses of Concentration Camps in Nazi Germany was, quite logically, for political opponents – communists, socialists, anarchists, liberals, etc. - whom the Nazis had fought against in coming to power and were determined, once in power, to ensure that those kinds of 'us or them' situations which had bedevilled the Weimar Republic didn't re-occur or persist at their expense. Hence, too, the clinging on to power even when the war appeared to be lost or, in being continued, would lead to increased bloodshed. No Nazi is going to let communists, socialists, anarchists, etc., back into the political arena, never mind into power. The struggle with Soviet Communism was an ongoing phenomenon, even ideological necessity, that could only be halted, as was the case, through total defeat, albeit the defeat, when it finally came, was by no means solely attributable to the Soviet Union.

Politicians may set out to solve the world's problems, but to the metaphysically-inclined religious thinker the world itself is a problem. In fact, the world is if not exactly a bitch, then certainly a phenomenon ruled and/or governed by one.

The contemporary novel, which I would prefer to hold at arm's length, is cursed with the drama-like scourge of descriptive minimalism, whereby dialogue is virtually all-pervasive and one wonders why the author didn't just write a frigging play instead!

Writing inspired by the soul rises above mere writing to a level not far short of godliness.

Galway City now looks more like a British than an Irish city, with Boots, Debenhams, Marks & Spencer, HMV, the Body Shop, New River, Ulster Bank, Tesco, Currys, Londis, Next, Top Shop, Argos, McDonalds, etc., etc. Other than for the sea, there would be scant reason to leave London.

'Free speech' is one of those, at best, dubious terms that tend, for me, to connote with some whisky-befuddled sporter of a bow tie delivering an after-dinner speech to fellow ruling-class types. In short, a manifestation of noumenal objectivity that is not so much free thought 'coming out' as an entrenched opposition to such thought which ensures, by its very existence, that only the rantings of 'free speech' are granted any credence as a vehicle for the transmission of information by and largely for those who wield power and would be fearful of its negation through soulful contentment.

The 'godless' age in which we apparently live is necessarily one partial to Devil the Mother, and thus to predatory instincts of a female character that inevitably lead to war and the martial equivalent of sex, from which love, strutting her beautiful stuff, falls as a matter of predatory course, thereby perpetuating the world.

Militarism also starts out in beautiful squares or stiffly-marching regiments prior to falling into the tumultuous sex of war and fertilizing the ground with its blood, pride and strength seeping out of every wound with nothing but weakness and humiliation left – at least to the vanquished and, paradoxically, to many of the victorious too!

Yes, we may well still be living in a 'godless' age, the Christian god having died, as Nietzsche reminded us (somewhat unnecessarily in view of the fact that the Christian god had always been dead, if not necessarily the worship of him), but there was never enough godliness or, more correctly, heavenliness in the Western past, nothing to compare with the 'outer face' of Heaven that the smiling Buddha could be said to represent, and all because the original 'God' in back of Christ was really Devil the Mother, a scientific, or cosmic, 'bovaryization' that has 'come out' in more naked terms in our own age, as, for that matter, has Woman the Mother, whom some would have regarded, in the past, as the 'Mother of God' or, rather, of the 'God that is dead', the Christian god that limply hung upon the Cross even before Nietzsche proclaimed his religious death for our own time and we were left with nothing but … the dogs of war.

Although born in Galway of an Irish father, I have to say that, growing up in Aldershot, the birthplace of my mother, from approximately the age of two-and-a-half to when I was despatched to a children's home at ten, Aldershot is effectively my home town. After all, that is where I began to understand and to interact with the world.

Through a coincidence of birth I carry an Irish passport. But I guess, growing up in Britain, I would be amongst the least Irish of Irish-born citizens. As someone who is virtually English, with English schooling and all the rest of it, it's not as though I take any pride in being Irish. On the contrary, periodic visits to Ireland have taught me that it can be a wet, windy, overcast, inhospitable, expensive place, with little to inspire one or make one feel particularly glad to be Irish.

We live in a post-atomic age, dependent, to a large extent, on nuclear power; for once the atom has been split you can't unsplit it again. All these wind farms and solar-heating panels, useful as they may be up to a point, are no alternative to nuclear energy, but are rather symptomatic of a kind of back-to-nature ethos that flies in the face of the largely post-atomic world we happen to inhabit in the twenty-first century. Nuclear energy will not go away, nor should it, since other energy sources are either depleted or redundant or, in the case of trendy natural alternatives, of limited utility. It is not for a post-atomic age to be overly dependent on Nature; it must simply forge ahead on its own artificially independent basis, thereby delivering us from dependence on natural resources, we who, in any case, are increasingly artificial in our urban lifestyles.

