> hodgaomoder...@golden-dawn.com wrote:

>> On Apr 3, 3:05 pm, mika gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Apr 3, 11:46 am, mika gmail.com> wrote:

>>> On Apr 3, 11:20 am, The Speaking Clock wrote:

>

>>>> That's more like it!  :)
>>>> Let's talk about sex.  In trad. GD groups they don't have any sexual
>>>> activity as part of the ritual initiation,

>>> How do you know?

>

>>>> but there were several
>>>> break away groups in the 70's that decided to incorporate sex into the
>>>> ritual.  These groups still regarded themselves as GD, not Thelma
>>>> etc.  I don't know why sex was incorporated,

>>> Really?

>

>>>> and I would like to know
>>>> further information about the rationals for this.

>>> The rationale?  On person is in a position of authority over another
>>> person.  The one with authority knows "secrets" which the other
>>> desires to learn, which are taught through undisclosed means.  Thus,
>>> if the one wants sex from the other, all they need to say is "it is
>>> necessary for your initiation for me to fuck you".  For most people in
>>> these groups, magical purpose or magick theory in practice has nothing
>>> to do with why they incorporate sex into their rituals.  If it did,
>>> then it would be irrelevant whether the sex involved other people or
>>> was a solo practice (or if someone was celibate).

>

>>> Now if you want to talk about sex magick, that's a whole other topic
>>> than the use of sex in hierarchical magical organizations.
>>> If you wish to have
>>> a meaningful conversation with me, don't confuse the two subjects,
>>> with eachother or with your issues with Zink.

>

>> Sorry, Mika, but the issues "are" related. Just take a look at all of
>> the defamation threads attacking David Griffin in this newsgroup
>> linking to anonymous defamation websites just like the one that had
>> been directly linked to Robert Zink! They are obviously related and
>> can not be separated as long as the defamation trolls keep ruining
>> any meaningful discussion in this newsgroup.

>
> You think a discussion about sex magick must be related to Zink? It
> seems to me that you cannot distinguish between a discuss about magick
> and your group's feuds.
>
> It's as if I asked how to build a house, for example, and you replied
> saying that Zink *is* related to the subject because he called a HOGD
> building -- supposing that you actually have one -- poorly designed. If
> Zink had made such a criticism, it wouldn't be related to house
> building; and the feuds of HOGD have nothing to do with sex magick.