Your content goes here. Edit or remove this text inline or in the module Content settings. You can also style every aspect of this content in the module Design settings and even apply custom CSS to this text in the module Advanced settings.

Under what circumstances is one human being justified in forcing another to obey them?

My answer: A reversal of “sexual consent”, even if offered before, sexual consent is always open to reversal or change. When consent is in question sexually, one has to force compliance with another, to obey them in their consent wishes, and not engage sexually or stop engaging sexually.

*Sexual Consent important to self-sovereignty rights and what to do if someone doesn’t respect “Sexual Consent” boundaries.

“Sexual consent means you and your partner give each other permission to touch, kiss, or have sex with one another. To give and receive consent, what you are and aren’t OK with.” ref 

Consent should be:

Freely given
Specific” ref  

  • Freely given. Consenting is a choice you make without pressure, manipulation, or under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
  • Reversible. Anyone can change their mind about what they feel like doing, anytime. Even if you’ve done it before, and even if you’re both naked in bed.
  • Informed. You can only consent to something if you have the full story. For example, if someone says they’ll use a condom and then they don’t, there isn’t full consent.
  • Enthusiastic. When it comes to sex, you should only do stuff you WANT to do, not things that you feel you’re expected to do.
  • Specific. Saying yes to one thing (like going to the bedroom to make out) doesn’t mean you’ve said yes to others (like having sex).” ref

What is Consent?

“Consent is an agreement between participants to engage in sexual activity. Consent should be clearly and freely communicated. A verbal and affirmative expression of consent can help both you and your partner to understand and respect each other’s boundaries. Consent cannot be given by individuals who are underage, intoxicated or incapacitated by drugs or alcohol, or asleep or unconscious. If someone agrees to an activity under pressure of intimidation or threat, that isn’t considered consent because it was not given freely. Unequal power dynamics, such as engaging in sexual activity with an employee or student, also mean that consent cannot be freely given.” ref

How does consent work?

“When you’re engaging in sexual activity, consent is about communication. And it should happen every time for every type of activity. Consenting to one activity, one time, does not mean someone gives consent for other activities or for the same activity on other occasions. For example, agreeing to kiss someone doesn’t give that person permission to remove your clothes. Having sex with someone in the past doesn’t give that person permission to have sex with you again in the future. It’s important to discuss boundaries and expectations with your partner prior to engaging in any sexual behavior.” ref

You can change your mind at any time.

“You can withdraw consent at any point if you feel uncomfortable. One way to do this is to clearly communicate to your partner that you are no longer comfortable with this activity and wish to stop. Withdrawing consent can sometimes be challenging or difficult to do verbally, so non-verbal cues can also be used to convey this. The best way to ensure that all parties are comfortable with any sexual activity is to talk about it, check in periodically, and make sure everyone involved consents before escalating or changing activities.” ref

What is enthusiastic consent?

“Enthusiastic consent is a newer model for understanding consent that focuses on a positive expression of consent. Simply put, enthusiastic consent means looking for the presence of a “yes” rather than the absence of a “no.” Enthusiastic consent can be expressed verbally or through nonverbal cues, such as positive body language like smiling, maintaining eye contact, and nodding. These cues alone do not necessarily represent consent, but they are additional details that may reflect consent. It is necessary, however, to still seek verbal confirmation. The important part of consent, enthusiastic or otherwise, is checking in with your partner regularly to make sure that they are still on the same page.” ref

Enthusiastic consent can look like this:

  • “Asking permission before you change the type or degree of sexual activity with phrases like “Is this OK?”
  • Confirming that there is reciprocal interest before initiating any physical touch.
  • Letting your partner know that you can stop at any time.
  • Periodically checking in with your partner, such as asking “Is this still okay?”
  • Providing positive feedback when you’re comfortable with an activity.
  • Explicitly agreeing to certain activities, either by saying “yes” or another affirmative statement, like “I’m open to trying.”
  • Using physical cues to let the other person know you’re comfortable taking things to the next level (see note below).” ref

“Note: Physiological responses like an erection, lubrication, arousal, or orgasm are involuntary, meaning your body might react one way even when you are not consenting to the activity. Sometimes perpetrators will use the fact that these physiological responses occur to maintain secrecy or minimize a survivor’s experience by using phrases such as, “You know you liked it.” In no way does a physiological response mean that you consented to what happened. If you have been sexually abused or assaulted, it is not your fault.” ref

Consent does NOT look like this:

  • “Refusing to acknowledge “no”
  • A partner who is disengaged, nonresponsive, or visibly upset
  • Assuming that wearing certain clothes, flirting, or kissing is an invitation for anything more
  • Someone being under the legal age of consent, as defined by the state
  • Someone being incapacitated because of drugs or alcohol Pressuring someone into sexual activity by using fear or intimidation
  • Assuming you have permission to engage in a sexual act because you’ve done it in the past” ref 

What’s sexual assault and what’s rape?

“Rape, sexual assault, and sexual abuse can have different legal definitions. In general, rape, sexual assault, and sexual abuse are forms of violence in which there is sexual contact without consent — including vaginal or anal penetration, oral sex, and genital touching. In the U.S. the legal definitions of rape and sexual assault vary. Some states use these terms interchangeably, while others define them differently. Often, people will use the term “sexual assault” to refer to any kind of non-consensual sexual contact, and use the term “rape” to mean sexual contact that includes penetration. Anyone can be a victim — no matter their gender, sexual orientation, or age.

“However certain groups of people are more likely than others to experience sexual assault in their lives. Women (especially women of color), LGBT-identified people, and people with developmental disabilities are more likely to experience sexual assault over the course of their lifetimes. Sexual violence doesn’t happen in one single way. There doesn’t need to be a weapon involved and the victim doesn’t need to have fought back, screamed, or said “no” repeatedly in order for it to count as rape or sexual assault. Most sexual assaults don’t happen by strangers in dark alleyways. Often, it’s someone the victim knows or even a romantic partner. If you or someone you know has experienced this type of violence, you’re not alone, and help is available.” ref 

Related to this, I am for body sovereignty and thus am anti-genital mutilation without consent (Circumcision/Male Genital Mutilation or Female/Intersex Genital Mutilation).

Genital Mutilation

I am pro-body sovereignty and rights against forced or nonconsent genital mutilation in females, males, as well as intersex persons. I am against the Genital Mutilation of All Children Girls and Boys. First for me as in all things: people own themselves, thus have all rights to their body to use as they wish. Children have the right to body sovereignty and bodily integrity rights that should not be violated, thus forced male and female circumcision is unethical. I am for the right to physical integrity. To read more on my thinking on this issue check out this link to my blog post: Against Genital Mutilation

Brave thinker, what if we leveled the full weight of reason, in an intellectually honest critique of our own beliefs not leaving any free of rebuilding or disbelief. A thinker who earnestly directs, analyses, and challenges their own beliefs is brave. For it is better to search not like one with a belief to prove, no, first one must drill down into the belief exposing any and all flaws and if there is be willing to address it or remove it.

Self-ownership, Human Rights, and Societal Liberty or Freedoms

Humanistic Simplicity: “don’t do harm and do help.”

Fairness, thus an equality of respect, seems to hold a high status in the call for justice.

Atheism is silly Damien…

My response, (Atheism is a freedom from the mental trap of theism fantasies and errors in thinking) You have to be joking, it is theism, and its lack of any proof that is silly. Atheism is not believing evidence devoid of claims like gods. Furthermore, atheism if it can be said to believe in something, it’s only believing in observable real-world evidence or demonstrable natural reality, so the same things proven by science. Yes, so crazy… Please give me a break.

Hey religious people, don’t let your religious freedom become your children’s religious oppression.

The reason the scientific method assumes methodological naturalism (the assumptions that there is only natural without supernatural) is that there is no magic anything evident in reality at every level in every test ever done all over the earth from the beginning of science testing even when minds wished for magic. The saying “you only live once” is true and misleading; as you live a little every day, thus it’s more like, you only die once. So, my fellow unbelievers be good to yourselves and others; and by all means, live it up. Theist threats of hell and a call to fear a god for an atheist would be like a child asking you to believe that the dark itself is actually somehow dangerous because they invent the dark as a dangerous reality out of nothing. But why as a reasonable thinker talk of the dark as a danger in itself, any reasonable adult knows this is irrationalism not any more real than the emotionalism it creates. This is similar to the irrationalism and emotionalism of a child-like fear-driven belief that makes one invent gods out of nothing which they then come to fear. One is not any more reasonable to grab the wind than to think they found facts of gods.

“Dream World”

How can I sum up something so encompassing into words so small? You will hear my passion for our planet; it has it all, every cloud, every mountain, every valley, every stream, our world is like a dream. The earth has so much life to give it is a sparkle in my eye giving me such a reason to live. Just look around, wonder from the sky to the ground. A world so alive and free, so many strong growing trees and such deep and teaming seas. I want to see all of these, so please love and care for the world in which we live in for it’s the only one we’ve been given.

A wise person can even learn from things some people think are stupid.

A stupid person cannot even learn from someone who is wise.

We who are good, shine no matter the darkness.

My reasoning about what makes a universal ethic is in depth, in general, it is meta-ethics driven and is best expressed in a multi modality application with a heavy axiology influence. But here is a simpler standard to adhere to when moral reasoning is used to grasp what makes a universal ethic. We can do this by taking clues from the ideas of universal ethics according to Fred E. Foldvary, from the book The Soul of Liberty: The Universal Ethic of Freedom and Human Rights. According to Fred E. Foldvary, the three main criteria that any possible exploration to establish what makes a universal ethic must satisfy:

1. Comprehensiveness: it must discern right and wrong for all possible ethical situations.
2. Objectivity: it must, as an objective ethic, be independent from any authority or culture.
3. Universality: it must, as a permanent and universal ethic, apply to mankind as a whole and to all individual human beings, in all times and places.

These three criteria – comprehensiveness, objectivity, and universality – imply other qualities too, such as rationality, uniqueness, absoluteness, and naturalness (derived from nature). These are our premises and requirements. Some say I or other atheists and rationalists have faith in reason. No, I don’t have faith in reason, instead, Reason is a well Known demonstrated method of human thinking; as in its assists in a higher level of accuracy and reliability than unreasonable thinking. And some wonder why I am an I am a feminist? Well, because of many things but most of all because in my mind I become “women” when they suffer or are fighting for rights, just as I too try to become, in my mind, any and all peoples who are oppressed, suffering, or are fighting for rights. We are all valuable beings of dignity and we rise by helping each other.

THE SOUL OF LIBERTY: The Universal Ethic of Freedom and Human Rights.