The saint and neutralized dragon paradigm, which I equate with metaphysics and pseudo-metachemistry, ethereal male and pseudo-female gender positions, is a manifestation of post-atomic (post-worldly) criteria in an age headed towards 'Kingdom Come', that is to say, towards otherworldly/pseudo-netherworldly structures biased towards male liberation from female dominion, without which one has only world perpetuation and its latter-day correlation of population increase as the gender rule of atomic relativity.

'Man overcoming', to use a Nietzschean phrase, is equivalent to 'world overcoming', and thus to the establishment of otherworldly/pseudo-netherworldly criteria under messianic auspices. It has nothing to do with the perpetuation of atomic criteria.

Most internet sites, only concerned with making money, are sheer crap, especially those one sees all the time on traffic exchanges. A boring predictability of commerce-oriented banality!

I always feel a chill when the central heating comes on. The hotter the radiator, the colder I feel.

'O for the wings of a dove' by Felix Mendelssohn – such divine music, such uprightness and moral conviction, such righteousness and sublime sense of harmony. Something almost Haydnesque about this great man, the saviour, in many respects, of mid-nineteenth century German music, whose own music, certainly in this instance, still sounds fresh and almost … contemporary or, at any rate, modern in the sense that, say, someone like Rick Wakeman would understand, to distinguish it from the decadence of petty-bourgeois classicism, so to speak, and the equalitarian degeneration of so-called classical or serious music towards a point where even jazz appears comparatively discriminating if not musical, albeit from a standpoint less strictly Western than inceptively global in its origin or scope.

The body has a mind of its own, namely the blood, which we underestimate at our peril.

Conversely, the mind has a body of its own, namely the brain, which it would be most unwise to underestimate.

One of the most influential books of my youth, strangely, was Jim Morrison's 'The Lords and the New Creatures', a collection of poems and aphoristic writings which I bought in Camden Town one lunchtime whilst working in the West End. I was subsequently shocked to find that some pages only had a one-line entry (which my mother found amusing when I showed the book to her), be it poems or aphorism or whatever. Doubtless Morrison's concise style was partly inspired by Nietzsche, whom he admired, and I incline to the belief that much of my own work wouldn't have become as aphoristic had it not been for their influence on my intellectual development as a writer.

In a society dominated by the speaker, the thinker tends to be 'beyond the pale' and therefore taboo. Even the writer must be speaker (dialogue) and reader (description) friendly.

Michael Schenker – that most electrifyingly inventive of rock guitarists. Nobody else even comes close, although Edgar Froese might disagree, as, for that matter, might Bernhard Beibl. In fact, all Tangerine Dream guitarists have been special in one way or another.

The only British guitarist I can think of to rival Schenker in terms of electrifying fecundity is Richie Blackmore, whose work with Deep Purple was truly in a class of its own.

Rediscovered my old appetite for Hertford Town today (9^th November), where I had lunch or, rather, breakfast in Barney's Grill, I think it was. Nice food! Sad that the old library has closed. I occasionally visited it in the past. Now there's a new one in Dolphin's Yard off Maidenhead Street, where I once bought a black leather belt – I still use it – in Edinburgh Woollen Mills (still there!), of all places.

Fire on the mountains, wind on the hills. Alpha and omega, Devil and God or, more correctly, Heaven. Kind of like autocrat and theocrat, monarch and pope, which is to say, metachemistry and metaphysics.

Life for a male who has any intelligence is a long lesson in disillusionment which, if you can survive into old age, will leave you with nothing but the truth and, hence, a female-rejecting disposition that is free of beauty and everything that conduced towards one's former enslavement, including, no least, the world itself. Only that man who is thoroughly disillusioned with a life ruled by the Beautiful can enter the Heaven of God.

He, on the other hand, who is not disillusioned is deluded by the mistaken belief that beauty will save him when, in point of fact, all it will do is … use and drain him for purposes that have nothing to do with mere aesthetics.

Today, the 11^th November, is of course Remembrance Sunday, the date commemorating the 1918 Armistice that led to the cessation of hostilities on the Western Front of the Great War, and, whilst respecting Britain's right to honour its glorious dead, I find myself thinking about those brave Germans who died during the course of two World Wars – in the first one defending the honour of Austria in relation to the assassination of the heir to the Austro-Hungarian (Catholic) throne, Archduke Franz Ferdinand, by a Bosnia Serb terrorist, and in the second one righting the injustices of Versailles and fighting against Soviet Communism and the disproportionate influence and power of European Jewry in respect, it was alleged, to both communism and capitalism. It is to be hoped they did not die in vain.

