FIG – The sacred fruit of Hera / Juno: the goddess of marriage

FIG

The sacred fruit of Hera / Juno: the goddess of marriage

(Also, GOAT: the sacred animal of Hera / Juno)

http://www.kreweofjupiter.com/royaltymain.html, Krewe of Jupiter Royalty:

Juno was worshiped all over greece, especially in Argos and Salmos where she had several temples built in her honour. She is a symbol of marriage, marital love and childbirth. … Figs are Her sacred fruit.

http://www.w-a-u.net/romangoddess.html, Meet the Roman Goddesses, “Juno”:

Figs are Her sacred fruit.

This site describes every goddess, and “fig” is only listed under Juno.

http://wwwiz.com/issue34/html/article5.html, COOKING, “More Than Just a (Fig) Leaf”:

The fig has been cultivated since earliest times. Apart from its value as a food tree, it was regarded as sacred by many people. The ancient Hebrews looked upon the fig tree as a symbol of peace and plenty. Mohammed’s followers called it the "Tree of Heaven." The old Romans sacrificed the milky sap of the wild fig tree to Juno, and some central African tribes built huts for the spirits of their ancestors in the shape of the sacred fig trees. The fig is the first tree mentioned in the Bible (Genesis 3:7).

The Praeger Encyclopedia of Ancient Greek Civilization, 1967, p. 283, “Marriage”:

FIG -- Nonae Caprotinae (July 7):

The New Encyclopedia Britannica, 2002, Vol. 6, p. 657, “Juno”:

It fits that the Goddess of Marriage would be associated with the military.

Same page (Juno):

Now who’s that remind you of? The irony is that the goddess representing the prison of marriage would be associated with Liberty and Freedom, but then the Statue of Liberty is a modern day analysis.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=liberty (Dictionary.com), “liberty”:

1. a. The condition of being free from restriction or control. … See Synonyms at freedom. –That doesn’t sound much like marriage to me, simply because the vows of marriage definitely includes sexual “restrictions.”

http://www.societasviaromana.org/Collegium_Religionis/caljul.php, Roman Calendar, “Julius [July]”:

7 Non Quint N: NONAE CAPROTINAE Women sacrifice to Juno Caprotina beneath a wild fig tree, where ancillae are honored for having saved the women of Rome from a Latin army.

This site describes every festival day of the entire year, and “fig” is only listed on July 7.

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Sparta/7249/Calendar.html, Calendar of Holidays and Festivals, “July”:

7th= Nonae Caprotinae, in honor of Juno Caprotina. The oldest ferial presides over the Nonae Captotinae in which both free women and ancillae take part. The latter race, and fight each other with fists and stones. On this date the sacrifice to Juno takes place under a certain wild fig tree, the "milk" which flows from it's brances being used in the rites.

This site also describes every festival day of the entire year, and “fig” is only listed on July 7.

http://www.thedreaminggoddess.com/goddess.php, “The Goddess Juno”:

Juno was honored in two festivals: the unrestrained Nonae Caprotinae on July 7, when serving girls staged mock fights under a wild fig tree; and the more sedate Matronalia on March 1, when married women demanded money from their husbands to offer to the goddess of womanhood.

In Latin “Matronalia” means “of or befitting a married woman.”

http://www.goddess.ws/juno.html, Juno:

Her significant festivals were the Matronalia on March 1 and the Nonae Caprotinae, which was celebrated under a wild fig tree in the Campus Martius on July 7.

http://www.web-dictionary.org/encyclopedia/he/Hera.html, Hera:

On July 7 was another festival in her honor, the Nonae Caprotinae[?] ("The Nones of the Wild Fig").

http://www.clubs.psu.edu/up/aegsa/rome/jul06.htm, The Nones of July:

This day is the Nonae Caprotinae, or the Fig Festival.

http://www.pantheon.org/miscellaneous/feastdays.html (Encyclopedia Mythica), Feast Days, “Nonae Caprotinae (Roman)”:

"The Nones of the Wild Fig". A festival in honor of Juno.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/308353/Juno#tab=active~checked%2Citems~checked&title=Juno%20--%20Britannica%20Online%20Encyclopedia, Encyclopaedia Britannica, “Juno”:

Her significant festivals were the Matronalia on March 1 and the Nonae Caprotinae, which was celebrated under a wild fig tree in the Campus Martius on July 7.