For freedom and human rights to mean anything, they must be specific principles founded on the bedrock of a fixed ethic. “Harm” should not be whatever the authorities don’t happen to like, but must be defined by the ethic in a manner that can be applied to all moral issues. Ethics is to human relations what health is to life. The rules of health tell us how to avoid sickness and death, and the rules of ethics tell us how to be free from social illness, injustice, exploitation, and crime. We must start with dignity and self-ownership for all in this endeavor. Our political, economic, and social problems are ultimately moral questions. Consider these examples:

Do people have a right to food, shelter, and health services?
Do parents have the right to raise their children as they wish?
Should people of any amount or kind be allowed to marry and divorce at will?
How should scarce resources be distributed?
Should writing or art ever be censored?
Should prostitution be prohibited or restricted?
Should there be any laws at all concerning sex?
Should people be allowed to ingest any drug they wish?
Do animals have any rights?
Are extremes of wealth inherently immoral?
Should a business be allowed to make as much profit as it wants?
Should we have capital punishment?
Should we permit people to kill themselves? ref

Dear of Seed of Hate, I no longer love you.

Where did the seeds of hate come from you may ask: well, “That is only mine”, “only they are me”, “they are only allowed there” “only they are allowed this/that” or “only I matter”, all of which have quite often sent a seed of hate in the world and we have been responding to them for years on end. Who is wrong? Once I was wrong. And then wrong again. In fact, I have been wrong all my life. One has not found truth, if they believe that they are never wrong. I am sure this plague of my side bias is a fantastic way of not learning new-truth, if that matters to you? Dear thinkers welcome you’re being completely shown to be wrong, as who wants to spend another second believing a lie. You don’t honestly want to believe lies or half-truths do you?

Let me explain why as an axiological atheist (value theory atheist) even the belief in the concept of god is ethically vile to me. God belief is inherently immoral to me it is the belief that supports an all-powerful being who willfully allows suffering, something that no ethical person would tolerate if they had the ability to do otherwise. Moreover, a common attribute of god belief is support of this claimed greater being of high intelligence and self-will forcing its will and standards on other beings of high intelligence and self-will. This force is unethical and abusive to the rights of humanity. Furthermore, many who subscribe to this forced abusive relationship with god claim an even more revolting ethical atrocity called hell where eternal horror and suffering are dished out by the direct will of the claimed stronger immoral god being against the defenseless undeserving subjugated humanity. Thus, being one who values rights and ethics, it sickens me to even speak of such willful misconduct of justice.

“Damien, you’re a psychologist, right? I want to know your honest views on incest, large age gap relationships, polygamy, polyamory, falling in love with animals, fictional characters, or physical objects (examples of pathetic fallacy), etc. which common people find unacceptable or taboo?” – Questioner
My response, I have a degree in psychology but stopped halfway through my masters, deciding to be a full-time atheist instead. I will give you my honest opinion as I always do anyway. lol
My response, I agree in general that before 18 there should not be an age difference above around 3 years. but after 18 I think it is open. Incest to me is a social issue, not a relational one if the individuals are adults. I am not interested in it but as a sex thing, I have no issues if all are over 18 and give consent. If under and not more than a 3 years age difference I would think it a potential issue as there are psychological issues with crossing such boundaries which you can’t take back so it should be an adult choice not one under 18 should try to make as for an age difference whether incest or non-incest sex is statutory rape and should not occur. I think also such incest couples over 18 still should ethically consider the potential impact on children so I would advise some form of birth control unless the child can be assured to not be deformed in some way.
My response, Polygamy, polyamory, or polyandry, if all involved are of adult age and free of cursive force, is cool with me, let people love how, who, and with how many they wish. Falling in love with animals? As in what, care for animals or are you asking about sex with animals? I will assume you mean people having sex with animals. I am against abuse and sex with ones who are unable to give sexual consent should not do so.
My response, People who fall in love with fictional characters to me is likely Animistic influenced. People fall in love with fictional characters all the time and in many ways so I don’t know what you are asking? I will try to guess, I have a general belief that people own themselves and this includes things that they may believe. I don’t see much wrong with it unless it is very detrimental to their life (or detrimental harm in the lives of others). There is not one limited reason this loving of fiction could accrue or flourish so without knowing more detriment to their well being I would say it could be ok or a real problem. People do love many inanimate objects that are likely why Totemism emerged, we love art. 🙂

“Damien. You often use the words “me”, “my”, and “I”. Do you feel that you do most of what you do to fulfil a personal need? Whatever the need may be, as I’m not going to just assume. Or do you feel that you are an advocate for atheism as a whole?” Questioner
My response, I have a need to inspire deep thinking in both those who don’t think much only believe and I also wish to inspire others to find their power to challenge others so yes I have a goal to improve the world as much as can while I am here. I speak to myself as I can not talk for others nor would I want to I want to help others speak for themselves.

THE SOUL OF LIBERTY: “The Universal Ethic of Freedom and Human Rights” By Fred E. Foldvary

Justice in the Workplace: morality/ethical dimensions

Axiological Dignity: “Value Consciousness vs Value-Blindness”

Why care? Because we are Dignity Beings. Utilizing Dignity? Dignity = respect?

Moral fear and Moral love (which together motivate my axiological ethics)?

How Do I Gain a Morality Persuasion or Make a Change to it?

T.R.U.E. “The Rational Universal Ethics”

Self-ownership: Abortion, Genital Mutilation, Prostitution, Drugs, and the Right to Die

FREEDOM in relation to group status
To me, there is a confusion, I see some make about the ontological nature of FREEDOM in relation to group status. They think it’s like being alone uninfringed by anything or anyone allowed to do anything. But how can you profess freedom, when you are alone and completely uninvolved with others when the freedom requested, is from the group, to begin with, whether or not one realizes it. So it is wrong to think that freedom is like being alone, rather a FREEDOM of this nature is found in the status of a group or in group dynamics where one individual still holds group-sanctioned autonomy thus conceding some limit to one’s freedom rights where they interact with others freedoms. To me, freedom of the social engagement variety involves the reasonable acknowledgment of behavior bubbles of freedom restraint compared to the free flow of unhindered involvement with others freedoms. Social freedom in this way involves behaving in a group setting with freedom equally, which by nature has the internal limit to one’s free choice to do something such as violate the rights of another by something like hitting them just because that is how the puncher wanted to live their freedom rights. Which I am sure most agree is a violation of the social equity of respect of the freedom and dignity of others as fellow freedom holders. To conceive of social freedom as if it is like being alone one should stop and think this would mean everyone could do as they wished which would include violating the freedom of everyone else showing social freedom must involve respecting the freedom rights of others even if to do so automatically add limits to what can be expected from one’s own limits social freedom because one has some reasonable freedom ONLY if others also respect them. Freedom of this social nature is a behavior as much as a right or status. 

I am a staunch believer in Self–ownership.

Selfownership (or sovereignty of the individual, individual sovereignty or individual autonomy) is the concept of property in one’s own person, expressed as the moral or natural right of a person to have bodily integrity, and be the exclusive controller of his own body and life.

In a general sense the concept of rights means that an individual, and by extension all people in society are justified in rejecting force agent themselves or using force to defend themselves or others in certain circumstances from human rights violations, “self-ownership violations” meaning “the individual owns themselves and thus has rights to their body and what interacts with it or how it is used (self-governed body).” This is something that very few people would dispute, and thus the concept of human rights or self-ownership basically highlights the thinking connected to ones right to life as well as how that life is used. “Self-ownership” can thus be interpreted as meaning: we have individual body sovereignty, we have moral legitimacy to our rights in our bodies and our liberty s connected to this understanding, we are the only ones who (should) have control over ourselves, we are self-ownership agents on equal standing with every other self-ownership agent in society. Therefore, “Self-ownership” is the capacity to live wholly in accordance with the full and free exercise of our private judgment about and to our body. Ref

“Self-ownership” can be thought of as a person’s self-management and can thus be interpreted as supported under: Civil liberties “sovereignty of the individual”.

Civil liberties are personal guarantees and freedoms that the government cannot abridge, either by law or by judicial interpretation without due process. Though the scope of the term differs amongst various countries, some examples of civil liberties include the freedom from torture, freedom from forced disappearance, freedom of conscience, freedom of press, freedom of religion, freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, the right to security and liberty, freedom of speech, the right to privacy, the right to equal treatment under the law and due process, the right to a fair trial, and the right to life. Other civil liberties include the right to own property, the right to defend oneself, and the right to bodily integrity. In America, we not only have Bill of Rights a collective name for amendments to the United States Constitution states have a constitution such as a bill of rights, or similar constitutional documents that enumerate and seek to guarantee civil liberties. Likewise, there is the European Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Ref

The Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution (abolished slavery and involuntary servitude) is sometimes viewed as an implementation of the concept of self-ownership, as are some portions of the Bill of Rights. Ref

“Self-ownership” can be thought of as involving a person’s bodily integrity which is the inviolability of the physical body and emphasizes the importance of personal autonomy and the self-determination of human beings over their own bodies. It considers the violation of bodily integrity as an unethical infringement. Ref

I will address the issues of abortion, genital mutilation, prostitution, drugs, and the right to die.


The main argument of the anti-abortion or anti-choice movement boils down to this: a human zygote, blastocyst, embryo, or fetus is a human being with a right to life, and abortion is, therefore, murder of a human being. Anti-choicers must claim that fetuses are human beings, of course, or they really have no case against abortion. However, the stages of embryonic development: A zygote is a single-celled fertilized egg. A blastocyst is the fertilized egg after cell division. At implantation, it becomes an embryo through to the eighth week of development, and a fetus from eight weeks to birth. The common law rule is that a fetus is not considered a living human being until it has been born alive. Therefore, if a defendant kills a pregnant woman he can only be charged with one count of murder for killing the mother, but no charges can be brought against him for the death of the fetus. Some jurisdictions have moved even farther than that and have defined murder as the unlawful killing of a human being or fetus with malice aforethought. Notice how human being and fetus are separate? That’s because a fetus is not a person. Ref Ref I think it’s the mother’s choice to decide what she wants to do with her body grin emoticon. If she wants to keep it, let her keep it. If she wants to abort it, let her abort it. The word murder is a legal clarification on killing (someone who is a human ie born) unlawfully. I do think to terminate a pregnancy by means of a kind of killing but so is the cow, pig, and chicken I ate in the last two days. They are not murder and neither is abortion. Some say even a dead body has rights. so a human zygote, blastocyst, embryo, or fetus should two, however, this is wrong and seems to misunderstands so-called rights of the dead just as they seem to confuse what or who is owed human rights as a person.

The Rights of the Dead is more accurately stated the Rights of Survivors. In general, the legal rights of the next of kin include: the right to immediately possess the remains for burial, the right to oppose disinterment, the right to oppose autopsy or organ donation, and the right to seek damages for mutilation of the body. Who counts as next of kin? As a general matter, both common law and state statutes give first preference to spouses in determining what will happen to the deceased. If there is no spouse, decision-making authority goes by the same consanguinity rules that apply to inheritance. Legal disputes have arisen where same-sex partners or unmarried lovers are excluded from these decisions.

