Behold The Mystery of Faith...

A very old friend of mine felt sorry for me this week on the fact I have lost my faith on the Catholic God. It is true that I have been baptised and I even did my confirmation when I was about seventeen. Actually, the same very age I met the referred friend. Back in that time, I used to be a humble fearful servant to the love of God having a very strong relationship with the Church. Even more ironically is the fact that I was the one reuniting my friend to… faith.  

Over twenty years later, there isn't the most vaguely shadow of that boy in the man I am today. However, for those who are used to follow my blog, there are lots of clues and remains of my childhood along the texts pointing this out. Freud and Yung aside, where exactly the adult version of me has turned the back to religion in general?

Religion should be a reference, some sort of guidance for a high spiritual behaviour narrowing the path towards God. Meanwhile, in a planet figuring over seven billions of souls facing serious health issues, populated by shallow values, consuming societies, and full of ego-dystonic communities, it doesn't seem to me that prays and novenas – like ever – have been making a better race of humans or a better world. Even worse is the thought that it may only do better for life in a very, very individual way.

Statistically, people become more religious and grow in faith as the age grows. In other words, when they realize that the mystic and mysterious ending is getting closer, some king of ‘celestial benefits’ or some sort of heaven policy must be arranged in order to assure the access to the other side. Now, I know I am being quite harsh to the authentic religious people but I am just building up an argument.

Looking back to History before Christians, over 2000 years ago, when the Roman Empire had spread its doctrine during centuries for the vast areas between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans and, before them, for more over 3000 year, in the Egypt, fathers had taught their sons through generations and generations to venerate their kings as gods, I wonder: 3000 years are seriously a lot of years, G! At least 1000 more than Catholicism… and for as long as it was, legacies and societies were raised up, lived, and died upon those beliefs. And even though they surely lived their religion experiences in a much more profound and dedicated way than we live ours nowadays, some of their gods can be seen at the British Museum and not just only that, we also learn about them in school, like we do with algebra or geography but contextualized as mythology.        

Somehow, it became clear to me that in the future, when the Earth’s core has been moved or twisted around and the whole urban architectures as we know have been under snow, somewhere in the Caribbean islands, people will be teaching about the Catholic Mythology and its deep impact into the socio-economics-politic development of that era.

Yet, looking over the human evolution, from the wheel invention, from the fire discovery to the historic journey of Casini spaceship to Saturn, or even about storms and cataclysm, plagues and inexplicable diseases, how could we have survived without a god?

It is notorious for me that almost 6000 years later to the writing invention, whereby we still have gods with elephant heads in the most populated nation in the world, that man still hasn't learnt what are God’s wishes, nor even strength faith itself. Well, the most Italian heritage that could still remaining in the Catholicism, nowadays, is the ability to commit some sinful indiscretion. Just in case we might have nothing to confess next Sunday…

I always have in consideration that when my mother studied chemistry in the 50´s, a half dozen of metals or gazes had not yet been catalogued. In fact, we don’t have to go back in time that far! The periodic table that I used when I was in school in the 80´s was already shorter in elements than the one my nephew has been using now. But imagine, what those unknown materials and odours could mean for those who, full of unawareness, have met them?   

I had some contact with magic and esoteric practises and I read a lot about Spiritualism, something about Buddhism and it is worthless talking about Judaism. I am son of Yemanja with Ogun, Gemini by the solar horoscope and Pig by the Chinese one. I read Taro and on my strongest days in the past I’ve done some card reading using an English deck!

I believe that the material and energetic world retains thousands of secrets and keys we haven’t seen, found or understood yet. Quantum Physics is a small baby comparing to mathematics age. Somehow, I found peace in the fact that I am living in the era where we are, as we have always been, surrounded by the limits of our present evolution. Unfortunately, common sense, some groups, and even entire societies they take the comfort their souls need out of hypothetical thoughts, short explanations, and theories, exactly as their ancestors needed to do in order to go through devastations as El Niño or even plagues as the red or black ones.  

This look upon History, upon our entire trajectory, and also for have watched tones of National Geographic channel, makes me realize that we are the only living creatures disconnected from our biologic nature, from the planet, and cosmos. We do insist in keep living around active volcanos or above seismic cracks when we know by fact that someday, any day, things may run badly. We are also the only homothermous stubborn specie living immersed in ice or caved in into a desert!     