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Atrium/3958/goddess1.htm, Goddess Symbolism & Mythology, “Juno”:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juno_(mythology), “Juno (mythology)”:

Another festival called the Nonae Caprotinae ("The Nones of the Wild Fig") was held on July 7. Many people consider the month of June, which is named after the goddess who is the patroness of marriage, to be the most favorable time to marry.

http://www.mc.maricopa.edu/dept/d10/asb/anthro2003/ancient_religion/pages/feast_days.html, Egyptian Feast days, “July 7”:

Nonae Caprotinae ("the nones of the wild fig"), the second festival of Juno, the chief Roman goddess.

This site also describes every festival day of the entire year, and “fig” is only listed on July 7.

Therefore, the FIG is a sign of marriage:

The original sin:

Genesis 2:25 (NKJV):

And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

Genesis 3:6-7,11:

⁶So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree desirable to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate. She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate. ⁷Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves coverings. … ¹¹And He [God] said, "Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you that you should not eat?"

The coverings with marriage (fig leaves) – because marriage is possessiveness – fits that being publicly sexually exposed (naked) would make one feel “ashamed.” Furthermore, the fig (marriage) is the first listed fruit that comes from the tree which directly relates to what Eve just picked (Genesis 3:1-3), the “original sin” from which started the whole fuss. “Tree” to “fig” is as close as from verse 6 to verse 7. Probably not even enough time between these two verses to even travel to another tree. If it was to mean another fruit, then it would have told about them traveling to another tree; because otherwise, this closeness definitely blames marriage as the “original sin.”

Encyclopedia of World Mythology, Warner, 1975, p. 237, “THE MYTHOLOGY OF PLANTS | Fig”:

Jesus curses the fig tree:

Matthew 21:19:

And seeing a fig tree by the road, He came to it and found nothing on it but leaves, and said to it, "Let no fruit grow on you ever again." Immediately the fig tree withered away.

& Mark 11:14,21:

¹⁴In response Jesus said to it [the fig tree], "Let no one eat fruit from you ever again." And His disciples heard it. … ²¹And Peter, remembering, said to Him, "Rabbi, look! The fig tree which You cursed has withered away."

Jesus instructs / “curses” marriage (the fig tree) to “wither[] away,” meaning that you do not divorce from your commitments, you just don’t get married again, or never marry in the first place. Since Christians still eat figs (“let no one eat fruit from you ever again”), that shows they would have to agree that this is an allegory / symbolic, meaning it has an unknown (on the surface) meaning; necessary so to pass through the Dark Ages of Church corruption.

http://www.goddess-pages.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=492, A journal of Goddess Spirituality in the 21st Century, “Mythology, Menstruation and the ‘Woman with the Issue of Blood’”:

(Of different context:)

I am a little reluctant to welcome these comments from the Catholic Church, particularly as in the Bible the best publicised environmental vandalism - the deliberate and senseless destruction of a wild fig tree - was in fact perpetrated by Jesus himself. This is how authors of the Good Book report it in the Gospel of Mark (11;12-21):

“The next day as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry. Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to find out if it had any fruit. When he reached it, he found nothing but leaves, because it was not the season for figs. Then he said to the tree, "May no one ever eat fruit from you again." And his disciples heard him say it… In the morning, as they went along, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots. Peter remembered and said to Jesus: "Rabbi, look! The fig tree you cursed has withered!"

Today, of course, a well-known public figure could never get away with such pointless vandalism, and anyone openly destroying a budding tree, in front of witnesses, would probably be crucified by the British press. At the time, however, only Juno, the Goddess of the wild fig tree, was watching with horror the obliteration of Her sacred tree.

http://www.goddess-pages.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=492 (Goddess Pages), Mythology, Menstruation and the “Woman with the Issue of Blood”:

Juno, the Goddess of the wild fig tree

…

“Cursing the Fig Tree”:

The sacred tree of the Roman Goddess Juno has been the symbol of the eternal feminine since time immemorial. Fig leaves have been seen as a representation of the divine yoni, and the image of the menstruating vulva of the Goddess is rightly seen in the fresh fruit.³ It is clear therefore that the authors of the Gospels⁴ needed to annihilate the fig tree.