Well, it’s not a viable being outside of the mother and as it’s not born it’s not yet actually a citizen of anything. As in if the mother travels, the baby could be born in a different state or country creating different issues.

A late termination of pregnancy often refers to an induced ending of pregnancy after the 20th week of gestation. The exact point when a pregnancy becomes late-term, however, is not clearly defined. Premature babies born at 22 weeks are more likely to survive outside the womb than previously thought, according to new research.

And 89-92% of all abortions happen during the first trimester, prior to the 13th week of gestation (AGI/CDC).
In 2012, 7.2% of all abortions occurred between 14-20 weeks’ gestation; 1.3% occurred ≥21 weeks’ gestation (CDC). Evidence regarding the capacity for fetal pain is limited but indicates that fetal perception of pain is unlikely before the third trimester.” The third trimester begins at 27 to 28 weeks from conception.

So the fetus is not an aware sovereign being or citizen to suppress the rights of the who is both an aware sovereign being and a citizen with both human rights and government-entitled citizen protection. Likewise, the fetus is being aborted before it can experience with the pain of death or some connected response to it. Ref 

I strive to be a good human ethical in both my thinking and behaviors thus I strive to be:

Anti-racist, Anti-sexist, Anti-homophobic, Anti-biphobic. Anti-transphobic, Anti-classist, Anti-ablest, Anti-ageist, and as Always Antifascist!

In fact, I want to strive to avoid as much as I can bigoted thinking towards others based on their perceived membership or classification based on that person’s perceived political affiliation (Well: within reason, justice, and ethics), sex/gender, beliefs (Well: within reason, justice, and ethics), social class (Well: within reason, justice, and ethics), age, disability, religion (Well: within reason, justice, and ethics), sexuality (Well: within reason, justice, and ethics), race, ethnicity, language (Well: within reason, justice, and ethics), nationality, beauty, height, occupation (Well: within reason, justice, and ethics), wealth (Well: within reason, justice, and ethics), education, sport-team affiliation, music tastes or other personal characteristics (Well: within reason, justice, and ethics).

Although, I am a “very”, yes, VERY strong atheist, antitheist as well as antireligionist, My humanity is just as strong and I value it above my disbeliefs. My kind of people are those who champion humanity, the one’s who value kindness, love justice, and support universal empowerment for all humans, we are all equal in dignity, and all deserve human rights, due self-sovereignty.

Prostitution Rights?

I am for legal non forced consensual prostitution (for adults with adults). First for me as in all things: people own themselves, thus have all rights to their body to use as they wish. Also if prostitution were legalized, then it can also be regulated and made more safe. Applicable and newly created laws would make it safer and more healthy for both workers and clients. Prostitution is never going to go away, but we can make it safer for everyone involved.

In 1949, the United Nations adopted a resolution in favor of the decriminalization of prostitution, which has been ratified by fifty countries. The National Task Force on Prostitution suggests that over one million people in the US have worked as prostitutes. Estimates in some larger cities found that 20-30% of prostitutes are male. One report cites 60% of the abuse against street prostitutes perpetrated by clients, 20% by police, and 20% in domestic relationships.

In a study in London, 50% of clients were married or cohabiting. 70% of adult men have engaged in prostitution at least once. Average prostitution arrests include 70% females, 20% males and 10% customers. 85-90% of those arrested work on the street. Prostitution in the US is a 14.5 billion dollar a year business. Cities spend an average of 7.5 million dollars on prostitution control every year, ranging from 1 million dollars to 23 million dollars. Ref

Advocates for sex workers strongly back the idea. A petition in support of such a policy has garnered more than 6,000 signatures, including dozens from sex worker support and advocacy groups in Africa, Asia, Europe, North America and Latin America. The proposal has also received harsh criticism from anti-trafficking activists as well as from celebrities like Anne Hathaway, Lena Dunham, and Kate Winslet. Ref

Amnesty International now joins the United Nations, Human Rights Watch, the World Health Organization and other global groups that argue the best way to protect the safety of people who sell sex is to legalize the industry. Ref

Some say, but prostitution is only a result of economic necessity.

This claim that the only reason for prostitution is a result of economic necessity, well that if true would not make it different than all work as all work is an economic necessity, well I guess you could say unless there was something like a basic income. But even where there is a basic income we still see prostitution. Such as in Denmark where their ambassador once said, “while it is difficult to become very rich in Denmark no one is allowed to be poor. The minimum wage in Denmark is about twice that of the United States and people who are totally out of the labor market or unable to care for themselves have a basic income guarantee of about $100 per day.” And yet prostitution still happens in Denmark. But since sex work is not recognized as a lawful profession, sex workers are not entitled to the protection of employment laws or unemployment benefits, but are still required to pay tax. Ref

So let’s look at the research not believed claims.

Half of the prostitutes in a new survey say they became prostitutes because of sexual curiosity, and 68 percent consider their line of work as part of their sexuality.

“While there’s no doubt that money is the primary reason for the women becoming prostitutes, it is very surprising that sexual motivation ranks so highly,” says Jens Kofod, who holds a PhD in anthropology and is a researcher at SFI – The Danish National Centre for Social Research. Ref

Again, I am only for non-forced consensual prostitution (for adults with adults), that said I want to make it clear no one is obligated to give or engage in sex, not even in a relationship or marriage; but this includes the thinking behind the term ”friendzone.” To me the idea of ”friendzone” is or may be connected to some odd belief that people mostly women have an obligation to offer sex in return for friendly actions or thoughts. To such thinking I wish to remind people that NO one is required to be sexual with anyone regardless of how nice you are, how close you are as friends, on a date, or if you’re romantically together, etc. I always strive to respect the body ownership of others including their right to use sexual consent when, how and with whom they wish and there is no external entitlement nor obligation owed or owned by anyone else then the person themselves.

Drugs Rights?

I am for eliminating the prohibition of all drugs for adults and establishing appropriate regulations and standards for distribution and use. First for me as in all things: people own themselves, thus have all rights to their body to use as they wish.

History has shown that drug prohibition reduces neither use nor abuse. After a rapist is arrested, there are fewer rapes. After a drug dealer is arrested, however, neither the supply nor the demand for drugs is seriously changed. The arrest merely creates a job opening for an endless stream of drug entrepreneurs who will take huge risks for the sake of the enormous profits created by prohibition. Prohibition costs taxpayers tens of billions of dollars every year, yet 40 years and some 40 million arrests later, drugs are cheaper, more potent, and far more widely used than at the beginning of this futile crusade. Ref

10 Reasons to legalize all drugs

1 Address the real issues
2 Eliminate the criminal marketplace
3 Massively reduce crime
4 Drug users are a majority
5 Provide access to truthful information and education
6 Make all drug use safer
7 Restore our rights and responsibilities
8 Race and Drugs
9 Global Implications
10 Prohibition doesn’t work

To read the details for the ten reasons click the link:

Right to Guns (the claimed right to a product)?

I Am not Pro Guns or Anti guns. I am Pro Rights and Pro Safety. I am an atheist for Non-Aggression, valuing anti-violence unless the aggression or violence is for direct self-defense or other-defense. I am for Gun Rights and I am for Gun Laws. I want sensible laws for all things guns are in no way special. I would like gun laws to be like vehicle license laws, such as different classes A, B, C. And similar scaling required Personal Firearms Liability Insurance per gun and gun type owned like car insurance is for vehicles by different classes A, B, C. NRA Endorsed Personal Firearms Liability Insurance (voluntary of course for the NRA; though I think it should be mandatory)

“A” Being full auto machine guns. “B” being pistols and semiautomatics, and “C” being shotguns and hunting rifles. Just like driving licenses, it should be easier to get a class “C” gun license and the hardest and have extra requirements to get a class “A” gun license just like driving licenses. And each class requires proof of training yearly registration and liability insurance for gun ownership just like vehicles. To me, the gun rights issue starts off with a confused mind about guns as I see it there is a human right to self-defense not a right to a dangerous product unencumbered by any restrictions. Guns are not special, they are a product, a very dangerous product they may or may not be employed in Self-care (for food “hunting”, safety “self-defense”/other-defense” fun “target practice”). While guns don’t have a human right, there is a human right self-defense is people seem to confuse the two. Speaking of human right self-defense, I am in support of a right to reasonable safety in society (shared right to self along with other-defense) and why I support reasonable gun laws.

The NRA once supported gun control:

Name me laws we don’t put into practice simply because some will not follow them? I’m all for sensible laws. We need sensible laws even if getting people to follow them is a problem. Just like underage drinking, we cannot stop it but we need the laws. Laws are why we even have a right to have guns in the first place. Thus, it is no strange thing a law is needed to govern them as well. Laws are what come from the Bill of Rights in the U.S. Constitution, that guarantees our basic freedoms like freedom of speech, religion, and the press etc.

Possible Gun Debate Fallacies

The gun debate needs a reason, not rhetoric and logical fallacies. There are many fallacies that occur on both sides of the gun debate, this fallacy can be especially distortive in how it affects our ability to think rationally about the issue.

Appeal to Fear- used by both sides such as saying how many more gun deaths would there be if there were no guns to protect us or we must ban all or some guns as it’s the only way to protect us.

Appeal to emotion – used by both sides such as saying if we don’t ban guns, then kids will continue to be violently and gruesomely murdered. If we don’t allow more guns everywhere, then kids will continue to be violently and gruesomely murdered.

False causality – (assume that correlation must equal causation)- used by both sides such as saying remove guns and gun violence will have to drop or allow more guns everywhere and gun violence. Another way to say this is there is no evidence that making gun laws removed gun violence or there is no evidence that open carry gun laws reduce overall gun violence. There could be places in different parts of the country where either of these claims has what looks like validating statistics. This can be a fallacy because it ignores the possibility that the two things are influenced by a third factor. This is a fallacy you should look for whenever statistics are being thrown around because as one of my old dive instructors used to say, statistics can be like bikinis: what they show is revealing, but what they hide is essential.

Slippery slope – eg. If they take away our rights to any weapon soon we won’t be able to hunt at all: This tends to be more of the pro-gun side as they are supportive of maintaining the status quo. It is not a particularly useful argument for change.

Perfect solution fallacy – We can’t strengthen firearm regulations because people will still get their dirty paws on guns. But the goal is a reduction of gun deaths. There’s no reason why we shouldn’t employ a multifaceted approach to deal with this problem.

Appeal to authority – eg. The constitution says we should have guns. This is a tricky point as the validity of the constitution as an authority is rarely questioned, yet it does not necessarily represent a valid argument. This is probably a point that will never change.

Anecdotal fallacy – eg. I know of someone who stopped a robbery with a gun. One incident can always be pointed to where a gun was useful in defense. The size of this example set is usually the point of debate. The same can be said for massacres with firearms on the other side.

