IMMUTABILITY OF THE GENDERS

1. It would seem that females are, by nature, the cursed sex and males the blessed sex - at least when each sex is freely hegemonic in either somatic sensuality for the one or psychic sensibility for the other. For even when males are damned to sensuality in the sinfulness of folly and unholiness they are only cursed on secondary terms, being, as it were, pseudo-cursed in the undermining of psychic freedom, whereas even females who have been saved to sensibility in the punishingness of goodness and unclearness are only blessed on secondary terms, being, as it were, pseudo-blessed in the undermining of somatic freedom.

2. For as creatures for whom psyche precedes soma, males remain psyche-over-soma even in sensuality, despite the greater emphasis upon soma that accrues to their subordinate position under a female hegemony, while, as creatures for whom soma precedes psyche, females remain soma-over-psyche even in sensibility, despite the greater emphasis upon psyche that accrues to their subordinate position under a male hegemony, and therefore we have to regard the primary manifestation of cursedness as pertaining in females to free soma and its secondary manifestation as pertaining in males to bound psyche, in contrast to the primary manifestation of blessedness as pertaining in males to free psyche and the secondary manifestation of it as pertaining to females in bound soma.

3. For males should be conceived of primarily in terms of psychic predominance in relation to the precedence of soma by psyche and females, by contrast, in terms of somatic predominance in relation to the precedence of psyche by soma. The gender for whom freedom is primarily in terms of soma can only be bound, or enslaved, on those terms, as is the case for females in sensibility, whereas the gender for whom freedom is primarily in terms of psyche can only be bound, or enslaved, in terms of psyche - something that applies to males in sensuality.

4. Therefore the free female, whose cursedness will be evil in will and clear in spirit, always presupposes, in subordinate sensual positions, the bound, or enslaved, male, whose cursedness will be foolish in id-undermined soul and unholy in spirit-undermined ego, that is, whose cursedness will be primarily psychic rather than somatic owing to the outflanking of his soul on the part of females by will-inspired soul, viz. id, and the outflanking of his ego on their part by spirit-inspired ego, viz. superego, and the correlative enslavement of psyche to somatic freedoms rooted in fire and water.

5. In contrast to which, the free male, whose blessedness will be wise in ego and holy in soul, always presupposes, in subordinate sensible positions, the bound, or enslaved, female, whose blessedness will be good in ego-undermined will and unclear in soul-undermined spirit, that is, whose blessedness will be primarily somatic rather than psychic owing to the inflanking, as it were, of her will on the part of males by ego-inspired will, viz. natural will (natwill) and the inflanking of her spirit on their part by soul-inspired spirit, viz. subnatural spirit (subspirit) and the correlative enslavement of soma to psychic freedoms rooted or, rather, centred in vegetation and air.

6. Therefore the somatic cursedness of free females in sensuality and the psychic cursedness, or pseudo-cursedness, of bound males in sensuality has to be contrasted with the psychic blessedness of free males in sensibility and the somatic blessedness, or pseudo-blessedness, of bound females in sensibility - cursedness being primarily somatic and only secondarily psychic, blessedness, by contrast, being primarily psychic and only secondarily somatic.

7. Should anyone disbelieve the theory that females are by nature soma-over-psyche and males psyche-over-soma or, in Oscar Wilde's proverbial phrase, females 'matter over mind' and males 'mind over morals' (though, as a self-taught philosopher, I personally prefer logical consistency in terms of 'mind over matter'), one need only stop for a second to ask oneself: how on earth could females be resigned, through sex, to child-bearing and rearing if they were not soma-over-psyche?

8. The fact of a female being intelligent if not intellectual does not invalidate the claim, nay, the incontrovertible reality, that females are by nature soma-over-psyche, but may simply indicate that, in certain instances, the emphasis has been placed on psyche at the expense of soma without the ratio of soma to psyche - 3:1 in the case of the most particle/least wavicle absolutism of metachemical females and 2½:1½ in the case of the more (relative to most) particle/less (relative to least) wavicle relativity of chemical females - necessarily changing by one iota. For males and females or, to revert to common usage, men and women are different creatures, and different they remain irrespective of circumstances or a variety of contingencies, including environmental and social conditioning.

9. People who seek to undermine the realities of gender do so for a variety of reasons, none of which is connected to the sincere pursuit of philosophical truth or, rather, to something which, whilst embracing truth, not to mention its illusory corollary, is capable of doing justice to fact and its corollary of fiction. For, in the end, those who underestimate the significance of gender do a grave disservice to themselves, not least in terms of the sacrifice of wisdom to folly and of goodness to evil, with damnable consequences!

10. Those males, in particular, who underestimate the significance of economics and religion end-up selling out to science and politics, with disastrous consequences for their gender. For the male who lacks the courage or moral insight to be wise after his class fashion inevitably pays for his shortcomings with the curse of folly, and folly it is which sucks up to evil and the free female, the female who has been permitted all manner of somatic licence in the absence of punishing restraint attendant upon the due rule or, rather, lead of male wisdom in sensibility.

11. Small wonder that crime and sin are the order of the day in those societies whose one-track view of freedom owes more to soma than to psyche, to the not-self than to the self, to science and/or politics than to economics and/or religion, and that accordingly boast of freedom primarily in relation to the eyes and/or the tongue rather than primarily in relation to the brain and/or the lungs, making will and/or spirit the principal ideals to be defended against all threats from without or, more correctly, beyond.

12. I do not esteem the female freedoms of power and glory, but only the male freedoms of form and contentment, attendant upon a free ego and/or soul, and I am keen to differentiate, in consequence, between freedom of the press and freedom of conscience, not to mention between freedom of speech and freedom of thought, since what primarily accrues to the eyes and/or tongue must ever be distinguished from what accrues to the brain and/or lungs, as one would distinguish fact-besotted empiricism from truth-oriented rationalism, or fire and water from vegetation (earth) and air, or noumenal and phenomenal objectivity from phenomenal and noumenal subjectivity, endeavouring, once one has clarified the distinction, to grant prominence to one side or the other according to both gender and class considerations.

13. For you cannot have it both ways! Either encourage evil and folly or, presuming upon a certain level of male self-respect, encourage their antipodes, wisdom and goodness, but don't behave like a hypocrite or gender ignoramus for whom either pairing are of equal importance and you may as well strike a balance as strive for one or the other! The amorally androgynous are neither male nor female, men and/or gods nor devils and/or women, but two-faced hypocrites for whom the bog of worldly mud(dle), compounded of water and earth, is preferable to the hell of netherworldly fire or the heaven of otherworldly air. I do not entirely disagree with them as regards the former, but I cannot see how any logical mind could possibly concede to the notion that the bog of worldly mud can possibly be preferable to the heaven of otherworldly air!

14. But I am no fascist! For me, the coming of 'Kingdom Come', which I have customarily identified with a triadic Beyond, has to embrace water and vegetation (earth) as well as air, not to mention a new order of fire in what has been called the administrative aside, but the presence of an airy dimension in the sensible context to which I transcendentally allude would be a new and fresh departure from the world and its netherworldly fatality and guarantor that, no matter what the future may hold, the truth could never again languish on the periphery or be effectively excluded from the way society thinks and acts, but would have a leading role to play in the way society develops and what it regards as its chief priorities, heaven-without-end.