Celebrated throughout the Roman world only by women, both free women and slaves, was the Festival of Juno Caprotina. Sacrifice of milk from the fig tree was offered to Juno in Her aspect as fertility Goddess. Branches cut from the fig trees were used to promote fecundity.

In the “cursing of the fig tree”, the basic story tells us that on his way to Jerusalem, Jesus becomes hungry. Seeing a fig tree he goes to pick some figs. It has no fruit because fig trees don’t bear fruit until late summer. Subsequently, Jesus curses the tree and it withers. The question is obvious: Why? As a miracle worker, it would have been just as easy for him to make the tree produce ripe figs, instead of destroying the tree.

Today’s generation:

Matthew 24:32-34:

³²"Now learn this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. ³³So you also, when you see all these things, know that it is near--at the doors! ³⁴Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place. ³⁵Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away.

& Mark 13:28-31:

²⁸"Now learn this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender, and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. ²⁹So you also, when you see these things happening, know that it is near--at the doors! ³⁰Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place. ³¹Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away.

The “parable” sign of the coming of the Son of Man (before said generation passes): when marriage (the fig tree) “becomes tender” and “puts forth leaves.” – “Effective birth control” in 1960 and “women’s lib” in the 1970s started the great number of divorces, the growing number of babies born out of wedlock, more and more people leaving Christianity, etc. showing that marriage is on it’s way out, because people down deep really don’t want marriage; therefore, “allowing” the public acceptability of the Goldenrule in religion: 50 years ago, no one would have given me a second thought. Today, because of the growing number of promiscuous behavior, mainstream conservatives are pressuring abstinence until marriage more than ever.

Nathanael blessed for leaving marriage:

Now, this one is probably not as certain as the others, so you should reach your own conclusion:

John 1:47-51:

⁴⁷Jesus saw Nathanael coming toward Him, and said of him, "Behold, an Israelite indeed, in whom is no deceit!" ⁴⁸Nathanael said to Him, "How do You know me?" Jesus answered and said to him, "Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you." ⁴⁹Nathanael answered and said to Him, "Rabbi, You are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!" ⁵⁰Jesus answered and said to him, "Because I said to you, "I saw you under the fig tree,' do you believe? You will see greater things than these." ⁵¹And He said to him, "Most assuredly, I say to you, hereafter you shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man."

“Under the fig tree” would mean being married, and the word “were” would indicate that he is not married any longer. In 1 Esdras 9:18-22 there’s a Nathanael (same spelling) who vowed to “put away their wives”:

Cambridge Annotated Study Apocrypha (NRSV), 1994, p. 191, 1 Esdras 9:18-22 (Apocrypha):

Here’s a parallel account:

Ezra 10:18-22 (Pagan Wives Put Away):

¹⁸And among the sons of the priests who had taken pagan wives the following were found of the sons of Jeshua the son of Jozadak, and his brothers: Maaseiah, Eliezer, Jarib, and Gedaliah. ¹⁹And they gave their promise that they would put away their wives; and being guilty, they presented a ram of the flock as their trespass offering. ²⁰Also of the sons of Immer: Hanani and Zebadiah; ²¹of the sons of Harim: Maaseiah, Elijah, Shemaiah, Jehiel, and Uzziah; ²²of the sons of Pashhur: Elioenai, Maaseiah, Ishmael, Nethanel, Jozabad, and Elasah.

Therefore, Jesus’ praising Nathanael could be because he vowed to stop marriage, if you look at it allegorically. Otherwise, the passage lacks a message. Nathanael is described as a Disciple, but since no other Gospel speaks of him as being one of the twelve, it makes sense that the passage could be allegoric to match the Old Testament Nathanael. Jesus also told Nathanael that he “will see greater things than [figs / marriage].”

Fig tree versus olives and the grapevine:

James 3:12:

¹⁰Out of the same mouth proceed blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not to be so. ¹¹Does a spring send forth fresh water and bitter from the same opening? ¹²Can a fig tree, my brethren, bear olives, or a grapevine bear figs? Thus no spring yields both salt water and fresh.

