Godhi Blog

This Blog is the linear record of one Freyja's Godhi. Material is not intended to offend - simply illuminate.

2006

09-16-06: Blog Begins

THE GALLERY IS FINALLY FIXED!!!!! Also, I've just updated all the content and site-map of FreyjaFirst.com. Enjoy.

09-29-06: Lovers Posted

'Her Lovers' content page is complete. That's been a long time in coming, for I believe it is the first (ever?) published comparison of Freyja's literary lovers. This should solve many discussions of who Freyja is, for they define Her ideal mate. This revelation will surprise some and not surprise others. Either way, it's important that the concept is defined.

I should also mention that the 'As Warrior?' page was changed. Included in the text was a proposal on why Freyja is recently seen as a 'warrior' goddess - even though there is no lore or original tradition to support it. The proposal was brief and controversial. After much deliberation that particular passage was deemed inappropriate and removed from FreyjaFirst.com. I stand behind the text that was written - however that brief proposal had no right being brief. The correct answer to the question is terribly complex and requires a detailed description of controversial human behaviour. Behaviour that most people would rather not discuss, let alone accept. The included propoal touched lightly upon that behaviour and I received a number of complaints. This site should not be used to cause strife to any degree and I apologize for publishing something that was disturbing to some. Unfortunately, I still believe the revealed truth is important to share for the obfuscation of reality is as damaging and any weapon of mass destruction. Maybe I will continue that dissemination in this blog... or maybe not.

10-06-06: Brisingamen Added

'Brisingamen' content page has been added, and it was a rea challenge. I always intended on adding a detailed description of Sörla Þáttur and hemmed and hawed over what section to do it in. I chose 'Brisingamen' instead of 'As Warrior?' because it was an example of where lore SHOULD have provided detailed spiritually relevant material about the Her and Her necklace - but didn't. The content is actually relevant in other sections as well, but the redundancy is not neccessary.

10-09-06: What is Asatru or Heathenry vs. Paganism?

The Christian definition of Paganism is any faith of religion that does not worship a Christian, Jewish or Muslim deity. This includes any other monotheism or polytheism on earth. Of course, Hindus and Buddhists and most others sorely object to the purely deragatory categorization. I prefer my own definition, based on personal experience with many religions. Those who call themselves Pagans worship a faith of their own devising, without direct relation to any historical faith or religion. Those worshipping another faith, whether extant or resurgent, refer to themselves by terms specific to their own trraditions. Those who worship as the Ancient Greeks call themselves Helenes (though, they should more properly call themselves Athenian or Ionian - or by whatever region of Greece their faith spawned from). Modern Wiccans or witches are primarily Pagan in the generic sense because their faith is still evolving, with few codified traditions, dieties, or even core beliefs. Those who worship Asatru worship a resurgent form of ancient Germanic or Scandinavian faith. The word Asatru is actually a new one, and was chosen by modern Icelanders for legal reasons. Other Scandinavian countries use the name Forn Sed which means 'Ancient Tradition'. Icelandic Heathens were prohibited from legally naming the faith Forn Sed by the Lutheran Church, thus the name Ásatrú was born meaning 'Faith-of-the-Heathen-Gods'. Anglo-Saxon and Continental resurgencies prefer their own names. Overall, it is accepted that the term Heathenry refers to all practitioners of Germanic originated faiths. Like most non-pagan faiths, Heathenry has a rich collection of lore and history upon which to draw spiritual strength from. One clear point of confrontation between Pagans and Heathens is that we have literary, poetic, and anthropological evidence to guide our spirituality and provide us with solutions to life's mysteries. Pagans, without such references of their own, mix and match concepts from other conflicting faiths to fit into their own model.

