> mim3@mim.org wrote: > > > You all are wishful psycho-biologists thinking all that is needed is some > > stiff sex education in school-- field work! It's not that Nazis > > don't have orgasms ever. They might do it in front of their WWII > > movies or especially sick porno, but they can do it. >

Hr. Vad says:

A lot of people can _ejaculate_, but it does not necessarily give them > the _release_ that is so important to an animal. Take people like > Jeffrey Dahmer (continuing my example from earlier): He surely had a lot > of orgasms with his bed mates/victims, but it did not give him the > _release_ he was searching so desperately for. What those people into > "sick porn" is doing tends to not give them that release -- the sex > makes them even more pent-up. I think you're mistaking the "mechanical" > aspects of sex with the inner, true release that is supposed to happen > when you have sex. When broken, akathartic people have sex "their way" > the kundalini tends to backfire due to closed chakras -- or > neurologically speaking: when release is supposed to happen via the > normal neural pathways the impulses find their ways closed (frustrated) > which cause them to travel by alternative paths. It is this > frustration/Reichian DOR that causes a further build-up in the > akathartic state. > > Hr. Vad >

See this gets back to a discussion we already had long ago. To grant this theory the dignity of being called a theory or scientific proposition, we would have to have the history and distributions of ejaculations and even worse--this sort of mystical release you refer to. Such an historical record--unlike fossils, anthropological artifacts or light from distant star systems DOES NOT EXIST.

You might be persynally sure of something about this kundalani hocus-pocus, but you have no way of connecting it to any argument talking about a deviation from alleged animality. To deviate from something original you have to have the history of that something original. We don't, so this subject is pre-scientific and an excellent excuse for private science.

In contrast, we can study the mode of production. Why? Because we know about the technologies peoples of yore had by digging up their stuff. We ain't never gonna find their kundalanis or chakras.

At best, you can say psychiatry of this sort can handle the limited bunch of people studied by it this century-- vastly disproportionately upper-middle and upper class honkeys.