In opposition to the fig tree, the olive is a Biblical emblem of peace, prosperity, and wealth:

http://www.closetojesus.org/modules/news/article.php?storyid=19, Close to Jesus - News:

the olive branch is a symbol of peace, prosperity, and wealth.

Therefore, the verse allegorically states that marriage cannot bear peace, prosperity, and wealth; and promiscuous sex (Dionysus’ grapevine: orgies) cannot bear marriage. The verse also equates promiscuous sex with peace, prosperity, and wealth. Again, in Jesus’ day, the pagan gods / goddesses and their sacred symbols / fruits were as popular as gods / goddesses; therefore, James had to have known of these correlations.

Incidentally, also note that Hera “hated” Dionysus:

The Rapid Fact Finder: A Desk Book of Universal Knowledge, Weideman, 1958, p. 134:

Cassell’s Dictionary of Classical Mythology, Jenny March, 2001, p. 265, “Dionysus or Bacchus”:

Hera / Juno’s sacred animal was the GOAT:

Jesus also described the evil ones as “goats” in Matthew 25:31-46. And, that’s the only passage where Jesus talks about goats. For example: Matthew 25:33: “And He will set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left.” Then explains how he will curse and ignore those who are goats. Note: John 10:11: “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep.”

http://www.hannibalofcarthage.org/Juno.php, The Gods > The Gods of Rome > Juno, “The Goddess Juno”:

The Caprotinae was celebrated on July 7. This was a festival to Juno Caprotina and women both free and slave attended the sacrifice of milk from a fig tree. Branches cut from the fig trees were used to strike the women, perhaps to promote fertility. Figs from wild trees were placed in the branches of cultivated ones to promote the fertility of the orchard.

…

Her sacred animal is the goat and Her sacred fruit is the fig

http://books.google.com/books?id=jEcpkWjYOZQC&pg=PP1&dq=%22Dictionary+of+Ancient+Deities#PPA253,M1, Dictionary of Ancient Deities –Google Books Result, by Patricia Turner, Charles Russell Coulter, 2001, p. 253, “Juno”:

http://www.bol.sapphiremoon.info/ll/deities.htm, Deities of the Moon, “Juno”:

http://books.google.com/books?id=-F0KAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22The+Roman+Festivals+of+the+Period+of+the+Republic&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=qZiFhzwBSc&sig=lIpqCl7O6aSUBLrOGhSPdrQm_lA&hl=en&ei=wHfeSdGXCcfinQfaibybAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#PPA178,M1, The Roman festivals of the period of the Republic: An Introduction to the Study of the Religion of the Romans –Google Books Result, by William Warde Fowler, 1899, p. 178, “Mensis Quinctilis” (“Festivals of July”):

Note: “Caprificatio” (defined as “husbandry” above, and has to do with the “wild fig tree” in Latin) is a form of “caprificus” in the upper first sentence, defined as a “wild fig-tree.”

http://www.goddess-guide.com/juno.html (Goddess Guide), Juno:

Juno's Symbolism

This Roman Goddess had a more warlike nature than Hera and was often depicted in a goat skin coat that was favoured among Roman soldiers.

…

Sacred Plants: The wild fig tree.
Festivals: A special ceremony was dedicated to her in the home to celebrate the begining of each lunar month.

Her main festival, the Matronalia was held on 1st March. On this day married woman asked their husbands to give them money to make offerings to the Goddess.

A smaller celebration known as the Nonae Caprotinae took place on 7th July.

http://www.thaliatook.com/OGOD/caprotina.html, The Obscure Goddess Online Dictionary, “Caprotina”:

Caprotina is an epithet of Juno in Her aspect as a fertility Goddess. As Juno Caprotina She is associated with goats (Latin capra, "she-goat", caper, "he-goat") and with figs, both of which are symbolic of fertility: the fig fruit bears many seeds, and goats are well-known for their randiness. Her festival was called the Nonae Caprotina, or the "Nones of Caprotina", held on the nones or 7th day of July, and it was exclusively celebrated by women, especially slave-women.