Every year, hundreds and hundreds of different species they cross over the planet running away from cold, seeking food, or just for procreation. They are amazing beings fully equipped with natural-organic radars, sonars, censorial lines, thermostats and GPS, but if a human being says he had a feeling, foreseen something or predicted whatever, he is medicated and people around this person may show some ostracism because, after all, schizophrenia is some serious and, for some misinformed, dangerous decease! Halooooooo? 

In my point of view, we get this all so very wrong. Think about it, how much more healthy it would be if you had free mornings instead of free nights? Having some quality sun light bursting you out with vitamin D in a blue sky after you and your partner and child had taken the breakfast together! You all could even get lunch together, enjoying the day, before starting the work, school or even housekeeping! At night, instead of getting fat in front a TV doing nothing we would do a light meal, shower, and bed! Renovating for one more gorgeous day surrounded by those you love most in the sun!

We are simply victims of our own evolving trajectory regarding decisions, social organizations, schemes, and structure of how we have been solving the needs of managing life under the most stupid and useless rules and beliefs in the past 8000 years. Let’s agree upon this, that a little help from a god was very welcome and helpful.

So, living in a world where approximately 98% of people believe in God, you might be wondering, how does he do?

Well, finding myself gay in the middle of a dictator South American country has provided me lots of practice in how to survive under a disguise (LOL). But I just don’t have any Tudor tendency to fight against a whole belief to change it, break up with it, or even to establish another new one based on mine. I don’t mind and I don’t feel bothered by any belief and in fact, I have a profound respect and sense of understanding regarding the need of having it (especially religion) and I also recognize the benefits some of those religious movements may bring to one’s life.

I am fascinated by human nature and human behaviour and I feel myself part of a system as important as water and wind for the creation of Grand Canyon. I enjoy being alive and I am sure there are millions of opportunities ahead and that fills my 'spirit' with expectation and hope and that nurtures my 'soul'.

I do not care about the mysteries we just cannot explain but I will not reject what I can feel. Humans are living longer and so, brand new aspects of our physique are coming up revealing things, confirming knowledge but also, putting down old, once, certainties.

At last, when I look over my lack of faith, I realise how I behave myself, through life, and toward others and then, I dare to say that I live much more like a Christian than those who cross their chest passing by a church. I see myself as a person with an active spirit and vibrant soul (or just nice unblock neuro-cognitive system. Yet). Even though a strange version of myself still needing some ‘divine intervention’ regarding the falling in love issues. But please, do not feel sorry for me. I am fine.

I believe all of you will have a nice week.

Eduardo Divério 

The Hell is within Us

Within a doctrine I do get the concept of purgatory. It would be something like: if you did not behaviour yourself during class you are going to miss the break, so you can bethink about what you have done. But the hell’s concept, well… don’t.

Look, if Lucifer’s work, the fallen angel, is to recruit people stimulating them to perform the evil so it can decrease heaven’s attendance, like creating competition, why do this people, once held in hell, would be punished and tortured for all eternity?

I suspect that the contract policy offered should promise things that truly allure the human form in order to sign for it. If so, Lucifer was supposed to take them in as it happens on those holidays pack deals including a luxurious resort with gym, a poll with artificial waves, tennis court, ski and equitation! Something to keeps the customer really happy.

But if Lucifer is going to torture all these people because they have performed some evil, for whole eternity, it is like he is almost an infiltrator agent from heaven and hell itself would not be more than a celestial department of losses! After all, he would be punishing those who did not behave properly, which is the rule number one to get into heaven!

Ok, we all know people say that the ‘cuckold’ lies through his teeth and promises what does not exist, fools people and pretends a lot to get some attention. But would all that be just for the pleasure of smelling burnt flesh? Hum… I don’t know. I do understand, using antagonism, that ‘evil’ degenerates and corrodes life in contrast to the ‘good’ that builds up and enriches all around. If so, I could see his intention on trying to destroy the Lord’s creation. 