My Personal Mission: I champion a value-driven life not just enlightenments by valuing people and embarking to be a friend and show friendliness as a way of inspiring change. Instead of trying to attack people personally and put others down rather than putting bad ideas down. A person wishing for a value-driven life works to inform and build others up as well as hold a willingness to listen and where we see, unrest in the world try to help to offer new thinking to bring level-headedness and peace. A person wishing for a value-driven life sees this positive thinking not just a good thing to do when convenient but see it as a way of life and compassion as a personal virtue.

The number of mass shootings in the America this year (2015) reached 294, according to the Mass Shooting Tracker. The website defines mass shootings as incidents in which four or more people are killed or injured by gunfire.

We ethically must do something, as to doing nothing likely means more will suffer. I believe in reasonable anarchist gun laws?

“Damien, you say you agree with reasonable gun laws, but you say you are an anarchist. How can you have gun control without a government?” – Questioner

My response, As if “government” is the only form of governance…

“Explain to me how it works then.” – Questioner

My response, What governance?

“Controlling gun ownership without a state, how would that work.” – Questioner

My response, We the People are the management, and we should support all reasonable personal freedom but still have laws we directly vote on like free People. Direct democracy (also known as pure democracy) is a form of democracy in which people decide (e.g. vote on, form consensus on) policy initiatives directly. Guns are not some human right it’s a dangerous product and like all hazardous products need reasonable regulations just as bomb-making.

“Who enforces the regulations?” – Questioner

My response, I hope you don’ wrongly think I am anti-society. No, I am for ethical Governance, I just oppose the abusive hierarchal governments and one over many rules removing our rights then only giving them back in small peaces and demanding we thank and praise them, some almost as if gods but I am not so fooled, as to me much of what we have now is similar such as fire departments and all other reasonable services we as a community pay for in taxes. I am not against reasonable taxes for desirable social services. From “Big Government” to “Big Governance”?

Rights to Gods (Religious Freedom)?

The Right to Die?

I am for the right to die, supporting ‘rational suicide’ assisted voluntary euthanasia. First for me as in all things: people own themselves, thus have all rights to their body to use as they wish.

The right to die is a moral principle based on the belief that a human being is entitled to commit suicide or to undergo voluntary euthanasia. Possession of this right is often understood to mean that a person with a terminal illness should be allowed to commit suicide or assisted suicide or to decline life-prolonging treatment, where a disease would otherwise prolong their suffering to an identical result. The question of who, if anyone, should be empowered to make these decisions is often central to the debate.

Proponents typically associate the right to die with the idea that one’s body and one’s life are one’s own, to dispose of as one sees fit. However, a legitimate state interest in preventing irrational suicides is sometimes argued. Pilpel and Amsel write, “Contemporary proponents of ‘rational suicide’ or the ‘right to die’ usually demand by ‘rationality’ that the decision to kill oneself be both the autonomous choice of the agent (i.e., not due to the physician or the family pressuring them to ‘do the right thing’ and commit suicide). Ref

Further addressing Sexual Consent

Consent is defined as permission for something to happen or agreement to do something. And synonyms Consent: agreement, assent, acceptance, approval, authorization, permission; informal: go-ahead, thumbs up, green light, OK. Body Ownership or Self-Ownership (self-rights to your body or sovereignty of the individual, individual sovereignty or individual autonomy) and similar to Property of or in the Person.

All unconsent especially violations to sexual consent should not only be criticize we should teach consent thus to me we also should teach Body Ownership or Self-Ownership (self-rights to your body or sovereignty of the individual, individual sovereignty or individual autonomy).

—-Teaching consent, well there is formal and informal consent.

*What is formal consent?

Formal consent or Informed Consent is the requirement of informed consent in professional practice, the doctrine of informed consent rose to dominance during the course of the 20th century. Informed consent is shorthand for informed, voluntary, and decisionally-capacitated consent. It replaced a medical ethos founded on trust in physicians’ decisions—often on the assumption that “doctor knows best”—with an ethos that sought to put patients in charge of their own care. In English, “consent” has several meanings but in the relevant sense, consent transactions have a distinct structure: person A consents to B’s engagement for a time on A’s body or owned self, under a certain description of A’s body or owned self, whether or not the offer was initiated by B. For example, a person “A” may consent to a physician “B” touching their genitals as part of a physical exam, but this limited consent is not and cannot be thought to as universal entitled consent such as if consent is given for a breast exam this not a free-for-all consent to then touch the woman’s vagina or rectum. Just like if consent is given for a tactical exam this not a free-for-all consent to then touch the man’s penis or rectum. Unconsented touch is bodily trespass an action that in itself is wrongful in respect of its being a violation of autonomy of another and that the class of such actions violates Body Ownership or Self-Ownership and the right to consent that comes with them. There must be a better understanding of how we all own our own bodies and how we are the only sovereign owner to allow consent personal autonomy.

*What is in formal consent?

Consent is an agreement between participants to usually to engage in sexual activity sometimes in close romantic relationships there is what is called “presumed consent” though this is only tentative by an agreed loose consent dependent on the people, place and time, etc. There are many ways to give consent, and consent doesn’t have to be verbal, but verbally agreeing to different sexual activities can help both you and your partner respect each other’s boundaries. Consent in sexual interactions have a distinct structure: person A consents to B’s engagement for a time on A’s body or owned self, under a certain description of A’s body or owned self, whether or not the offer was initiated by B. For example, a person “A” may consent to kissing “B” but this is not a free-for-all consent allowing touching her genitals as the consent is for kissing and while some mistake this as a universal sexual consent, this is a limited consent and cannot be thought to as universal entitled consent as in you must ask if your partner is in the mood for sex, one should ask for and be given consent each and every time sex is desired, unless given consent otherwise. As people own themselves, thus have all rights to their body to use as they wish. Moreover, this sexual consent is not a universal ok for any and all in any way sexual consent unless stated so, such as if consent is given for a breast exam this, not a free-for-all consent to then touch the woman’s vagina or rectum. Just like if consent is given for a tactical exam this not a free-for-all consent to then touch the man’s penis or rectum. I wish to remind people that NO one is required to be sexual with anyone regardless of how nice you are, how close you are as friends, on a date, or if you’re romantically together, etc. I always strive to respect the body ownership of others including their right to use sexual consent when, how and with whom they wish and there is no external entitlement nor obligation owed or owned by anyone else than the person themselves.

—–Teaching Body Ownership or Self-Ownership

*What is Self-Ownership?

Self–ownership (or sovereignty of the individual, individual sovereignty or individual autonomy) is the concept of property in one’s own person, expressed as the moral or natural right of a person to have bodily integrity, and be the exclusive controller of his own body and life. In a general sense the concept of rights means that an individual, and by extension all people in society are justified in rejecting force agent themselves or using force to defend themselves or others in certain circumstances from human rights violations, “self-ownership violations” meaning “the individual owns themselves and thus has rights to their body and what interacts with it or how it is use (self-governed body).” This is something that very few people would dispute, and thus the concept of human rights or self-ownership basically highlights the thinking connected to ones right to life as well as how that life is used. “Self-ownership” can thus be interpreted as meaning: we have individual body sovereignty, we have moral legitimacy to our rights in our bodies and our liberty s connected to this understanding, we are the only ones who (should) have control over ourselves, we are self-ownership agents on equal standing with every other self-ownership agent in society. Therefore, “Self-ownership” is the capacity to live wholly in accordance with the full and free exercise of our private judgment about and to our body. Ref

“Self-ownership” can be thought of as a person’s self-management and can thus be interpreted as supported under: Civil liberties “sovereignty of the individual”.

Civil liberties are personal guarantees and freedoms that the government cannot abridge, either by law or by judicial interpretation without due process. Though the scope of the term differs amongst various countries, some examples of civil liberties include the freedom from torture, freedom from forced disappearance, freedom of conscience, freedom of press, freedom of religion, freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, the right to security and liberty, freedom of speech, the right to privacy, the right to equal treatment under the law and due process, the right to a fair trial, and the right to life. Other civil liberties include the right to own property, the right to defend oneself, and the right to bodily integrity. In America, we not only have Bill of Rights a collective name for amendments to the United States Constitution states have a constitution such as a bill of rights, or similar constitutional documents that enumerate and seek to guarantee civil liberties. Likewise, there is the European Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution (abolished slavery and involuntary servitude) is sometimes viewed as an implementation of the concept of self-ownership, as are some portions of the Bill of Rights. “Self-ownership” can be thought of as involving a person’s bodily integrity which is the inviolability of the physical body and emphasizes the importance of personal autonomy and the self-determination of human beings over their own bodies. It considers the violation of bodily integrity as an unethical infringement.

For more reading check out the following links:

Teaching Consent Without Sex:

We Can Teach Kids About Consent Without Bringing Sex into the Conversation:

This Is How You Teach Kids About Consent:

Healthy Sex Talk Teaching Kids Consent, Ages 1-21:

Sex Ed Lesson ‘Yes Means Yes,’ but It’s Tricky:

What If We Treated All Consent Like Society Treats Sexual Consent:

Self-ownership: Abortion, Genital Mutilation, Prostitution, Drugs, and the Right to Die:


The Need for Consent and the value of Body Ownership: Healthy Sex Talk with Kids

Kids and Consent?

Body Ownership or Self-Ownership (self-rights to your body or sovereignty of the individual, individual sovereignty or individual autonomy) and similar to Property of or in the Person.

A mother I know had the conversation with her son after me and her talked about self-ownership and consent and she said it went very well. She told me she would be talking to her 8-year-old son and it will be a lesson in consent. She said she was going to use hugs as an example for consent. She planned to tell him that not everyone wants to be hugged, so it’s a good idea to make sure it’s ok. Someone may have been ok with you hugging them yesterday, but doesn’t want you to hug them today. THAT’S OK! ITS THEIR BODY! Also, if someone hugs a lot of people, they are NOT obligated to hug everyone. That is also ok. If you ask someone if it’s ok to hug them and if they say I don’t know, treat that as a no. They may be worried about what you think if they say no. It’s about respect people’s rights to their bodies. Touch is a personal matter and shouldn’t be taken personally. Not wanting to be hugged doesn’t necessarily mean they don’t like you and don’t want to be your friend. And don’t forget, you have all these same rights to your body as well. She wanted to keep this discussion gender-neutral as rape isn’t only a problem being faced by women. She was hoping this conversation would pave the way for a few years down the road when it’s about sex. This is our contribution to a better future by raising one more person to not have any grey area on consent.