Interestingly, Jesus stated that the goat / marriage is the “left” side, where today marriage is more supported on the politically “right.” Obviously the church is going to call its placing on the politically “right,” since Jesus says that’s the side that will be saved; but, it appears it’s really the other way around; especially when you read the criteria: “liberals” (today’s “left”) lean more Goldenrule than “conservatives” (today’s “right”). This just tells me that everyone (both conservatives and liberals) have the idea of the real Bible / Jesus turned around. Matthew 25:34-46 says the Goldenrule should be done for the needy, and liberals lean more for taxing the rich to give to the poor, and conservatives are more the other way around. Therefore liberals are much more in line with being saved then conservatives. Therefore, there’s a huge (total opposite) difference in going to church and reading the actual Bible.

The parable of the “Barren Fig Tree” (back to the FIG):

(Introduction to Home erectus: the next continuing webpage)

Luke 13:6-9:

⁶He also spoke this parable: "A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard, and he came seeking fruit on it and found none. ⁷Then he said to the keeper of his vineyard, 'Look, for three years I have come seeking fruit on this fig tree and find none. Cut it down; why does it use up the ground?' ⁸But he answered and said to him, 'Sir, let it alone this year also, until I dig around it and fertilize it. ⁹And if it bears fruit, well. But if not, after that you can cut it down.'"

Equating figs to Hera / Juno, hence marriage; and since Dionysus (Greek) / Bacchus (Roman) was “the god of the vine” who was most popular for sex orgies, the vine represents promiscuous open/free sex; then Jesus’ parable goes like this:

⁶"A certain Man (God) had marriage planted (per the keeper’s request) in His (God’s) open sex world, and He (God) came seeking fruit (success / happiness / benefits) on this marriage standard and found none. ⁷Then He (God) said to the keeper (restrictor) of His open sex, 'Look, for three years I (God) have come seeking fruit (success / happiness / benefits) on this marriage standard and find none. Cut marriage down; why does it use up the ground?' ⁸But he answered and said to Him (God), 'Sir, let the marriage standard alone this year also, until I dig around it and fertilize it. ⁹And if the marriage standard bears fruit (proves successful / happiness / benefits), well. But if not, after that You (God) can cut the marriage standard down.'"

Well, I think the marriage standard today is in the worst shape it’s ever been.

Now, 2 Peter 3:8:

But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

Therefore, “three years” times 365.2422 days a year = 1,095.7266 days (total days in 3 years), times 1000 = about 1,095,726.6 B.C. (about 1 million years ago).

Speculation:

Homo erectus lived around 1 million years ago. From a time when there was a default open/free sex lifestyle, a Homo erectus determination that people’s face features that less resembled apes to be “superior” began “looks discrimination,” the precursor to marriage; which, in turn, caused male possessiveness of “attractive” females, which caused disputes / fights between males, escalating to an all new fad called “war.” This logic would further suggest that other human species with more ape like features were likely killed or banished, explaining the settlings in the colder Europe, later becoming, e.g., Neanderthal man (the last to become extinct). “Slaughter of the ugly” eventually totally extinguished the Neanderthal and all other “ugly” human species. Evidence tells that several human species all of a sudden became extinct about 1 million years ago.

It also fits that a more recent “human breading” became standard, moving our facial appearance more and more rapidly away from apelike features: Sex would have became only desirous with women whose features looked more the direction away from the ape appearance; and, likely “ugly” people (those who had more apelike features) would have often been killed, unable to reproduce. This would explain why the extant human has had such a drastic change in appearance in just the last two hundred thousand years. As better writing skills developed, the advent of slavery would have helped the more “ugly” live, to slow that process; especially during the bronze age, when police could better control crowds / slaves (by having better weapons at their side). The sexual prerequisite of more kissing required to accommodate marriage and conditional sex (foreplay), could be what has also drastically flattened the protruding mouth, as our underlying intelligence (not accidents) adapts to its environment. Also, since we’ve become erect (after a few million years of defending ourselves with sharpened stones), we spend practically all our time on the ground, making our legs bigger and our arms smaller, compared to our ancestors who still rely on both to swing from tree to tree. Also, we’re quite a bit weaker than chimps, gorillas, etc. (must have had the wheel early). All because of limited kind of underlying intelligence adapting us to our environment, not by accidental mutations.