But if God is the direct relation to the ‘good’ image and the devil is to the ‘evil’, one is on disadvantage; the devil once was a high patent angel from heaven, full of wisdom, so his essence is ‘good’ and not the pure ‘evil’ as the pure ‘good’ is to God. Are you following me? His DNA is divine, from heaven! So for this reason is very hard to me to believe, and even accepting, that someone enterprises its own life longing for satisfaction based on something not present in its own nature.

(Pause for analogy reflection).

But all of this reminded me an old joke: A guy dies and goes to hell. He is received by the devil himself who takes him for a petit tour. He surprises himself with the hell facilities. There are people hanging out on the grass by a lake,  playing football, and there’s a huge rave going on under open sky, I mean, open hell, and everybody ultra-mega-hiper-super happy. Then, in a corner exhaling a strong smell of sulphur, there were people being tortured and burnt by flames and so, the man asks to the devil what contrast was that, to which the devil responds: Don’t bother with them. Those are Catholics, they love that.

Wish you all a divide week of good behaviour – just in case… ;)

Eduardo Divério.

Responsibility

My mother has taught me since I was a little boy to comply with my commitments as well as to assume the consequences of my actions. This notion, within either a larger or lesser amplitude of concordance is quite common and I do believe that, in general, everybody has this perception regarding their tasks, jobs, and even home school.

Meanwhile, I also believe, but only by my pure observation, that this concept has been disconnected from the real and profound role it plays over less palpable things, or more subjective ones, although, totally linked to our decisions.

Deciding is an act of acknowledgement and understanding upon what we want against to what we can do or what we would never do. It is ratiocination (taking emotions on board in the equation as obvious) and it demands intelligence and wisdom but above all, courage.  

But what if when we decide to take a short cut, or to ignore a matter, or to deny a situation, or to procrastinate another one, or to wait for something dissolves it by itself, or to wait for somebody leaves, or for somebody returns while the reflexes of all this occurrences do produce unexpected events in the future. Can we accept or discern this? Are we able to take responsibility upon such mass?

I look at people suffering, outraged by the development of some issues, and I see them totally alienated from the responsibility that they have actually conducted their lives up to that point or yet, they have probably put themselves in there, in a collision route with an issue. It caught my attention how frequently people feel that life has been unfair, how destiny has betrayed them, when indeed they are just harvesting what they sowed.  

Accidents, cataclysms, and sickness a part, when we are taken by surprise and sorrow takes command of our lives, are we suffering for haven’t known how to decide or for not taking responsibility in assuming the consequences of our decisions?

I like to think that a man should not be judged by his infractions but for how he has tried to undo them, or fixing the damage. It is true that many times we do not have psychological structure to take a decision. Sometimes, we just don’t have enough acknowledgement of ourselves or yet, the subjectivity of the question is underestimated by ours own out of date or mistaken values and concepts.

So, part of the key to solve problems should be responsibility.

Assuming we have got a judgement wrongly. Assuming we rather let things just went out flying instead of taking control of them. Assuming that contempt, vanity, presumption, fear or stupidity were the forces we have allowed to get things where they are. By doing that, you would be removing from your shoulders all this esoteric weight that universe is conspiring against you. It allows us feeling a ground under our feet and realizing that, maybe, you find the right time to sort things out for good.

Confusing people, those who do not seek an alignment of ideas, some enlightenment, and wisdom, modulating their lives by routines that avoid them to live in plenitude, when confronted to consternations, sometimes recurrent issues that look like a person has been exposed and punished over and over again, they have a tendency to reinforce this very same behaviour based upon what they cannot let go, such as values, without realizing they are the very cause of a vicious cycle, an anchor.     

We should not impose a Kantian way of living upon ourselves (even if you sympathizes with it a lot like I do) and we should take it easier with ourselves too. After all, any thin material folds down or breaks up under pressure. But perhaps we also should not let many things getting accumulated and we should do a mental cleaning up more often. That would level us up so we could make more strong and truthful decisions and so, reducing future conflicts and on that way, responsibility and decision would have their hands together.

Whatever it works for you in order to have a more balanced life with a minimum of disadvantage. But it is just a thought anyway.

Wish you all a very responsible week!

Eduardo Divério.

Intelligent Psychology

When Coco Chanel created a whole new collection pulling up the border of her skirts around 4 inches she certain launched furore in the fashion world. In fact, in the whole world. Not much just for the artistic daring new look, but more for the social impact caused. A woman would have to be quite avant garde, or brave enough, to display her ankles in the 20’s of last century.

