101.   There is therefore, in this narrower sense, antiman and man, the antiphysical and the physical, but also, in each phenomenal context, woman and antiwoman, the chemical and the antichemical, neither of whom can be left out of the overall worldly dichotomy between the phenomenally sensual and their sensible counterparts. 

102.   There is also, as we have seen, that which controls antiman and woman, being germane to the metaphysical and antimetachemical contexts of noumenal sensibility, which we may call godly and antidevilish, thereby classing them apart from the generality of persons identifiable with phenomenal sensuality. 

103.   But there is also, as noted, that which controls antiwoman and man, being germane to the metachemical and antimetaphysical context of noumenal sensuality, which we can call devilish and antigodly, thereby classing them apart from the generality of persons identifiable with phenomenal sensibility.

104.   Therefore in returning to our axial distinctions between the meek and the righteous, phenomenal sensuality and noumenal sensibility, on the one hand, and the vain and the just, noumenal sensuality and phenomenal sensibility, on the other hand, it becomes evident that we are dealing, outside simple species definitions, with more than simply man or antiman.  We are also dealing with woman and antiwoman, the devilish and the antigodly, the godly and the antidevilish, all of whom differ from one another on a class or a gender basis within contexts either ruled by sensuality or led by sensibility.

105.   The concept of 'mankind', as a crass generalization for a two-legged species capable of thought, becomes rather irrelevant in the face of such manifold distinctions, as does the notion of 'human being' vis-à-vis people who spend much of their time demonstrating that, quite apart from the existence of human beings, they are more like doings or givings or takings, not to mention antidoings, antigivings, antitakings, and even antibeings who will be more or less human depending on the extents to which they are also, or alternatively, devilish or antigodly, godly or antidevilish, womanly or antimanly, manly or antiwomanly, as the case may be.

106.   Man as a kind distinct from animals and plants is no more homogeneous than the other kinds but is capable of being identified with a great many different roles and circumstances, and while there are some who will more literally approximate to what is human, or humanistic, there will be others who just as readily approximate to what is antihuman, or antihumanistic, not to mention to what is antinaturalistic rather than naturalistic within antiphysics as opposed to physics, thereby suggesting a closer affiliation with the death of man than with his birth or worship. 

107.   There is nothing special about being human, or humanistic, in the estimation of God, or godliness.  The godly are only really interested in the antihumanistic, the antimanly, and then to the extent that they can be saved to transcendentalism; for the death of man is a precondition of the birth of God, while the antidevilish corollary of godliness would evince a similar interest in the salvation of the nonconformistic, the subverted womanly, to the extent that they could be saved, in secondary vein, to antifundamentalism, passing from the death of woman under antihumanist subversion to the birth of the Antidevil under a divine hegemony in transcendentalism.

108.   But those who are neither antiphysical nor chemical, neither antimasculine nor feminine, but either antifeminine or masculine, antichemical or physical - what can the godly and/or antidevilish do for them?  Nothing!  For they appertain to a different axis from that which reflects church-hegemonic and state-subordinate criteria, being at the worldly base of the diagonally descending axis of state-hegemonic and church-subordinate criteria, and far from the few wishing to save the many, as from bound to free psyche, and to counter-damn them, as from free to bound soma, it is the many who would like to damn the few and render them less somatically free in consequence, perhaps even rendering some of them more psychically free in proportion as they become counter-saved from bound to free psyche and thus partake in the worship of the birth of both antiwoman and man in phenomenally sensible partnership, the former primary in both state and church, the latter, duly subverted from below, no more than secondary manifestations of state-hegemonic and church-subordinate criteria who consequently have no option but to live the life of man as a sort of slave to antiwoman, who is in turn a slave to the devilish who rule a freely somatic metachemical roost at the expense of an antigodly 'fall guy'.

109.   No, 'mankind' is too vague a word to do justice to these much more complex and multiform operations of disparate categories of persons, some of whom are more or less human than others.  There are those who are of God and the Antidevil, there are those who, though of antiman and woman, can be saved, no matter how intermittently or impermanently, to God and the Antidevil; and there are those, by contrast, who are of antiwoman and man, and others who, though of the Devil and Antigod, can be damned, no matter how intermittently or impermanently, to antiwoman and man.  Saved, in church-hegemonic vein, from bound to free psyche, and damned, in state-hegemonic vein, from free to bound soma.  Not forgetting, of course, the counter-damnation, in state-subordinate vein, from free to bound soma and the counter-salvation, in church-subordinate vein, from bound to free psyche, as in relation to the somatic or psychic affiliates, as the case may be, of the hegemonic factors.

110.   Therefore just as there are godly and antidevilish types at work trying to save antimasculine and feminine types, as from phenomenal sensuality to noumenal sensibility, so there are devilish and antigodly types at work trying to resist being damned by antifeminine and masculine types, as from noumenal sensuality to phenomenal sensibility.  The axes effectively pull in opposite directions, the diagonally ascending one up from the many to the few, the diagonally descending one down from the few to the many, and therefore they are completely incommensurate and antithetical in virtually every respect.