Later, the “average shape” of the face features became most attractive, although today’s fads (e.g., Cosmopolitan Magazine) can overrule it. That’s why Michael Jackson is (and other blacks are) trying to look white, because whites are the majority, in his / their environment of overwhelming influence. Hopefully the wider comfort in kissing someone with larger lips will maintain the ebony desire

To possibly understand why your mind can’t think anything but your firm definition of attractive, take a calculator, key in 2000, then minus 2000, then hit “=”. You’ve reached the time of Christ. Now hit “=” again. You’ve reach 2000 B.C. Now press “=” 547 more times to reach this Homo erectus date. (This concerns an emanation of our traditional embedded teachings, not “genetic code”.)

Logically, the most sexually oral, hence bisexual, of the human species were the least ape looking, with kissing flattening the mouth area, and the unnecessary (sexual) sucking / pulling of the non-lactating breasts, motivated our “subatomic DNA environmental adjusters (adjusting us to our environment)” to (unknowingly why) protrude the human females breasts. And, based on historical art, they’re getting bigger.

http://www.wilderdom.com/personality/L7-1EvolutionaryPsychology.html, Evolutionary Psychology:

human females are the only primates to have permanently engorged breasts, and the male penis is proportionately larger than in any other species (same scenario). Did you know that the most common word searched for on the net is "sex", closely followed by "porn" and other related words –What’s the matter… are people having trouble getting sexual satisfaction from only their spouse? Could it be… that the Goldenrule, is really what the vast majority really want?

Our subatomic adjuster friends would also not understand why the human female seems to be cleaning off her lower privates so often, but would adapt to the apparent instruction:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/07/1/text_pop/l_071_04.html, The Transforming Leap, from Four Legs to Two:

Other primate females display pronounced genital swellings when they are ovulating.

All this oral stimulation is the result of more foreplay required by women who make a man “earn” it.

http://www.coyotela.org/history.html, The Authentic Herstory [sic] of Prostitution: A Brief Chronicle of Sacred Whoredom:

THE PREHISTORIC ORIGINS OF PROSTITUTION:

Contrary to conventional "wisdom," prostitution has a long and noble legacy, one that began hundreds of thousands of years ago among our prehistoric ancestors. Indeed, it is not only the oldest profession, it is the profession on which both monogamous marriage and human society were originally founded.

FROM PROMISCUITY TO PAIR-BONDING:

At one time, early humans were promiscuous. Like our closest living relatives, the gorilla, chimpanzee, and orangutan, they were pansexual; that is, prehistoric women and men engaged in sexual activities with all other group members, female and male, young and old. This sexual behavioral pattern would eventually change, however, from rampant promiscuity to one in which we formed pair-bonds based around female prostitution. This transformation occurred around 1 million years ago in an early human ancestor known as Homo erectus. Any animal behavior that spans such an enormous length of time will become biologically programmed into that animal's genetic code. And this is precisely what happened in humans when we switched from promiscuity to pair-bonding. To this day-because it is now a genetically determined behavior-pair-bonding is the type of bonding that the majority of women and men in every culture and society engage most actively in.

I question that pair-bonding is in our “genetic code”: I think it’s simply the goal / fad that we are taught to pursue from generation to generation. I think changing / reversing that “fad” to “sexually desiring diversity in appearance” will quickly (by the next generation) overrule that “genetic code.” And, it will also stop other “looks discrimination” problems, like the fact today that “uglier” people do make less money, are left in jail longer, etc.

THE HUMAN SEXUAL CONDITION: PROGRAMMED FOR POLYGAMY:

There are some individuals who would call it "lifetime monogamy." But those individuals would be wrong. In fact, anthropological studies show that humans are not designed for lifetime monogamy, and that even in societies (such as the U.S.A. and England) where lifetime monogamy is held to be the ideal, only a tiny fraction of couples actually practice it. To the contrary, nearly all people, following our prehistoric ancestor's basic mating pattern, form a temporary pair-bond with a single mate, separate, then go in search of a new partner with whom she or he forms another brief, tenuous bond. This primal custom is overtly reflected in our obsession with dating, and in our extremely high rates of desertion, infidelity, divorce, and remarriage.

That’s simply because, once the lust dies, we get sick of the same person around all the time. It’s like having the exact same meal every night. Even if it’s from the most expensive restaurant in town, eventually you’re going to want something difference. I think that only when the lust is very strong – when your mate is much more attractive than you – is when you will not desire others.