After talking to me she had a talk with her son. She combined my examples of explaining consent with hers and thus used the words consent and body ownership when she spoke with him. through body or self-ownership like home ownership; even if you have been to someone’s house 100 times you still have to knock on the door and wait for them to let you in if they wish (give consent to come inside) and you are allowed in with a tentative consent as likely you are not able to just move in without further consent and even then it’s a limited consent and likely comes with some of limits rooms or spaces not a universal consent. She added my explanation with hers and used the words consent and body ownership when she spoke with him. As I advised, she didn’t use any language that indicated the discussion applied to one gender over another. At the end, I asked him if he had any questions. He said no. So she gave a few scenarios and asked what he should do or if what an occurred in each scenario was ok. He did very well. She said she was glad she engaged him further in the discussion even after he said he had no questions. It was a great way for her to gauge his comprehension.

Why she felt a need to talk to him was in light of the recent controversy about the swimmer who raped the unconscious woman, and most especially there are some people victim blaming. And there have been a lot of eye-rolls when people say things like instead of blaming the victim for what she was wearing/saying/doing/alcohol consumption, how about we just teach boys not to rape. Well, what happened was a matter of first-order moral principles violation of “Consent” in general and disrespect for “Body Ownership” of the unconscious woman and specifically Sexual Ethics violation rape sex without consent or against consent.

She told me what she wants is for this message to get out to parents. What would be really cool is after putting the piece out there, we could post it again no less than a month later, but with the addition of people’s success stories and updates on how my son has applied the concept to his behavior and interactions with others, possibly even share it in discussions he has with other kids. She also is hoping it helps people to understand that children can be taught this easily and comfortably. She told me home a family of allies: supporting equal civil rights, gender equality, LGBT social movements, and challenging homophobia, biphobia, transphobia, and intersexphobia. She had provisory talked to him about never bullying and standing up for others being bullied. He told her his teacher last year said that two men or two women can’t get married. My friend was pissed because it was the previous summer when two men or two women getting married became legal in all 50 states. Not to mention it was a hateful seed to plant in the minds of 1st graders! So my friend used it as an opportunity to teach her son that just because someone is in a position of power, doesn’t mean they are always right. If something strikes you as wrong, then it probably is, so it’s ok to question it. I agreed authority is a position not a universal fact, it must be justified and just. I told her she is doing great and is an amazing mother, we need more people like her. Having some concern to discourage her son from being a class disruption she told him that for now he needs to talk about it with her first. If they together think his teacher is ever wrong, then we can talk with them together.

All unconsent especially violations to sexual consent should not only be criticized we should teach consent thus to me we also should teach Body Ownership or Self-Ownership (self-rights to your body or sovereignty of the individual, individual sovereignty or individual autonomy).

“Consent occurs when one person voluntarily agrees to the proposal or desires of another. It is a term of common speech, with specific definitions as used in such fields as the law, medicine, research, and sexual relationships. Consent as understood in specific contexts may differ from its everyday meaning. For example, a person with a mental disorder, a low mental age, or under the legal age of sexual consent may willingly engage in a sexual act that still fails to meet the legal threshold for consent as defined by applicable law. United Nations agencies and initiatives in sex education programs believe that teaching the topic of consent as part of a comprehensive sexuality education is beneficial. Types of consent include implied consent, express consent, informed consent, and unanimous consent.” ref

A Few Types of Consent

  • “An express consent is one that is clearly and unmistakably stated, rather than implied. It may be given in writing, by speech (orally), or non-verbally, e.g. by a clear gesture such as a nod. Non-written express consent not evidenced by witnesses or an audio or video recording may be disputed if a party denies that it was given.” ref
  • “Implied consent is consent inferred from a person’s actions and the facts and circumstances of a particular situation (or in some cases, by a person’s silence or inaction). Some examples include unambiguously soliciting or initiating sexual activity or the implied consent to physical contact by participants in a hockey game or being assaulted in a boxing match.” ref
  • “Informed consent in medicine is consent given by a person who has a clear appreciation and understanding of the facts, implications, and future consequences of an action. The term is also used in other contexts, such as in social scientific research, when participants are asked to affirm that they understand the research procedure and consent to it, or in sex, where informed consent means each person engaging in sexual activity is aware of any positive statuses (for sexually transmitted infections and/or diseases) they might expose themselves to.” ref
  • “Unanimous consent, or general consent, by a group of several parties (e.g., an association) is consent given by all parties.” ref
  • Substituted consent, or the substituted judgment doctrine, allows a decision maker to attempt to establish the decision an incompetent person would have made if they were competent.” ref

See also: Sexual consentRape § Consent, and Sexual consent in law

“In Canada “consent means… the voluntary agreement of the complainant to engage in sexual activity” without abuse or exploitation of “trust, power or authority”, coercion or threats. Consent can also be revoked at any moment. Sexual consent plays an important role in defining what sexual assault is, since sexual activity without consent by all parties is rape. In the late 1980s, academic Lois Pineau argued that we must move towards a more communicative model of sexuality so that consent becomes more explicit and clear, objective and layered, with a more comprehensive model than “no means no” or “yes means yes”. Many universities have instituted campaigns about consent. Creative campaigns with attention-grabbing slogans and images that market consent can be effective tools to raise awareness of campus sexual assault and related issues.” ref

“Since the late 1990s, new models of sexual consent have been proposed. Specifically, the development of “yes means yes” and affirmative models, such as Hall’s definition: “the voluntary approval of what is done or proposed by another; permission; agreement in opinion or sentiment.” Hickman and Muehlenhard state that consent should be “free verbal or nonverbal communication of a feeling of willingness’ to engage in sexual activity.” Affirmative consent may still be limited since the underlying, individual circumstances surrounding the consent cannot always be acknowledged in the “yes means yes”, or in the “no means no”, model. Some individuals are unable to give consent. Children or minors below a certain age, the age of sexual consent in that jurisdiction, are deemed not able to give valid consent by law to sexual acts. Likewise, persons with Alzheimer’s disease or similar disabilities may be unable to give legal consent to sexual relations even with their spouse.” ref 

“Within literature, definitions surrounding consent and how it should be communicated have been contradictory, limited or without consensus. Roffee argued that legal definition needs to be universal, so as to avoid confusion in legal decisions. He also demonstrated how the moral notion of consent does not always align with the legal concept. For example, some adult siblings or other family members may voluntarily enter into a relationship, however, the legal system still deems this as incestual, and therefore a crime. Roffee argues that the use of particular language in the legislation regarding these familial sexual activities manipulates the reader to view it as immoral and criminal, even if all parties are consenting. Similarly, some children under the legal age of consent may knowingly and willingly choose to be in a sexual relationship. However, the law does not view this as legitimate. Whilst there is a necessity for an age of consent, it does not allow for varying levels of awareness and maturity. Here it can be seen how a moral and a legal understanding do not always align.” ref

“Initiatives in sex education programs are working towards including and foregrounding topics of and discussions of sexual consent, in primary, high school, and college Sex Ed curricula. In the UK, the Personal Social Health and Economic Education Association (PSHEA) is working to produce and introduce Sex Ed lesson plans in British schools that include lessons on “consensual sexual relationships,” “the meaning and importance of consent” as well as “rape myths“. In U.S., California-Berkeley University has implemented affirmative and continual consent in education and in the school’s policies. In Canada, the Ontario government has introduced a revised Sex Ed curriculum to Toronto schools, including new discussions of sex and affirmative consent, healthy relationships, and communication.” ref

Affirmative consent?

“Affirmative consent (enthusiastic yes) is when both parties agree to sexual conduct, either through clear, verbal communication or nonverbal cues or gestures. It involves communication and the active participation of people involved. This is the approach endorsed by colleges and universities in the U.S., which describes consent as an “affirmative, unambiguous, and conscious decision by each participant to engage in mutually agreed-upon sexual activity.” Notably, past research has found that college students generally held unfavorable attitudes toward institutional affirmative consent requirements (e.g., Antioch’s policy), stating issues related to endorsement and practicality of these mandated policies. According to Yoon-Hendricks, a staff writer for Sex, Etc., “Instead of saying ‘no means no,’ ‘yes means yes’ looks at sex as a positive thing.” Ongoing consent is sought at all levels of sexual intimacy regardless of the parties’ relationship, prior sexual history, or current activity (“Grinding on the dance floor is not consent for further sexual activity,” a university policy reads). By definition, affirmative consent cannot be given if a person is intoxicated, unconscious, or asleep. There are 3 pillars often included in the description of sexual consent, or “the way we let others know what we’re up for, be it a good-night kiss or the moments leading up to sex.” ref

“They are:

  1. Knowing exactly what and how much I’m agreeing to
  2. Expressing my intent to participate
  3. Deciding freely and voluntarily to participate” ref

“To obtain affirmative consent, rather than waiting to say or for a partner to say “no”, one gives and seeks an explicit “yes”. This can come in the form of a smile, a nod, or a verbal yes, as long as it’s unambiguous, enthusiastic, and ongoing. “There’s varying language, but the language gets to the core of people having to communicate their affirmation to participate in sexual behavior,” said Denice Labertew of the California Coalition Against Sexual Assault. “It requires a fundamental shift in how we think about sexual assault. It’s requiring us to say women and men should be mutually agreeing and actively participating in sexual behavior.” ref

Age of Consent?

“The age of consent is the age at which a person is considered to be legally competent to consent to sexual acts. Consequently, an adult who engages in sexual activity with a person younger than the age of consent is unable to legally claim that the sexual activity was consensual, and such sexual activity may be considered child sexual abuse or statutory rape. The person below the minimum age is regarded as the victim, and their sex partner is regarded as the offender, unless both are underage. The purpose of setting an age of consent is to protect an underage person from sexual advances.” ref

“The term age of consent rarely appears in legal statutes. Generally, a law will establish the age below which it is illegal to engage in sexual activity with that person. It has sometimes been used with other meanings, such as the age at which a person becomes competent to consent to marriage, but the meaning given above is the one now generally understood. It should not be confused with other laws regarding age minimums including, but not limited to, the age of majority, age of criminal responsibility, voting age, drinking age, and driving age.” ref

Age of consent laws vary widely from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, though most jurisdictions set the age of consent in the range 14 to 18. The laws may also vary by the type of sexual act, the gender of the participants or other considerations, such as involving a position of trust; some jurisdictions may also make allowances for minors engaged in sexual acts with each other, rather than a single age. Charges and penalties resulting from a breach of these laws may range from a misdemeanor, such as corruption of a minor, to what is popularly called statutory rape.” ref

“There are many “grey areas” in this area of law, some regarding unspecific and untried legislation, others brought about by debates regarding changing societal attitudes, and others due to conflicts between federal and state laws. These factors all make age of consent an often confusing subject and a topic of highly charged debates.” ref

List of countries by age of consent






“In traditional societies, the age of consent for a sexual union was a matter for the family to decide, or a tribal custom. In most cases, this coincided with signs of pubertymenstruation for a woman, and pubic hair for a man. In the 21st century, concerns about child sex tourism and commercial sexual exploitation of children gained international prominence, and have resulted in legislative changes in several jurisdictions, as well as in the adoption of several international instruments.” ref