10-12-06: Sex Part 1

People have been struggling with sex in civilized society for as long as we have been calling society 'civilized'. The struggle has been so volatile that extreme mechanisms have been devised by nearly every culture to deal with it. Some of these mechanisms have been enlightened and others have been brutal. Some have been legal and others have been religious. This format won't let me go into those details, instead I want to answer what the struggle is and allow you, the reader, to wonder why such a simple concept is so confused today. The short answer is that human beings have both a biological and a societal role. The biological role is to reproduce, and to secure that purpose, we reach sexual maturity in as early as ten years. Boys possess viable sperm and are capable of erections from birth. Girls may reach estrus years before their bodies are strong enough to carry a child to term. Even so, nature has provided children with an innate tendancy to shun the opposite sex until they reach true sexual maturity. On the other hand, the complicated social structure of mankind demands years of training to become a fully functional member of society. Without modern culture, some anthropologists suggest that a person may have learend everything they need to survive in the wild by age 7. That includes hunting, foraging, rudimentary tool-making, and basic family-tending skills. Today in the U.S., the law deems a person unfit until at least 12 years of formal education starting at age 5 or 6. Statutory Rape is an automatic crime for any person over the age of 17 to have sex with anyone 17 or under. That means that individuals must endure 7 or so years of sexual maturity before being deemed fit to engage in sexual activity. Obviously, no one doubts that people under the age of 18 engage in sexual activity - but there is a decided lack of understanding among the general public by calling those people 'children'. We have a complicated social structure, and the advantage a full 12 years of education gives a parent is extremely important. The word 'adult' is a confusing term that generally means an individual who is capable of surviving on one's own, without further education. By that token, a 'legal adult' is one who is presumed to have survived a full 12 year educational period - though proving that education is not neccessary by law. The major struggle is now finally describable. People who have reached sexual maturity are far from having reached social maturity and therefore cannot fully appreciate the disadvantage they would give any offspring early in their lives. In order to prevent children from being born at a disadvantage, societies try various ways to prevent early pregnancies. Promoting abstinence might work, if it was handled with intelligence - instead... Moving on, the second method has been horribly treated in the country, and that is about reponsible sex. More could be done to promote responsible sex, however the sad truth is that people are simply irresponsible. So what can be done to ease the struggle, to prevent early pregnancies and to fully educate responsible adults? Good question and one that leads into another major quandry about sex: What is it? Is sex solely about procreation? Or does it also serve a social purpose? One can clearly claim that procreation is a responsibility that should only be allowed to adults - but is there any possible social purpose to sex that could be permissable to those under the age of 17? That's hard to say.