The lyrics in rock songs, particularly when of a romantic cast, can be poisoned when one lives in close proximity to female neighbours whom one detests but feels to be implicated in the scope of the lyrics, if only because they could easily overhear them in the next room or the rooms above or below, as the case may be. However, living in a bedsitter in north London I am – and have always been – so far from any kind of romantic or sentimental feelings towards women that rock lyrics often annoy or embarrass me, in any case, for their utter irrelevance to my life.

The solution to that problem, if you are going to continue listening to music, is to use headphones and thus, quite apart from the advantage of being on the male side of the gender fence rather than as some kind of speakers-using bitch, be in a position to keep the music, no matter how lyrically irrelevant, to oneself.

If the body is the objectification (Schopenhauer) of will, and the body's mind, the blood, the objectification of spirit, then it seems not improbable to me that the mind is the subjectification of soul, and the mind's body, the brain, the subjectification of ego, being a factor less of feelings than of intellect, which would contrast with the sensations of bodily will and the emotions of spirit.

Just as flesh and blood overlap in the body, as will and spirit, those quintessentially female attributes, so do brain and mind overlap in the psyche, as ego and soul, those quintessentially male attributes. But fundamental to the existence of brain and mind in the psyche are the flesh and blood of the body, without which the former would naturally be unable to exist. Nor could the brain, and hence mind, exist without the oxygen carried through it by the blood being pumped around the body by the hard-pressed heart, that seat not of the soul, as superficial persons think, but of the spirit. For the feelings of the soul have to be differentiated from the emotions of the spirit as one would distinguish the central nervous system and, indeed, nerves in general from the blood, and whilst emotions, associated with the body, are objective, feelings are subjective on account of their association with the mind, whose nervous disposition borders the brain.

Therefore if the body's mind regressively transcends the body, as spirit the will, or glory the power, so it can be said that the mind progressively transcends the mind's body, as soul the ego, or contentment the form.

It is for this reason that mankind is contradictory, both in terms of gender and class, not to mention ethnicity and occupation. Although they work together and are dependent on each other, body and mind are opposites, like will and soul, power and contentment, absolute alpha and omega, and the body's mind and the mind's body are also opposites, like spirit and ego, glory and form, relative alpha and omega, which happen, in their opposite ways, to be more worldly than either netherworldly (like the body) or otherworldly (like the mind), at least when it is being true to itself and isn't corrupted by submission to bodily rule, as to a wilful despot of autocratic disposition.

Unfortunately, what applies to the mind, the soul, does not apply to the mind's body, the ego, since the fatality of the latter is towards an axial polarity with the body, the flesh, that contrasts, on state-hegemonic terms, with the fatality of the body's mind, the spirit, to establish such a polarity with the mind in what can only be a church-hegemonic axial orientation whose hegemonic positions correspond to spirit and soul, not, like its axial rival and opponent, to will and ego.

Torn between this further contradiction mankind enters into an uneasy equilibrium between opposing kinds of gender polarity that remain incompatible with each other as a matter of axial course. Such is how things can only remain until Judgement (as defined by me in relation to a majority mandate for religious sovereignty) and the establishment, under messianic auspices, of 'Kingdom Come', that is to say, to the ending not only of the world of atomic values, but of axial relativity in relation to that world.

If the heart is the 'seat' of the spirit, the body's mind, then it seems not unreasonable to contend that the genitalia (with particular reference to the female) are the 'seat' of the will and, hence, of the body. Conversely, if the brain is the 'seat' of the ego, the mind's body, then we may well believe that the spinal cord is the 'seat' of the soul and, hence, of the mind.

Now since antitheses are incommensurate, it follows that anybody who is into the ego, the mind's body, will be relatively indisposed to the spirit, the body's mind, and vice versa, whilst anyone who is into the soul, the mind, will be absolutely indisposed to the will, the body, and vice versa.

But it is interesting to note that anybody who is into the brain, the mind's body, will be relatively indisposed to anyone into the blood, the body's mind, whilst anyone who is into the soul, the mind, will be absolutely indisposed to anybody into the flesh, the body, and will scorn the flesh accordingly. The state-hegemonic axis is a polarity, in its hegemonic elements, between noumenal and phenomenal, ethereal and corporeal types of 'anybody' deriving from the polarity of body with mind's body, will with ego, whereas the church-hegemonic axis can only be a polarity, in respect of its hegemonic elements, between phenomenal and noumenal, corporeal and ethereal types of 'anyone' deriving from the polarity of body's mind with mind, spirit with soul.

