Homosexuality Part II: The Utilitarian Development of Pederasty in Abrahamic Religion

In Hebrew, the idea of a pederastic origin of homosexuality appears to have taken root. Indeed, there one can’t find a word that means homosexual and not also pederast. In fact, we will shortly discover some clear scriptural evidence that Jewish esotericists believe homosexuality or bisexuality may and should be groomed through pederastic abuse.

Here Freud’s theory of a polymorphous perversity seems to apply. Freud describes “unfocused” sexual drives, especially in children under the age of five where sexual pleasure may be derived outside of “socially normative” sexual behaviors. His is an interesting contemplation not because of what it tells us about “infant sexuality” but because of what it tells us about the purpose and intention of Freudian thought.

Ominously, what Freud appears to be hinting at, is an ability to shape sexuality through early “guidance.”   Here we may now extend the definition of “pederastic abuse” to sexual suggestions appearing in contemporary and ancient Jewish media, whether directed toward children or Aryan adults. Again, we understand Aryans as more racially youthful and impressionable.

The Hebrew word Golem, again, means “something formless,” “embryo” and “larva.” In other words, sexual abuse may be a way of creating faithful and psychologically dominated golems. This study points elsewhere to the possibility if not likelihood that Goyim and Golem are related words. We think of Joseph’s early abuse in Genesis and how it eventually made him an able and powerful servant of Judah.

As with the related phenomena of circumcision, Priestly pederastic abuse, appearing in all three of the major faith’s, may have developed and been perfected by experimentation and observation conducted over generations. Here one was able to develop a particular temperament and “sexual identity” through an early weaning. Again, here we may encounter a cold and clinical “breeder’s mentality,” that makes any Aryan effort toward eugenic breeding appear absolutely mawkish.

Here the goal is certainly not the “corruption” of the Jewish flock —that seems to have evolved in some essential manner bisexually— nor is it merely the corruption of an enemy’s flock. Rather, the goal is to submit one’s own flock and an enemy’s flock, which one makes one own, to psycho-sexual domination. The goal is to weaken and feminize the world around them, to make of the world, to make “Israel,” a psychologically dominated wife, both its men and women. In this manner, they conquer the world by lowering it, by humiliating it and by degrading it.

Pederasty and homosexuality among priests, Rabbis, Imams, princes, politicians, academics and media developers is inherently secretive and thus, ultimately, unknowable in its scope. Here both practitioners and victims strongly pressured and incentivized to deny its existence. Consider for instance the outraged reaction of even the secular “homosexual community” to any suggestion that pederasty is related to homosexuality.

The incentive here is obvious: any acknowledgment of pederasty as a problem among the homosexual community is to admit abnormality, even criminality and to devastate social acceptance. It is also to suggest “contagiousness.” Suddenly they fall from celebrated, protected novelties, enjoying a decadent lifestyle, to tragic, mentally ill men in need of treatment and quarantine. Here, an attack on one, is an attack on all. Here, again, men are thick as thieves. Add a Religious facade of moral righteousness, even one exoterically preaching against homosexuality, as appears in Christianity, and the stakes and the loyalty go up a thousand-fold.

In the religious context, these castes of men are fiercely protected by the lay communities among which they reside. Arguably the lower the intelligence of the surrounding laity the fiercer the protection, hence one is incentivized to breed this laity poorly. We may find an exception here with Judaism where one is believed innocent, at least in comparison to a dangerous adversarial out-group, merely by dint of being a “persecuted” Jew. In any case, they will make the criticism themselves, not outsiders, with a priority placed on not lowering the reputation of Jews in the face of outsiders, in other words, on “covering up.”

Regardless, the very notion that the priest caste of one’s accepted faith is guilty of anything, let alone the worst sexual offenses, is perceived as an attack on the individual of that community himself. It is an attack on his “identity.” It is possibly an attack on his intelligence. It is possibly calling him a fool for not guessing. More gravely, it is an attack on his morality and what he believes, mistakenly, to be the basis of it. It tells him he follows and protects the worst people alive, even to the point of endangering his own children. He will fight that contention fiercely.

It’s my thesis that these pederastic tendencies among at least Jewish, Muslim and Christian priests, don’t merely come with the territory, but are encoded in scripture, esoterically, as esoteric instruction and as a means of celebrating them and keeping them alive. This is revealed especially in the parables surrounding Jonah, Elisha and Elijah but also in the relationships of Samuel, Saul, Jonathan and David. Here pederasty is a “sacred mystery.” Here we may find a method by which priests themselves are “groomed” into priesthood.