But what exactly was it said of woman who allowed to expose herself publicly?

When I was a child we were not supposed to have 'eye contact' with anybody’s underwear. Never! So, based on this rule it was conclusive that people revealing their internal pieces of clothing, or even just part of them, would have at least a questionable moral, a sexualised element, who would be working the eroticism through their own image. Obviously, because this issue was involved into a sexual tenor, a list of other adjectives were applied to these same people.  

But nowadays underwear comes with griff and it can accessorize a whole outfit and exposing it is no more related to any sexual appeal or eroticism. Perhaps, some sensuality, when it is good taste.  It is granted that any teenager that have grown up watching people on streets, TV, and in social events having a use of this resource can only face it as ‘normal’ (regular) and, I imagine, wouldn’t get much when someone commented that only a whore would dress like that 20 or 30 years ago. References…

What we have is a miscellaneous of generations kind of flexible about what they learn with some hints of tradition merged into their concepts and suggestions, but on my point of view, the mathematic tendency of this evolution is to accept the fact with the same naturalness we replace an old collection winter coat.

Please notice that I am not ignoring the fact that there are still ways and ways of how one may reveals its underwear and how this action can even be subjected to an old judgement regarding sexual behaviour.

When I was going into my first adult phase I remember it was kind of awkward to mention we liked oral sex. To be honest, that was an authentic taboo e only with the dearest friends we would dare exchange some details. But today, any American vespertine movie talks about it freely. In fact, I would say that weird would be not doing it or don’t like it.

As that, there are a series of others concepts, ideas among us, suggesting connotations forgotten in time long ago without any review and all of us can do a less appropriated use of them. We do have a permissive tendency to analyse events with a very short lazy mind.

Psychology is dynamic because the human behaviour also is. We evolve but our evolution is confusing because it happens physically in the world around us much more rapid then we can actually ‘read’ it, acknowledge it, rationally.  

For instants, the micro-waves was invented in the 60’s last century. However, 20 years later it still could be considering a luxurious article in a kitchen as so many others electronics. Twenty years ago things moved slower and their evolution were compassed, but today, in times of globalization, with the high technical level we achieved, ‘everybody’ has got ‘everything’ in a much faster pace.   

Scary enough, there is also here a parallelism to the evolution on the variety of aims we do impose to ourselves nowadays following a very similar tacit pattern where everything became so easy and quick on the matters of wishing and getting things. Meanwhile, seems to me that what looked like more stable 20 years ago, truthfully, it was just slower…  

This text was born from my observation upon those unlucky people who has put faith into some help or advise – professional or not – and ended up even more confused. But after all, psychology is just like odontology: it is filled with mediocre professionals.  

It has been a very hard time for living, full of commotion that causes even more confusion and increasing the subconscious need we have for order and that can lead people to hold themselves to rules and values not quite tuned to our reality anymore, maybe, 4 inches out of size. Rules and values that formerly in their time and space, once, were exactly what we people needed before they have been called by revision.

Where and how we seek for guidance is the key for the balance or so I believe.

Have you all an evolutionary week.

Eduardo Divério

Monogamous Effects of a Monosyllabic Sex

First and before anything, due to the sedimentation of this issue, I would like to make clear that I’ve got conscience that common sense bases do no provide conditions to wonder about this argument individually. In the meantime, I truly hope one can take it as an idea, or least as an inspiration.

Said that…   

Here in England, we have started to see TV ads about some internet sites where you can create a personal profile that can be matched across other compatible ones through automatic search, so it can find you a perfect date. One of these ads even has a catch phrase that it says: ‘being single is amazing so if you want to give up this life it’s got to be for the perfect person’. More or less that.

Then, it reminded me a coffee I had with a same age of mine friend some time ago when she was telling me she had met a guy in a pub to whom, after a couple of diners, she finally had sex for the first time and also for last one. Even though the words used by her to describe him was ‘he was a nice guy’, the sentence was followed right the way by the expected ‘but’. In this case to reveal that he had a small penis. She thought that in a day after day basis kind of living it could raise some issue regarding… satisfaction.