“The Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Children against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse (Lanzarote, 25 October 2007), and the European Union‘s Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography were adopted. The Optional Protocol on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography came into force in 2002. The Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children, which came into force in 2003, prohibits commercial sexual exploitation of children. The Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (which came into force in 2008) also deals with commercial sexual exploitation of children.” ref

“Several Western countries have raised their ages of consent recently. These include Canada (in 2008—from 14 to 16); and in Europe, Iceland (in 2007—from 14 to 15), Lithuania (in 2010—from 14 to 16), Croatia (in 2013—from 14 to 15), and Spain (in 2015—from 13 to 16). The International Criminal Court Statute does not provide a specific age of consent in its rape/sexual violence statute, but makes reference to sexual acts committed against persons “incapable of giving genuine consent“; and the explicative footnote states, “It is understood that a person may be incapable of giving genuine consent if affected by natural, induced or age-related incapacity.” ref

“Sexual relations with a person under the age of consent is a crime in most countries; Jurisdictions use a variety of terms for the offense, including child sexual abuse, statutory rape, illegal carnal knowledge, corruption of a minor, besides others. The enforcement practices of age-of-consent laws vary depending on the social sensibilities of the particular culture (see above). Often, enforcement is not exercised to the letter of the law, with legal action being taken only when a sufficiently socially-unacceptable age gap exists between the two individuals, or if the perpetrator is in a position of power over the minor (e.g. a teacher, minister, or doctor).” ref

“The sex of each participant can also influence perceptions of an individual’s guilt and therefore enforcement. The threshold age for engaging in sexual activity varies between jurisdictions. Most jurisdictions have set a fixed age of consent. However, some jurisdictions permit sex with a person after the onset of their puberty, such as Yemen, but only in marriage. Ages can also vary based on the type of calendar used, such as the Lunar calendar, how birth dates in leap years are handled, or even the method by which birth date is calculated. The age of consent is a legal barrier to the minor’s ability to consent and therefore obtaining consent is not, in general, a defense to having sexual relations with a person under the prescribed age.” ref

Reasonable belief that the victim is over the age of consent:
“In some jurisdictions, it is a defense if the accused can show that he or she reasonably believed the victim was over the age of consent. However, where such a defense is provided, it normally applies only when the victim is close to the age of consent or the accused can show due diligence in determining the age of the victim (e.g. an underage person who used a fake identification document claiming to be of legal age). In various jurisdictions, age of consent laws do not apply if the parties are legally married to each other.” ref
Close-in-age exemptions:
“Some jurisdictions have laws explicitly allowing sexual acts with minors under the age of consent if their partner is close in age to them. For instance, in Canada, the age of consent is 16, but there are two close-in-age exemptions: sex with minors aged 14–15 is permitted if the partner is less than five years older, and sex with minors aged 12–13 is permitted if the partner is less than two years older. Other countries state that the sexual conduct with the minor is not to be punished if the partners are of a similar age and development: for instance, the age of consent in Finland is 16, but the law states that the act will not be punished if “there is no great difference in the ages or the mental and physical maturity of the persons involved”. Another approach takes the form of a stipulation that sexual intercourse between a minor and an adult is legal under the condition that the latter does not exceed a certain age. For example, the age of consent in the US state of Delaware is 18, but it is allowed for teenagers aged 16 and 17 to engage in sexual intercourse as long as the older partner is younger than 30. In Slovenia, the age of consent is 15, but the law requires that there be “a marked discrepancy between the maturity of the perpetrator and that of the victim.” ref
Homosexual and heterosexual age discrepancies:
“Some jurisdictions, such as the Bahamas, UK overseas territory of the Cayman Islands, Chile, Paraguay, and Suriname have a higher age of consent for same-sex sexual activity. However, such discrepancies are increasingly being challenged. Within Bermuda for example (since 1 November 2019 under section 177 of the Criminal Code Act 1907) the age of consent for vaginal and oral sex is 16, but for anal sex, it is 18. In Canada, the United Kingdom, and Western Australia, for example, the age of consent was formerly 21 for same-sex sexual activity between males (with no laws regarding lesbian sexual activities), while it was 16 for heterosexual sexual activity; this is no longer the case and the age of consent for all sexual activity is 16. In June 2019, the Canadian Government repealed the section of the Criminal Code that set a higher age of consent for anal intercourse.” ref
Gender-age differentials:
“In some jurisdictions (such as Indonesia), there are different ages of consent for heterosexual sexual activity that are based on the gender of each person. In countries where there are gender-age differentials, the age of consent may be higher for girls—for example in Papua New Guinea, where the age of consent for heterosexual sex is 16 for girls and 14 for boys, or they may be higher for males, such as in Indonesia, where males must be 19 years old and females must be 16 years old. There are also numerous jurisdictions—such as Kuwait and the Palestinian Territories—in which marriage laws govern the gender-age differential. In these jurisdictions, it is illegal to have sexual intercourse outside of marriage, so the de facto age of consent is the marriageable age. In Kuwait, this means that boys must be at least 17 and girls at least 15 years old.” ref
Position of authority/trust:
“In most jurisdictions where the age of consent is below 18 (such as England and Wales), in cases where a person aged 18 or older is in a position of trust over a person under 18, the age of consent usually rises to 18 or higher. Examples of such positions of trust include relationships between teachers and students. For example, in England and Wales the age of consent is 16, but if the person is a student of the older person it becomes 18.” ref
Circumstances of the relationship:
“In several jurisdictions, it is illegal to engage in sexual activity with a person under a certain age under certain circumstances regarding the relationship in question, such as if it involves taking advantage of or corrupting the morals of the young person. For example, while the age of consent is 14 in Germany and 16 in Canada, it is illegal in both countries to engage in sexual activity with a person under 18 if the activity exploits the younger person. Another example is in Mexico, where there is a crime called “estupro” defined as sexual activity with a person over the age of consent but under a certain age limit (generally 18) in which consent of the younger person was obtained through seduction and/or deceit. In Pennsylvania, the age of consent is officially 16, but if the older partner is 18 or older, he/she may still be prosecuted for corruption of minors if he/she corrupts or tends to corrupt the morals of the younger person.” ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

People don’t commonly teach religious history, even that of their own claimed religion. No, rather they teach a limited “pro their religion” history of their religion from a religious perspective favorable to the religion of choice. 

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Do you truly think “Religious Belief” is only a matter of some personal choice?

Do you not see how coercive one’s world of choice is limited to the obvious hereditary belief, in most religious choices available to the child of religious parents or caregivers? Religion is more commonly like a family, culture, society, etc. available belief that limits the belief choices of the child and that is when “Religious Belief” is not only a matter of some personal choice and when it becomes hereditary faith, not because of the quality of its alleged facts or proposed truths but because everyone else important to the child believes similarly so they do as well simply mimicking authority beliefs handed to them. Because children are raised in religion rather than being presented all possible choices but rather one limited dogmatic brand of “Religious Belief” where children only have a choice of following the belief as instructed, and then personally claim the faith hereditary belief seen in the confirming to the belief they have held themselves all their lives. This is obvious in statements asked and answered by children claiming a faith they barely understand but they do understand that their family believes “this or that” faith, so they feel obligated to believe it too. While I do agree that “Religious Belief” should only be a matter of some personal choice, it rarely is… End Hereditary Religion!

Opposition to Imposed Hereditary Religion

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art


Animism: Respecting the Living World by Graham Harvey 

“How have human cultures engaged with and thought about animals, plants, rocks, clouds, and other elements in their natural surroundings? Do animals and other natural objects have a spirit or soul? What is their relationship to humans? In this new study, Graham Harvey explores current and past animistic beliefs and practices of Native Americans, Maori, Aboriginal Australians, and eco-pagans. He considers the varieties of animism found in these cultures as well as their shared desire to live respectfully within larger natural communities. Drawing on his extensive casework, Harvey also considers the linguistic, performative, ecological, and activist implications of these different animisms.” ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

We are like believing machines we vacuum up ideas, like Velcro sticks to almost everything. We accumulate beliefs that we allow to negatively influence our lives, often without realizing it. Our willingness must be to alter skewed beliefs that impend our balance or reason, which allows us to achieve new positive thinking and accurate outcomes.

My thoughts on Religion Evolution with external links for more info:

“Religion is an Evolved Product” and Yes, Religion is Like Fear Given Wings…

Atheists talk about gods and religions for the same reason doctors talk about cancer, they are looking for a cure, or a firefighter talks about fires because they burn people and they care to stop them. We atheists too often feel a need to help the victims of mental slavery, held in the bondage that is the false beliefs of gods and the conspiracy theories of reality found in religions.

“Understanding Religion Evolution: Animism, Totemism, Shamanism, Paganism & Progressed organized religion”

Understanding Religion Evolution:

“An Archaeological/Anthropological Understanding of Religion Evolution”

It seems ancient peoples had to survived amazing threats in a “dangerous universe (by superstition perceived as good and evil),” and human “immorality or imperfection of the soul” which was thought to affect the still living, leading to ancestor worship. This ancestor worship presumably led to the belief in supernatural beings, and then some of these were turned into the belief in gods. This feeble myth called gods were just a human conceived “made from nothing into something over and over, changing, again and again, taking on more as they evolve, all the while they are thought to be special,” but it is just supernatural animistic spirit-belief perceived as sacred.


Quick Evolution of Religion?

Pre-Animism (at least 300,000 years ago) pre-religion is a beginning that evolves into later Animism. So, Religion as we think of it, to me, all starts in a general way with Animism (Africa: 100,000 years ago) (theoretical belief in supernatural powers/spirits), then this is physically expressed in or with Totemism (Europe: 50,000 years ago) (theoretical belief in mythical relationship with powers/spirits through a totem item), which then enlists a full-time specific person to do this worship and believed interacting Shamanism (Siberia/Russia: 30,000 years ago) (theoretical belief in access and influence with spirits through ritual), and then there is the further employment of myths and gods added to all the above giving you Paganism (Turkey: 12,000 years ago) (often a lot more nature-based than most current top world religions, thus hinting to their close link to more ancient religious thinking it stems from). My hypothesis is expressed with an explanation of the building of a theatrical house (modern religions development). Progressed organized religion (Egypt: 5,000 years ago)  with CURRENT “World” RELIGIONS (after 4,000 years ago).

Historically, in large city-state societies (such as Egypt or Iraq) starting around 5,000 years ago culminated to make religion something kind of new, a sociocultural-governmental-religious monarchy, where all or at least many of the people of such large city-state societies seem familiar with and committed to the existence of “religion” as the integrated life identity package of control dynamics with a fixed closed magical doctrine, but this juggernaut integrated religion identity package of Dogmatic-Propaganda certainly did not exist or if developed to an extent it was highly limited in most smaller prehistoric societies as they seem to lack most of the strong control dynamics with a fixed closed magical doctrine (magical beliefs could be at times be added or removed). Many people just want to see developed religious dynamics everywhere even if it is not. Instead, all that is found is largely fragments until the domestication of religion.