OF SISTERHOODS & BROTHERHOODS: FATHERHOOD IS NOT NATURAL TO HUMAN MALES:

Up until this time, human mothers-like nearly all other living primate mothers continue to do-raised their offspring by themselves, in great all-female groups called "Sisterhoods," or "Matriarchies." In the 193 species of living primates, fatherhood and the two-parent family unit are literally all but unknown. Most primate males live as what primatologists call "vagabonds," in all-male groups or hunting parties called "Brotherhoods," or "Bachelorhoods." And so it always was for the human primate. That is, until the change from small-brained mature infants to large-brained immature infants. Now the burden of childrearing was so great that females needed extra help in order to protect and feed their young. It is out of this simple need that we find the origins of prostitution.

I think that males desiring the “less ape looking” (more attractive) females caused males to want to possess them, and in quantities; which also formulated human jealousy, which surely lead to lots of unhappy incidents. Henceforth, attractive women became a “commodity,” which therefore led to prostitution. Possessed women were not to sleep with other men; therefore, causing a lack of sexual partners for other males, thus creating a clientele. Men generally don’t want to even touch an “ugly” women. Culminating with God’s free food taken away (see my Lewis & Clark page) about 10,000 years ago, to force all to work, even more prostitution was necessary to make ends meet. Then marriage became a secular / religious legal requirement to feed the women (especially the “ugly” ones) and their babies (because the ugly ones couldn’t go out “a-whoring”). Now, whenever a society accepts prostitution (and/or marriage), you must have community enforced rape laws to support it, so prostitutes can have protection to do their job, and to help possessive (married) males get their jealous revenge. All a woman would have to do is scream and townspeople would come a-running. If you’re out of town, tough luck (except today: all a woman has to do is basically say he raped her and he will be convicted – judges today like it easy).

(http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/Prod/Parlment/HansArt.nsf/0/ca256d11000bd3aaca256acc002e03a6?OpenDocument (Parliament of New South Wales), Crimes Amendment:

Comments made by members of both major parties remind me of some of the unsavoury aspects of the history of rape laws. In the Old Testament, when a woman was raped it was the father or the husband who was seen to be raped and wronged. The woman was incidental to the crime. There was clearly the notion that the wronged males had damaged goods on their hands.)

(Deuteronomy 22:23-27 (NKJV):

²³"If a young woman who is a virgin is betrothed to a husband, and a man finds her in the city and lies with her, ²⁴then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city, and you shall stone them to death with stones, the young woman because she did not cry out in the city, and the man because he humbled his neighbor's wife; so you shall put away the evil from among you. ²⁵"But if a man finds a betrothed young woman in the countryside, and the man forces her and lies with her, then only the man who lay with her shall die. ²⁶But you shall do nothing to the young woman; there is in the young woman no sin deserving of death, for just as when a man rises against his neighbor and kills him, even so is this matter. ²⁷For he found her in the countryside, and the betrothed young woman cried out, but there was no one to save her. ²⁸"If a man finds a young woman who is a virgin, who is not betrothed, and he seizes her and lies with her, and they are found out, ²⁹then the man who lay with her shall give to the young woman's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife because he has humbled her; he shall not be permitted to divorce her all his days.)

…

(Continuing from coyotela.org above:)

WHY MEN MAKE POOR HUSBANDS & FATHERS:

On the other hand, neither paternal love, paternity, or the paternal figure, have ever played important roles in human culture. Fatherhood, as Margaret Mead and other anthropologists have repeatedly observed, is a "recent cultural invention." This explains why in almost every society, numerous social, legal, and religious laws have been created to entice men into marriage and keep them there. The truth is that neither long-term monogamous marriage, the two-parent family unit, or the role of "father," are natural to men. These newly created cultural ideas must be intentionally taught to men from an early age on. Without this intensive socialization for family life, few men will find this mode of living inviting or even tolerable.

Until God’s free food was taken, to motivate all to work, women could feed their children on their own.

Here’s a parody to the popular website of the Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka:

http://godhatesfigs.net/leaflet.pdf (via http://godhatesfigs.net/), GOD HATES FIGS:

CONTINUE TO NEXT PHASE (HOMO ERECTUS)

Home (Index)