Values and judgments apart, what really popped up as evident to me was the huge amount of extra pressure upon the already hard task of finding someone. In fact, as for most of the people, monogamy is mandatory. Sex plays an enormous part in this searching as much as it causes a large shadow over the crusades for a relationship.

Being in a relationship is being in a constant trading between the unique universe of this two people, between distinct pasts and experiences, as much as all that come along with it. Plus seeking sexual satisfaction of one with another. It all seems to me very dangerous and explosive! As it wasn’t enough all the organization and structure issues that two strangers have to balance, plus the physique dramas – ‘you don’t see me’ or ‘you don’t listen to me’, there is also the biorhythm and the sexual appetite of each one to conjugate! 

Perhaps, sex is the biggest taboo faced by every person. An ocean of contradicted emotions running free from a conscience, varying from a romantic embrace to a mere reaching of an orgasm or yet, all can start with a French kisses and end up with the most primary frictions either sadistic or masochist.

Considering that two people have to deal with how they see and feel the external world, as they grow old, having to face over and over again the need to change, to readapt to their internal world, which obviously affects how they feel and understand satisfaction, I must say: it all seems a huge endless battle of interests.

People live sex in a variety of ways. Yet, regarding such taboo, it is an issue always outlined when we are defining our predicates. Do you get it? What I mean is, when we are chatting, we say I love travelling or I like playing football or I am an engineer, so far so on. But it is required lots of champagne cocktail among a very small selected group of friends, in a lower ton of voice, in order to almost to confess if we prefer to be on top or on the bottom, or if we enjoy it more rough or gently, anyway.              

Meanwhile, along the day, we are involuntarily bombed by sexual stimulation and response! Notice: what we wear and how we do take care of our look are indeed the rules of this ‘game’. We do have our attention stolen when a good looking person crosses our path and sometimes all it takes is a fragrance. Not mentioning the innuendos! Quite surely often in conversations, someone, at a certain point, brought it on, spur the ‘filthy pig’ sex in! Freud truly got some around…

So, imagine one around its 40’s today who got married at its 30’s and finally is finding him/herself sexually. I mean, its own rhythm, what really turns him/her on, what truly gives to its life an organic balance. Now, add the spouse in the picture, who either found its own interests but in opposite way or yet, haven’t found at all. Locked in a life surrounded by a taboo that keeps sexual behaviour outside their conversations, what are the odds to a couple saving its family in a medium long term?  

The thought of two people, who assumed a commitment for life, after nine or thirteen years have sex to each other not because they are feeling attracted but because they have no option, as hormones do not understand arrangements, is terrifying! It is a legal passive mutilation to its own spirit and much more! There is something quite subversive in this, as in my point of view, the whole mechanics of this turns the wonders of the ‘Empire of Senses’, which is making love to someone, into a ‘Deep Thought’, a mere genital experience, the same most everybody around condemns in a life of a single one. That pig!

Having sex works as an energetic repository to our bodies. There are ‘zilions’ of articles through internet showing researches results revealing its benefits, as much as the consequences of the lack of it.

On the top of everything, people are not used to really think or listening to themselves and much less to others. Sooner, in a relationship cycle, complaints will get started followed by a despair leaded by a thin sense of misunderstood or not being well seen, culminating in only one normal common conclusion: The spouse is guilty.  

Readers, questioning monogamy is not promoting orgies or promiscuous sex behaviour, but only a revaluation of how we see things and how they truly impact our lives at the present and perhaps, break up a taboo. 

That has been my eternal fight against to this static-archaic-Victorian view. In a long term perspective, it does more harm than good to those who swore to be together for life. When a value or a vow lapidates, locks in, or modulates an incontrollable and involuntary energy causing profound disinterest, and sometimes even a burden, forcing such endeavour to two no more compatible souls to keep a physical act, costing their inner happiness, they are cursed to risk keeping their partnership only wasting what can come out of that.     

Sex for… humans is vital to mental balance and it doesn’t have to be synchronized to any emotion but only sensations. Flirting, attraction, and ‘quick ones’ do make us feel alive, young, and healthy. It is simple as that and it is just not right to keep questioning its functionality by arguing that it belongs to more animal side of our nature, like opposing the fact we do have a conscience, which was supposed to take care of it. But the thing is that one does not invalidate the other, in fact, one improves how to use the other ;).