10-18-06: Sex Part 2

"What do men want?" "What do women want?" These laments have finally prompted me to offer the obvious because everyone wants the same thing - they're just afraid to admit it. Every individual wants someone better than themselves. People are afradi that they are not able to succeed or to cope in this life without help, so they desire a mate to compensate for all their own failings. Sexually speaking, this is expressed as desire for individuals they deem 'unavailable'. This description is meant to describe individuals who are powerful enough to choose what ever mate they wish. For women, this kind of power is is noticed in confident displays of sexual availability. The very fact that a woman openly markets herself to men (e.g., cosmetics, fashion, flirting, etc.) means that she can pick and choose from suitors. That ability to choose intimidates weak willed men. Men, on the other hand, display themselves with confident gestures of strength - physical, intellectual, emotional, political or financial. In that strength, they show themselves capable of deserving any mate they desire. This ability to choose lovers intimidates weak-willed women. The work-around is that both men and women fake the required confidence. This is only a temporary solution, however. If a couple does not share with each other what their TRUE needs are, they are destined to fail each other. Men marry women for all sorts of reasons - but most of all because they feel that the woman will support them emotionally. Women marry men primarily because the fell that the man will support them emotionally. Hmm. What's the difference? Well, there really isn't any, but every individual has different specific needs. Some need to feel protected. Some need to feel dominant. Some need to feel desired. Some need to feel independant. Many people's needs change over time. Men don't change as dramatically - but the major life event of becoming a Mother often dramatically rearranges a woman's priorities and their men need to provide for the change. In a purely sexual sense, those same emotions come into play - but biology takes a stronger role than intellect. When in the bedroom, it can appear that men and women have different desires. Men appear to want to dominate and women appear to desire domination - but that is a purely masogynist description. The truth is that women feel as much a sense of 'domination' as men do in the bedroom - but their sense of it is perpendicular to men's. Women - on a biological level - consider the seduction of a powerful man a form of dominance. By getting their man to lose all focus except for her, she achieves her goal of emotional satisfaction. Men, contrariwise, feel that simple penetration achieve there goal of emotional satisfaction. This may seem shallow, but the ability to convince a woman to accept him is the height of male emotional needs - in and out the bedroom. This shared fulfillment of emotional needs is the definition of the social function of sex beyond the procreative. Here, now, we may answer the previous question. Is there a social purpose to sex that is permissable for those under the age of 18? By this definition of sex's social function, the answer must be no. In all cultures, individuals are defined by their ability to contribute to society. The simpler the culture, the less learned skills required to define one's role. It is that role which helps shape the individual's sense of self-confidence. Though it is possible that a 15 year-old could - in some societies - have formed an adult consciousness of their sociatal role, in our own society they have no role beyond learning to take on a role. Without this adult knowledge of self, the social role of sex does not provide any long-term value of emotional bonding. Teenagers are now screaming at me, especially those who think they are 'different' or 'mature'. In truth, no one can tell when another person is ready for something as powerful as sex, but the laws currently in place are legitimate in today's society. An 'underage' woman may be intelligent and stable and biologically ready for sex, but unless she's ready to sacrifice a greater role in society, she will most likely not be able to choose her lovers carefully enough to bond with properly. 'Underage' men have the same problem. The difference is that women put their lives on the line every time they have sex. They risk permanently bonding themselves to a child. Any woman will have much more difficulty providing for a child if she has not yet learned how to provide for herself. Men *should* have that same responsibility. The emotional bonds formed by adults are needed to provide an environment for raising children. 'Underage' persons are almost always incapable of forming those bonds. The emotions experienced by 'underage' persons during sex are very strong - but they are not 'bonding' emotions. They are the simultaneous feelings of individual passion - but they are not shared passion. There are also many adults who have difficulty in forming those bonds - and those difficulties are very often attempts to extend an illusion of pre-adult sexuality where one can fulfill one's own emotional needs without consideration of another or of the consequences of their act. In summation, 'underage' persons need to be taught that sex is more than an orgasm - it's about people. Sure, orgasms for orgasms sake are fun - that's what masturbation is all about. Certainly, the temporary emotional need of seducing a man or woman is a powerful emotional exercise. But those are but the smallest parts of sex that, when orchestrated properly along with many other elements, create a whole that can only be managed by an adult. The problem they must be taught is that they cannot separate those greater elements away from the smaller ones. Instead, pop-culture teaches that one can experience the orgasm and emotional congratulations without the rest. It's even referred to as 'baggage' and considered negative! Let children masturbate - they're going to anyway. But the 'underaged' have to be taught that sex is not a right - it's a privelege, and one they must earn from their mates by proving themselves worthy adults. The alternative is to simply reduce the standard by which an adult is measured. This is easier for women than for men. Men have no purpose in life but to contribute to society by what they do. They may supply the sperm - but they really don't need to do any more to keep life going - so they must actually work to make their lives meaningful. This means that education is mandatory. Women, on the other hand, do not HAVE to do anything other than bear and raise children to fullfill their purpose in life. Of course, they may wish to and are even encouraged to, but really, most women learn what they need to do to raise a child long before they finish their formal education in other subjects. Coupled mothers fulfill that role (along with any other/s they choose) and their spouse performs the complimentary role of providing for the her. Single mothers, however, are forced to perform more than one role to provide for her children and because of that risk, every woman should finish their formal education. I've written enough about this. The next chapter will be about polyamorous relationships- and if you think you know what my position on this will be - you will most likely be surprized.