111.   And, in overall historical terms, it could be argued that the death, at least in cosmic terms, of Devil the Mother leading to the birth of man, on both liberal and totalitarian humanist terms, has closer associations with the diagonally descending axis than ever it does with its diagonally ascending counterpart, in connection with which it is more logical to distinguish between the death of man and the birth of God the Father, as and when, transcending mere implicit hope of and allusion to the latter, the Second Coming equivalent brings his teachings into the world to lead the antiphysical, coupled to their chemical counterparts, towards the possibility of a new metaphysical dispensation which, hegemonic over antimetachemistry, will resurrect the phenomenally sensual dead in such fashion that they become the recipients of a degree and kind of Eternal Life commensurate with the most evolved and therefore per se manifestation of God/the Antidevil in the cyborg supersession not simply of mankind's more (compared to most) evolved approach to noumenal sensibility (where applicable), but also, and no less importantly, of nature's less (compared to least) evolved approach to noumenal sensibility (where applicable) and the Cosmos's least evolved approach to noumenal sensibility (where applicable) - approaches that, with good reason, have always been in the shadow of either man, woman, or the Devil, as the case may be, and are not capable of a truly representative stance or status in consequence.

112.   Be that as it may, the ascending and descending axes differ so antithetically that even in sex and sport, about which I shall now expatiate at some length, there are major differences, not least in respect of the relationship of psyche to soma or vice versa, and the extent to which sport, reflecting such relationships, can be either church hegemonic and state subordinate or, by contrast, state hegemonic and church subordinate.

113.   For it has logically occurred to me that sport is no more simply one thing or another, of the State or of the Church, than sex, since there is always a subordinate somatic dimension to church-hegemonic society and a subordinate psychic dimension to state-hegemonic society, no matter how much psyche and soma may typify the respective alternatives.  Therefore just as in Revolutionary Afterthoughts I distinguished the Irish games of hurling and Gaelic football from their British counterparts rugby and association football on the basis of an axial distinction between the many and the few of church-hegemonic society on the one hand and the few and the many of state-hegemonic society on the other hand, I did not, I believe, exclude soma from the former context or, indeed, psyche from the latter, and therefore it can be maintained that each of the sports is indicative, in their different ways, of both a church and a state dimension, if with a bias one way or the other according to the axis to which the sport would seem to conform.

114.   Therefore we can no more limit hurling and Gaelic football to bound and free psyche respectively than rugby and association football to free and bound soma, even though such ascriptions would arguably conform to what most characterizes each of these particular kinds of sport, bearing in mind their association with church-hegemonic criteria in the case of the Irish games and with state-hegemonic criteria in the case of the British games.  Clearly there is a state-subordinate dimension to both hurling and Gaelic football, not least in respect of points or goals scored under the crossbar, which complements, from below, the points scored over the bar between the extended uprights in arguably more representatively church-hegemonic vein, as when a bound (in the case of hurling) or a free (in the case of Gaelic) psychic parallel is indicated in respect of the greater height attaching to such points.

115.   Contrariwise, there is evidently a church-subordinate dimension to both rugby and association football, not least in respect of points scored (more usually via spot kicks) between the extended uprights in the case of rugby or goals scored via the head in the case of football, which complements, from above, the points scored under the bar or to either side of the uprights in the form of tries in rugby and goals scored via the foot in football in arguably more representatively state-hegemonic vein, as when a free (in the case of rugby) or a bound (in the case of football) somatic parallel is indicated in respect of the lesser height and/or greater depth attaching to such tries and/or goals.

116.   But just as we cannot limit such games to church or state, even if a bias towards one or the other will more usually typify their respective axial integrities, neither, it seems to me, can they be limited to only one gender or gender influence, as though simply significant of a male input from antiphysics to metaphysics on the ascending axis or of a female input from metachemistry to antichemistry on the descending one; for if the Irish games are not entirely male to the extent that they, or some equivalent thereof, are often played by females, then it would be foolish to suppose that the British games were entirely female when more usually played by males.  Or, rather, it would be as presumptuous to suppose that there was no chemical or antimetachemical dimension to the Irish games as that there was no antimetaphysical or physical dimension to the British games, irrespective of the extents to which both pairs of axially antithetical games remained either church hegemonic or state hegemonic which, in any case, is something that can apply from the standpoint of either gender, if on different terms, since according with either a primary or a secondary approach to each.

117.   Frankly I like to think that, in association football, low goals scored with the foot should be somatically distinguished from high goals scored with the foot, whether in consequence of having been hit on the volley or simply struck with a top corner or arching descent in mind, just as low goals scored with the head should be psychically distinguished from high goals scored with the head, more usually in consequence of the player having to jump rather than dive, and if such a distinction is between an antirealist and a naturalist approach to a state-hegemonic parallel in the case of booted goals and an antinonconformist and a humanist approach to a church-subordinate parallel in the case of headed goals, then who am I to argue?  I see no other interpretation to put on the methodology of football scoring than one that confirms either a bound somatic or a free psychic orientation on both antichemical and physical terms in which state-hegemonic criteria will take precedence, in bound soma, over church-subordinate criteria in keeping with the general nature of phenomenal sensibility as that which, stemming from noumenal sensuality, signifies the just retort of the many to the somatically free antics of the few.