Monogamy should be a state of mind and it is a beautiful one and I even dare to say that most of people wishes this state lasts forever and for me, if does, great! Fireworks! As long as everybody is happy and psychologically balanced, cool. The problem for me is that society has clearly been living lies. The percentage of people having extra conjugal affairs is high! The percentage of man married over 15 years having erectile dysfunction is also high. No one wants to live merged into lies or sleeping next someone we no longer fully trust. If monogamy makes you lie in order to not lose the things you really treasure, then it cannot be good at all. Besides, a lie put on perspective all which has been true.

All I know is there are lots of families where you can see real love falling apart for an idea. Two people crossing life together for years and years facing huge challenges, conquering amazing levels, sharing so many truthful emotions but half-blinded like a gothic old construction which all the arcades are strategically supported over one point.

The modern man has new problems and lives longer so he needs to labour more. However, he does not seem to fully understand his nature, his era, his generation and much less the point of evolution he is in history itself.

You, loving is one thing and having sex is another. They do not demand a synchronized event but when combined is amazing! Individually, even better and full of particular different interests! Think about it, talk about it, and do questions, researching, make theories up, whatever that can rip off with the ‘syphilization’ culture left upon us. After all, there are lots of antibiotics for that!

I wish you all a have nice week free from taboos.

Eduardo Divério.

How are you?

I do believe that this very simple three words question is one of the trickiest ever questions to answer. In an everyday continuous relationship it can be cleared seen as an info update request and we comfortably know exactly what to say. But when you don’t talk to someone for ages and an avalanche of occurrences have slid between you two what exactly do you answer? Not just that, how exactly do you answer?

This simple question carries the power of the generality and from where it comes, or from whom it comes, it can be quite even more treacherous. A ‘how are you’ at an end of silent period may indicate safeguard, just running out of time to write meaningfully, too much trust, over or forced interest, no interest at all, awkwardness, cynicism, a basic trimestral clock in and, why not, perhaps, let me know about what is going on in your life.

But how deep, truthful, honest, natural, trustful, analytic, succinct or generic can we be while replying?

Notice that in each relationship, between two people, there is a unique historic, an emotional measure, closed issues, open issues, their own limits and sorrows and so I wonder: what else is encrypted among these three words? What is the motive to this question? More so, how do we answer to an unknown or a devious question?  

Well, for quite some time now, regarding behaviour, I recognize myself as my own reference. What I mean by that is that my position does not work by others precedents. I follow my ‘book’ which I believe it reflects the values I hold for and the qualities I care. Said that, I would review a message as:

A good introduction can easily shows the ton for the correspondence exchange; ‘Hi Eduardo. I know we haven’t spoken for a while but it has been a really difficult time for me because my dog was sick and the parakeet ran away. It was devastating and very despondent but at a certain point we just realize that 'the show must go on' and like that, I just retook my life control. Everything is fine at work and the bike is ok too. What about you? How are you? Hugs, Joe’.

Pay attention on how minded the person was when he provided a brief explanation why he had been away, which clearly it gives the ton, the idea to what I should answer and why.

Meanwhile, it is true that writing, even though it is the invention that gave birth to History and changed the world, it is not quite uneventful to all people. Moreover, writing demands a subtle focus upon us and not everyone is willing to do it properly. It is like a mirror, a virtual time machine that put us back to live something again and forces us to watch one more time things we once wished to forget, at least for a while.   

Writing is revealing somthing. It is undeniably to testify an intention, a thought. So, nowadays, hiding behind the generic wildness of a just ‘how are you’ suggests, for me, insecurity. But I am not talking about the security of things you can assure like a car, that allow us going around almost hitting the narrow moll entrances because we would be covered in any case. I am referring to that kind of safety when one gets inside the house and locks its door using three different kinds of locks having bars on the windows keeping the world outside.

Unfortunately, good behaviour does not come with everybody even when for sure suits us all.  

So, for all the reasons above my friend, you, if one day you ask me ‘how are you’ and you just get back ‘I am fine, thanks. What about you?’ please take it as a mere fair response to your mere question. However, and beforehand, you should know that encrypted in my reply you can read: ‘what exactly do you want to know about me and why?

Have all a nice and good week.

Eduardo Divério.