Religions, as we think of them today, are a new fad, even if they go back to around 6,000 years in the timeline of human existence, this amounts to almost nothing when seen in the long slow evolution of religion at least around 70,000 years ago with one of the oldest ritual worship. Stone Snake of South Africa: “first human worship” 70,000 years ago. This message of how religion and gods among them are clearly a man-made thing that was developed slowly as it was invented and then implemented peace by peace discrediting them all. Which seems to be a simple point some are just not grasping how devastating to any claims of truth when we can see the lie clearly in the archeological sites.

I wish people fought as hard for the actual values as they fight for the group/clan names political or otherwise they think support values. Every amount spent on war is theft to children in need of food or the homeless kept from shelter.

Here are several of my blog posts on history:

I am not an academic. I am a revolutionary that teaches in public, in places like social media, and in the streets. I am not a leader by some title given but from my commanding leadership style of simply to start teaching everywhere to everyone, all manner of positive education. 

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref 

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Low Gods “Earth” or Tutelary deity and High Gods “Sky” or Supreme deity

“An Earth goddess is a deification of the Earth. Earth goddesses are often associated with the “chthonic” deities of the underworldKi and Ninhursag are Mesopotamian earth goddesses. In Greek mythology, the Earth is personified as Gaia, corresponding to Roman Terra, Indic Prithvi/Bhūmi, etc. traced to an “Earth Mother” complementary to the “Sky Father” in Proto-Indo-European religionEgyptian mythology exceptionally has a sky goddess and an Earth god.” ref

“A mother goddess is a goddess who represents or is a personification of naturemotherhoodfertilitycreationdestruction or who embodies the bounty of the Earth. When equated with the Earth or the natural world, such goddesses are sometimes referred to as Mother Earth or as the Earth Mother. In some religious traditions or movements, Heavenly Mother (also referred to as Mother in Heaven or Sky Mother) is the wife or feminine counterpart of the Sky father or God the Father.” ref

Any masculine sky god is often also king of the gods, taking the position of patriarch within a pantheon. Such king gods are collectively categorized as “sky father” deities, with a polarity between sky and earth often being expressed by pairing a “sky father” god with an “earth mother” goddess (pairings of a sky mother with an earth father are less frequent). A main sky goddess is often the queen of the gods and may be an air/sky goddess in her own right, though she usually has other functions as well with “sky” not being her main. In antiquity, several sky goddesses in ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia, and the Near East were called Queen of Heaven. Neopagans often apply it with impunity to sky goddesses from other regions who were never associated with the term historically. The sky often has important religious significance. Many religions, both polytheistic and monotheistic, have deities associated with the sky.” ref

“In comparative mythology, sky father is a term for a recurring concept in polytheistic religions of a sky god who is addressed as a “father”, often the father of a pantheon and is often either a reigning or former King of the Gods. The concept of “sky father” may also be taken to include Sun gods with similar characteristics, such as Ra. The concept is complementary to an “earth mother“. “Sky Father” is a direct translation of the Vedic Dyaus Pita, etymologically descended from the same Proto-Indo-European deity name as the Greek Zeûs Pater and Roman Jupiter and Germanic Týr, Tir or Tiwaz, all of which are reflexes of the same Proto-Indo-European deity’s name, *Dyēus Ph₂tḗr. While there are numerous parallels adduced from outside of Indo-European mythology, there are exceptions (e.g. In Egyptian mythology, Nut is the sky mother and Geb is the earth father).” ref

Tutelary deity

“A tutelary (also tutelar) is a deity or spirit who is a guardian, patron, or protector of a particular place, geographic feature, person, lineage, nation, culture, or occupation. The etymology of “tutelary” expresses the concept of safety and thus of guardianship. In late Greek and Roman religion, one type of tutelary deity, the genius, functions as the personal deity or daimon of an individual from birth to death. Another form of personal tutelary spirit is the familiar spirit of European folklore.” ref

“A tutelary (also tutelar) iKorean shamanismjangseung and sotdae were placed at the edge of villages to frighten off demons. They were also worshiped as deities. Seonangshin is the patron deity of the village in Korean tradition and was believed to embody the SeonangdangIn Philippine animism, Diwata or Lambana are deities or spirits that inhabit sacred places like mountains and mounds and serve as guardians. Such as: Maria Makiling is the deity who guards Mt. Makiling and Maria Cacao and Maria Sinukuan. In Shinto, the spirits, or kami, which give life to human bodies come from nature and return to it after death. Ancestors are therefore themselves tutelaries to be worshiped. And similarly, Native American beliefs such as Tonás, tutelary animal spirit among the Zapotec and Totems, familial or clan spirits among the Ojibwe, can be animals.” ref

“A tutelary (also tutelar) in Austronesian beliefs such as: Atua (gods and spirits of the Polynesian peoples such as the Māori or the Hawaiians), Hanitu (Bunun of Taiwan‘s term for spirit), Hyang (KawiSundaneseJavanese, and Balinese Supreme Being, in ancient Java and Bali mythology and this spiritual entity, can be either divine or ancestral), Kaitiaki (New Zealand Māori term used for the concept of guardianship, for the sky, the sea, and the land), Kawas (mythology) (divided into 6 groups: gods, ancestors, souls of the living, spirits of living things, spirits of lifeless objects, and ghosts), Tiki (Māori mythologyTiki is the first man created by either Tūmatauenga or Tāne and represents deified ancestors found in most Polynesian cultures). ” ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Mesopotamian Tutelary Deities can be seen as ones related to City-States 

“Historical city-states included Sumerian cities such as Uruk and UrAncient Egyptian city-states, such as Thebes and Memphis; the Phoenician cities (such as Tyre and Sidon); the five Philistine city-states; the Berber city-states of the Garamantes; the city-states of ancient Greece (the poleis such as AthensSpartaThebes, and Corinth); the Roman Republic (which grew from a city-state into a vast empire); the Italian city-states from the Middle Ages to the early modern period, such as FlorenceSienaFerraraMilan (which as they grew in power began to dominate neighboring cities) and Genoa and Venice, which became powerful thalassocracies; the Mayan and other cultures of pre-Columbian Mesoamerica (including cities such as Chichen ItzaTikalCopán and Monte Albán); the central Asian cities along the Silk Road; the city-states of the Swahili coastRagusa; states of the medieval Russian lands such as Novgorod and Pskov; and many others.” ref

“The Uruk period (ca. 4000 to 3100 BCE; also known as Protoliterate period) of Mesopotamia, named after the Sumerian city of Uruk, this period saw the emergence of urban life in Mesopotamia and the Sumerian civilization. City-States like Uruk and others had a patron tutelary City Deity along with a Priest-King.” ref

Chinese folk religion, both past, and present, includes myriad tutelary deities. Exceptional individuals, highly cultivated sages, and prominent ancestors can be deified and honored after death. Lord Guan is the patron of military personnel and police, while Mazu is the patron of fishermen and sailors. Such as Tu Di Gong (Earth Deity) is the tutelary deity of a locality, and each individual locality has its own Earth Deity and Cheng Huang Gong (City God) is the guardian deity of an individual city, worshipped by local officials and locals since imperial times.” ref

“A tutelary (also tutelar) in Hinduism, personal tutelary deities are known as ishta-devata, while family tutelary deities are known as Kuladevata. Gramadevata are guardian deities of villages. Devas can also be seen as tutelary. Shiva is the patron of yogis and renunciants. City goddesses include: Mumbadevi (Mumbai), Sachchika (Osian); Kuladevis include: Ambika (Porwad), and Mahalakshmi. In NorthEast India Meitei mythology and religion (Sanamahism) of Manipur, there are various types of tutelary deities, among which Lam Lais are the most predominant ones. Tibetan Buddhism has Yidam as a tutelary deity. Dakini is the patron of those who seek knowledge.” ref

“A tutelary (also tutelar) The Greeks also thought deities guarded specific places: for instance, Athena was the patron goddess of the city of Athens. Socrates spoke of hearing the voice of his personal spirit or daimonion:

You have often heard me speak of an oracle or sign which comes to me … . This sign I have had ever since I was a child. The sign is a voice which comes to me and always forbids me to do something which I am going to do, but never commands me to do anything, and this is what stands in the way of my being a politician.” ref

“Tutelary deities who guard and preserve a place or a person are fundamental to ancient Roman religion. The tutelary deity of a man was his Genius, that of a woman her Juno. In the Imperial era, the Genius of the Emperor was a focus of Imperial cult. An emperor might also adopt a major deity as his personal patron or tutelary, as Augustus did Apollo. Precedents for claiming the personal protection of a deity were established in the Republican era, when for instance the Roman dictator Sulla advertised the goddess Victory as his tutelary by holding public games (ludi) in her honor.” ref

“Each town or city had one or more tutelary deities, whose protection was considered particularly vital in time of war and siege. Rome itself was protected by a goddess whose name was to be kept ritually secret on pain of death (for a supposed case, see Quintus Valerius Soranus). The Capitoline Triad of Juno, Jupiter, and Minerva were also tutelaries of Rome. The Italic towns had their own tutelary deities. Juno often had this function, as at the Latin town of Lanuvium and the Etruscan city of Veii, and was often housed in an especially grand temple on the arx (citadel) or other prominent or central location. The tutelary deity of Praeneste was Fortuna, whose oracle was renowned.” ref

“The Roman ritual of evocatio was premised on the belief that a town could be made vulnerable to military defeat if the power of its tutelary deity were diverted outside the city, perhaps by the offer of superior cult at Rome. The depiction of some goddesses such as the Magna Mater (Great Mother, or Cybele) as “tower-crowned” represents their capacity to preserve the city. A town in the provinces might adopt a deity from within the Roman religious sphere to serve as its guardian, or syncretize its own tutelary with such; for instance, a community within the civitas of the Remi in Gaul adopted Apollo as its tutelary, and at the capital of the Remi (present-day Rheims), the tutelary was Mars Camulus.” ref 

Household deity (a kind of or related to a Tutelary deity)

“A household deity is a deity or spirit that protects the home, looking after the entire household or certain key members. It has been a common belief in paganism as well as in folklore across many parts of the world. Household deities fit into two types; firstly, a specific deity – typically a goddess – often referred to as a hearth goddess or domestic goddess who is associated with the home and hearth, such as the ancient Greek Hestia.” ref

“The second type of household deities are those that are not one singular deity, but a type, or species of animistic deity, who usually have lesser powers than major deities. This type was common in the religions of antiquity, such as the Lares of ancient Roman religion, the Gashin of Korean shamanism, and Cofgodas of Anglo-Saxon paganism. These survived Christianisation as fairy-like creatures existing in folklore, such as the Anglo-Scottish Brownie and Slavic Domovoy.” ref