This, in literary terms (as discussed above), would be a polarity not between speakers and readers, as on the state-hegemonic axis, but between writers and thinkers, and it would of course accord with church-hegemonic axial criteria as stretching from the southwest to the northeast points of the intercardinal axial compass.

All of this, it seems, can only be discovered through philosophy, which is the utilization of logic to a credibly conclusive end such that constitutes a mode of enlightenment.

I have often, in the past, described myself as an artist-philosopher or even as a poetic philosopher which, with my current approach to philosophical findings or teachings, could be described as a writerly thinker, that is, a thinker who writes as opposed, like a thoughtful writer, to a writer who thinks, whom one could alternatively describe as a philosophical poet or even, to reverse my starting-point, a philosopher-artist, like, say, Aldous Huxley, Hermann Hesse, or even Henry Miller.

Thus I pertain more to metaphysics and/or pseudo-metachemistry than to chemistry and/or pseudo-physics, the upper and lower poles, duly gender subdivisible, of the chuch-hegemonic/state-subordinate axis.

The Christian Mass, focusing on the 'body' and 'blood' of Christ, as upon the bread and the wine of the Last Supper, would suggest a concession to will and spirit, power and glory, at the expense of ego and soul, form and contentment, which would be less 'body' and 'blood', or body and body's mind, than mind's body, i.e. brain, and mind, the latter of which, beyond the Christian pale, would have more relevance to the central nervous system or spinal cord.

Therefore the Mass would appear to err on the side of female objectivity at the expense of male subjectivity, the Lord's Prayer itself referencing power and glory as opposed to form and contentment, their male counterparts.

One can see why Puritans prefer to reject the Mass, whether Anglican (with an emphasis, one might suppose, on 'body', and hence will, power, beauty, etc.) or Catholic (with an emphasis, one would think, on 'blood' and, hence, spirit, glory, pride, etc.), since neither 'body' nor 'blood' would be relevant to a religious position more affiliated to the brain and, hence, ego, form, knowledge, etc., in relation, most especially, to the New Testament, all of which would suggest a disposition favouring the mind's body, as it were, which, though axially polar to the body, as to Anglicanism, is less objective, whether noumenally or phenomenally, than subjective, if on terms which, being phenomenal, fall short of the mind and its orientation towards noumenal subjectivity, the subjectivity, one might say, of thinking (praying) rather than of reading (bible studying) that is closer to the soul of true religion in metaphysical Being.

But the so-called 'body of Christ', the Eucharist, is not – and cannot be – identifiable with the mind's body, the brain, since there is nothing more antithetical to spirit, the nature of the blood, than ego, the nature or, more correctly, nurture of the brain, the former being chemically feminine and the latter physically masculine, and therefore it must follow that the Eucharist and celebration thereof is fundamentally a metachemical and chemical ritual that, being objective, connotes with power and glory, will and spirit, as something contrary to both physical and metaphysical, Christian and, as it were, Superchristian (Social Theocratic?) positions favouring either the ego or the soul, form or contentment, as germane to the 'spirit' of true religion.

Educated women, whilst they may know how to be like men, must necessarily unlearn, or forget, how to act like women, since liberation from female norms through education is incompatible with the gender nature of woman.

But this equalitarian manifestation of bourgeois decadence has to co-exist with – and has even been eclipsed by – what could be termed the proletarian barbarity of feminism, especially when that feminism has less to do with equal rights in relation to education, social standing, professional and/or vocational opportunity, etc., than with liberation from anything, including traditional male hegemonic (chauvinistic) criteria, that would keep women 'bottled up', 'boxed in', and generally confined to a subordinate, male-deferring status incompatible with sexual freedom and the right to expression of precisely the femininity that their educated counterparts are busily suppressing in their thirst for gender equality.

This liberated female is more likely to 'burn her bra' and 'strut her stuff' than strive, in decadent bourgeois fashion, to equal if not outdo men in intellectual accomplishments. If anything, such educated females are apt to frown upon the sexual libertarianism of those females whose lifestyles, far from the pursuit of knowledge, revolve around the expression of beauty and the projection of love in the interests, by contrast, of a most inequalitarian hegemony over their male counterparts.