In other words, as pederasty becomes a form of “reproduction” for homosexuals in the secular community, it becomes a form of “reproduction” for both celibate and non-celibate priests in the Christian, Jewish and Islamic communities. Here Altar boys are not simply haphazardly abused or only haphazardly abused but inducted into priesthood. It is in this milieu homosexuality even becomes a problem one preaches against because, indeed, here, it is actually a problem.

The “Pauline” anti-homosexuality of the church, to the extent it appears in earnest, is cover. “They cry out as they hit you,” when you haven’t “hit” anyone.  Naturally we don’t imply all priests are homosexual. Yet those whom are not are frequently among them, wittingly or not. What number are innocent, deceived “true believers,” what number are tormented, conflicted, suffering, sinful yet passionate, delightfully “aroused souls” and what number are cynical clock-punchers who “know the score,” can never be known.  Neither would I insist there are clear boundaries demarcating these three groups. Likewise some, more naturally, lust for women.

Indeed, that this ancient problem and practice is only now coming to light tells us not that the problem is new but only that Christianity is dying and fealty can no longer be purchased. It is a Jewish brand being retired, attacked by other younger more promising Jewish brands.  It is especially attacked by the Jewish media so that this new brand may gain credibility. It is The Caducean, the serpent eating its old skin. Never feel sorry for an old dragon.

Perhaps at the center of the Abrahamic faiths, where all three faiths converge in darkened chambers, at the heart of this three-headed hydra, we encounter a technique by which fealty to a Jewish God and Jewry is solidified. Here, homosexual or bisexual Jews instill “fealty” through the sexual and psychological abuse of non-Jews, who in turn, through the same method, instill this same fealty onto their own flock. The Great Fish appearing in the Jonah parable and the prophet Elijah especially appear to be the archetype of this “top predator.”

More generally the homosexual and the Jew are also inextricably linked for the following reasons. During relatively salubrious periods both function in crypsis. Both resent this crypsis and push for society to become tolerant of their identities. Hence there is a natural sympathy and alliance here whereby the homosexual, lacking meaningful genetic goals, becomes the ready tool of the Jew. They both as well demonstrate the feminine power of crypsis, of lying and of hiding. The Christian priest has wielded this power the whole time. Here we find Mercury with his cap of invisibility.

Finally, we might guess, that a practiced homosexuality or bisexuality, residing at the hidden core of Judaism as well as that of the Christian and Islamic priests classes, accounts in some part for the profound group cohesion of these groups. In other words, they are “men in love.” Here smitten female congregants become what we now call “fag hags” or “flame dames” of a Jewish Fire God. There the love and loyalty of jilted women is deep.

The Priest or Philosopher as a Homosexual and Pederastic type

By instinct one understands the gowned men called priests effeminate. The “compassionate,” “concerned,” “spiritual” and “moral” mien here often comports with this suspicion. Meaningfully, modern Rabbis in contrast to Christian priests are not gowned, literally “wearing the pants in the relationship.”   Mercury and Bacchus, whom conform to a priest type, in contrast to the warrior Mars, are also more effeminate types. Indeed, perhaps meaningfully, Mercury will sire Hermaphroditus with Venus. Thus we see a progression toward ever greater effeminacy and androgyny.

Regarding pederasty, the “racist” Protestant will say, “well, these are things Jews and Catholics do.”  The “racist” Catholic will say, “well these are things Jews and fallen Catholics do as well as, doubtlessly, fallen Protestants.” The common, earnest Sussman Jew will say “these are things fallen men in general do.”   I will say that firstly and fairly these tendencies may be found among the priestly or “philosophic” type in general if, granted, especially within ancient cults that have practiced and institutionalized these things for millennia. Having said this, Jews are certainly the most Priestly and “Philosophic” of people, hence the gold standard of these tendencies.

Nevertheless, the reader will be aware of instances even within the largely secular “White Nationalist” community where homosexual men are using their prestige and natural, feminine verbal gifts —which relies on a fluid perfusion of words rather than a density of original content— to groom, younger, sexually confused men. This is no new story, the sophists and philosophers of Greece, whose general Semitic character I have already suggested, evince the same proclivity, both to homosexuality and pederasty.

Philosophers and Priests thrive wherever there are ambiguous, profound sounding concepts like “soul,” “spirit,” “thumos” or “being.” This “magic” or lack of concreteness is a glimpse also into their masculinity. It is, indeed, a great “Western” tradition. Thus but one reason we no longer call ourselves “Western.” This is why the Priest of Apollo is the anti-Priest, a bard who sings paeans of an approaching and immortal victory.

Part III here: Homosexuality Part III: The Exoteric Homophobia of the Abrahamic Faiths