118.   Likewise, in respect of the latter, I see no reason not to think that, in rugby, tries scored either side of the uprights should be somatically distinguished from those scored inside the uprights, while points scored between the uprights in consequence of a drop kick should be psychically distinguished from those scored in such fashion from a spot kick, and if such a distinction is between a materialist and an anti-idealist approach to a state-hegemonic parallel in the case of tries and a fundamentalist and an antitranscendentalist approach to a church-subordinate parallel in the case of drop and spot kicks, then who am I to argue?  I see no other interpretation to put on the methodology of rugby scoring than one that confirms either a free somatic or a bound psychic orientation on both metachemical and antimetaphysical terms in which state-hegemonic criteria will take precedence, in free soma, over church-subordinate criteria in keeping with the general nature of noumenal sensuality as that which, issuing from an overall female hegemony, signifies the right of the somatically free to have their centrifugal way on both loosely and closely objective terms.

119.   Be that as it may, distinctions in hurling similar to those of football between low and high points between the extended uprights and low and high goals under the crossbar should confirm an antiphysical/chemical distinction between church-hegemonic criteria in respect of antihumanism/nonconformism and state-subordinate criteria in respect of antinaturalism/realism, even if this may be the reverse of the Gaelic football distinctions between high and low points between the extended uprights and high and low goals under the crossbar as confirmation of a metaphysical/antimetachemical distinction between church-hegemonic criteria in respect of transcendentalism/antifundamentalism and state-subordinate criteria in respect of idealism/antimaterialism, in that the male positions would be higher than the female and therefore truly reflective of a hegemonic position.

120.   Either way, whether with an emphasis on bound psyche at the expense of free soma in hurling or, from the standpoint of noumenal sensibility, on free psyche at the expense of bound soma in Gaelic football, points between the extended uprights would, I argue, be more representatively church-hegemonic than those scored beneath the crossbar, even if counting for less in the overall points register than goals, and therefore one can only conclude that, in contrast to the British games, the Irish ones attach greater significance, morally and culturally, to whatever is scored above the crossbar than to its more mundane and, in effect, state-subordinate counterpart beneath it.

121.   Of course, there will be those who say that I have got the Irish games the wrong way around, since hurling is demonstrably higher - the application of hurley to slitter, or sliothar, generally requiring that play proceeds at a consistently greater height from the ground to football  where any running or dribbling-like tendency is concerned - than Gaelic football which, as the name suggests, simply parallels association football from the standpoint of phenomenal sensuality as opposed to sensibility, and is therefore more of a People's game than hurling.  However, much as I would respect such an argument, I frankly don't believe that to be the case; for Gaelic football is no more foot-low, like soccer so often is, than American so-called football, and is in that sense also something of a misnomer, as indeed is the term rugby football for a game that generally proceeds on the basis of carrying and running with the ball - necessarily elongated or oblong to facilitate grip - close to one's chest. 

122.   Besides, quite apart from the more elevated standing of Gaelic football than the latter part of the name would suggest, there is something phallic-like about a hurley that, no matter how high it may be wielded, suggests more of a mundane status in relation to the world, while points scored with it between the extended uprights are more likely to suggest a correlation with bound than free psyche in respect of the more pressing need to clasp the hurley with both hands, especially since points scored between the uprights in Gaelic football can be via the clenched fist of a raised arm, and there is surely nothing more ideologically or morally elevated than the clenched fist of a such an arm - something to which the more noumenally sensible are invariably drawn, as to a subjectively centripetal omega-point of ideological resolution. 

123.   However, I am prepared to concede that I could be wrong in my estimation of the relative standings of hurling and Gaelic football (though virtually every stick-wielding game one can think of seems to appertain to a lower plane than its stick-free counterpart, cricket to rugby, baseball to gridiron, hockey to football, etc.) even if, despite or perhaps because of my long exile from Ireland, I don't happen to believe so, largely, I suspect, because I am confident that Gaelic football is not only axially antithetical on an upper-class basis to rugby football, but that a like-antithesis between Australian rules football and American football can be adduced which might well be respectively more radically Left and Right again than these antithetical manifestations, within the comparatively narrow confines of the British Isles, of the radical Left and the radical Right, the freely psychic and the freely somatic. 

124.   But if games like these are divisible, over and above class distinctions, between psyche and soma, then so, of course, is sex, which is not just a matter of coitus, of somatic intercourse, but also has a long and even in some respects honourable tradition of oral sex behind it which, so I believe, would stand in a broadly psychic relationship to its somatic counterpart, whether arguably more prevalent or not.

125.   Obviously that can be logically reduced to an antithetical distinction between church- and state-hegemonic criteria; for if the one is to be identified with psyche and the other with soma, then oral sex will always stand closer to the Church and coitus to the State, irrespective of whether in hegemonic or subordinate vein, depending, one could argue, on the axis to which it is affiliated in any given context.