“Household deities were usually worshipped not in temples but in the home, where they would be represented by small idols (such as the teraphim of the Bible, often translated as “household gods” in Genesis 31:19 for example), amulets, paintings, or reliefs. They could also be found on domestic objects, such as cosmetic articles in the case of Tawaret. The more prosperous houses might have a small shrine to the household god(s); the lararium served this purpose in the case of the Romans. The gods would be treated as members of the family and invited to join in meals, or be given offerings of food and drink.” ref

“In many religions, both ancient and modern, a god would preside over the home. Certain species, or types, of household deities, existed. An example of this was the Roman Lares. Many European cultures retained house spirits into the modern period. Some examples of these include:

“Although the cosmic status of household deities was not as lofty as that of the Twelve Olympians or the Aesir, they were also jealous of their dignity and also had to be appeased with shrines and offerings, however humble. Because of their immediacy they had arguably more influence on the day-to-day affairs of men than the remote gods did. Vestiges of their worship persisted long after Christianity and other major religions extirpated nearly every trace of the major pagan pantheons. Elements of the practice can be seen even today, with Christian accretions, where statues to various saints (such as St. Francis) protect gardens and grottos. Even the gargoyles found on older churches, could be viewed as guardians partitioning a sacred space.” ref

“For centuries, Christianity fought a mop-up war against these lingering minor pagan deities, but they proved tenacious. For example, Martin Luther‘s Tischreden have numerous – quite serious – references to dealing with kobolds. Eventually, rationalism and the Industrial Revolution threatened to erase most of these minor deities, until the advent of romantic nationalism rehabilitated them and embellished them into objects of literary curiosity in the 19th century. Since the 20th century this literature has been mined for characters for role-playing games, video games, and other fantasy personae, not infrequently invested with invented traits and hierarchies somewhat different from their mythological and folkloric roots.” ref

“In contradistinction to both Herbert Spencer and Edward Burnett Tylor, who defended theories of animistic origins of ancestor worship, Émile Durkheim saw its origin in totemism. In reality, this distinction is somewhat academic, since totemism may be regarded as a particularized manifestation of animism, and something of a synthesis of the two positions was attempted by Sigmund Freud. In Freud’s Totem and Taboo, both totem and taboo are outward expressions or manifestations of the same psychological tendency, a concept which is complementary to, or which rather reconciles, the apparent conflict. Freud preferred to emphasize the psychoanalytic implications of the reification of metaphysical forces, but with particular emphasis on its familial nature. This emphasis underscores, rather than weakens, the ancestral component.” ref

William Edward Hearn, a noted classicist, and jurist, traced the origin of domestic deities from the earliest stages as an expression of animism, a belief system thought to have existed also in the neolithic, and the forerunner of Indo-European religion. In his analysis of the Indo-European household, in Chapter II “The House Spirit”, Section 1, he states:

The belief which guided the conduct of our forefathers was … the spirit rule of dead ancestors.” ref

“In Section 2 he proceeds to elaborate:

It is thus certain that the worship of deceased ancestors is a vera causa, and not a mere hypothesis. …

In the other European nations, the Slavs, the Teutons, and the Kelts, the House Spirit appears with no less distinctness. … [T]he existence of that worship does not admit of doubt. … The House Spirits had a multitude of other names which it is needless here to enumerate, but all of which are more or less expressive of their friendly relations with man. … In [England] … [h]e is the Brownie. … In Scotland this same Brownie is well known. He is usually described as attached to particular families, with whom he has been known to reside for centuries, threshing the corn, cleaning the house, and performing similar household tasks. His favorite gratification was milk and honey.” ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art


“These ideas are my speculations from the evidence.”

I am still researching the “god‘s origins” all over the world. So you know, it is very complicated but I am smart and willing to look, DEEP, if necessary, which going very deep does seem to be needed here, when trying to actually understand the evolution of gods and goddesses. I am sure of a few things and less sure of others, but even in stuff I am not fully grasping I still am slowly figuring it out, to explain it to others. But as I research more I am understanding things a little better, though I am still working on understanding it all or something close and thus always figuring out more. 

Sky Father/Sky God?

“Egyptian: (Nut) Sky Mother and (Geb) Earth Father” (Egypt is different but similar)

Turkic/Mongolic: (Tengri/Tenger Etseg) Sky Father and (Eje/Gazar Eej) Earth Mother *Transeurasian*

Hawaiian: (Wākea) Sky Father and (Papahānaumoku) Earth Mother *Austronesian*

New Zealand/ Māori: (Ranginui) Sky Father and (Papatūānuku) Earth Mother *Austronesian*

Proto-Indo-European: (Dyus/Dyus phtr) Sky Father and (Dʰéǵʰōm/Plethwih) Earth Mother

Indo-Aryan: (Dyaus Pita) Sky Father and (Prithvi Mata) Earth Mother *Indo-European*

Italic: (Jupiter) Sky Father and (Juno) Sky Mother *Indo-European*

Etruscan: (Tinia) Sky Father and (Uni) Sky Mother *Tyrsenian/Italy Pre–Indo-European*

Hellenic/Greek: (Zeus) Sky Father and (Hera) Sky Mother who started as an “Earth Goddess” *Indo-European*

Nordic: (Dagr) Sky Father and (Nótt) Sky Mother *Indo-European*

Slavic: (Perun) Sky Father and (Mokosh) Earth Mother *Indo-European*

Illyrian: (Deipaturos) Sky Father and (Messapic Damatura’s “earth-mother” maybe) Earth Mother *Indo-European*

Albanian: (Zojz) Sky Father and (?) *Indo-European*

Baltic: (Perkūnas) Sky Father and (Saulė) Sky Mother *Indo-European*

Germanic: (Týr) Sky Father and (?) *Indo-European*

Colombian-Muisca: (Bochica) Sky Father and (Huythaca) Sky Mother *Chibchan*

Aztec: (Quetzalcoatl) Sky Father and (Xochiquetzal) Sky Mother *Uto-Aztecan*

Incan: (Viracocha) Sky Father and (Mama Runtucaya) Sky Mother *Quechuan*

China: (Tian/Shangdi) Sky Father and (Dì) Earth Mother *Sino-Tibetan*

Sumerian, Assyrian and Babylonian: (An/Anu) Sky Father and (Ki) Earth Mother

Finnish: (Ukko) Sky Father and (Akka) Earth Mother *Finno-Ugric*

Sami: (Horagalles) Sky Father and (Ravdna) Earth Mother *Finno-Ugric*

Puebloan-Zuni: (Ápoyan Ta’chu) Sky Father and (Áwitelin Tsíta) Earth Mother

Puebloan-Hopi: (Tawa) Sky Father and (Kokyangwuti/Spider Woman/Grandmother) Earth Mother *Uto-Aztecan*

Puebloan-Navajo: (Tsohanoai) Sky Father and (Estsanatlehi) Earth Mother *Na-Dene*



Sky Father/Sky Mother “High Gods” or similar gods/goddesses of the sky more loosely connected, seeming arcane mythology across the earth seen in Siberia, China, Europe, Native Americans/First Nations People and Mesopotamia, etc.

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref

Hinduism around 3,700 to 3,500 years old. ref

 Judaism around 3,450 or 3,250 years old. (The first writing in the bible was “Paleo-Hebrew” dated to around 3,000 years ago Khirbet Qeiyafa is the site of an ancient fortress city overlooking the Elah Valley. And many believe the religious Jewish texts were completed around 2,500) ref, ref

Judaism is around 3,450 or 3,250 years old. (“Paleo-Hebrew” 3,000 years ago and Torah 2,500 years ago)

“Judaism is an Abrahamic, its roots as an organized religion in the Middle East during the Bronze Age. Some scholars argue that modern Judaism evolved from Yahwism, the religion of ancient Israel and Judah, by the late 6th century BCE, and is thus considered to be one of the oldest monotheistic religions.” ref

“Yahwism is the name given by modern scholars to the religion of ancient Israel, essentially polytheistic, with a plethora of gods and goddesses. Heading the pantheon was Yahweh, the national god of the Israelite kingdoms of Israel and Judah, with his consort, the goddess Asherah; below them were second-tier gods and goddesses such as Baal, Shamash, Yarikh, Mot, and Astarte, all of whom had their own priests and prophets and numbered royalty among their devotees, and a third and fourth tier of minor divine beings, including the mal’ak, the messengers of the higher gods, who in later times became the angels of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Yahweh, however, was not the ‘original’ god of Israel “Isra-El”; it is El, the head of the Canaanite pantheon, whose name forms the basis of the name “Israel”, and none of the Old Testament patriarchs, the tribes of Israel, the Judges, or the earliest monarchs, have a Yahwistic theophoric name (i.e., one incorporating the name of Yahweh).” ref

“El is a Northwest Semitic word meaning “god” or “deity“, or referring (as a proper name) to any one of multiple major ancient Near Eastern deities. A rarer form, ‘ila, represents the predicate form in Old Akkadian and in Amorite. The word is derived from the Proto-Semitic *ʔil-, meaning “god”. Specific deities known as ‘El or ‘Il include the supreme god of the ancient Canaanite religion and the supreme god of East Semitic speakers in Mesopotamia’s Early Dynastic Period. ʼĒl is listed at the head of many pantheons. In some Canaanite and Ugaritic sources, ʼĒl played a role as father of the gods, of creation, or both. For example, in the Ugaritic texts, ʾil mlk is understood to mean “ʼĒl the King” but ʾil hd as “the god Hadad“. The Semitic root ʾlh (Arabic ʾilāh, Aramaic ʾAlāh, ʾElāh, Hebrew ʾelōah) may be ʾl with a parasitic h, and ʾl may be an abbreviated form of ʾlh. In Ugaritic the plural form meaning “gods” is ʾilhm, equivalent to Hebrew ʾelōhîm “powers”. In the Hebrew texts this word is interpreted as being semantically singular for “god” by biblical commentators. However the documentary hypothesis for the Old Testament (corresponds to the Jewish Torah) developed originally in the 1870s, identifies these that different authors – the Jahwist, Elohist, Deuteronomist, and the Priestly source – were responsible for editing stories from a polytheistic religion into those of a monotheistic religion. Inconsistencies that arise between monotheism and polytheism in the texts are reflective of this hypothesis.” ref


Jainism around 2,599 – 2,527 years old. ref

Confucianism around 2,600 – 2,551 years old. ref

Buddhism around 2,563/2,480 – 2,483/2,400 years old. ref

Christianity around 2,o00 years old. ref

Shinto around 1,305 years old. ref

Islam around 1407–1385 years old. ref

Sikhism around 548–478 years old. ref

Bahá’í around 200–125 years old. ref

Knowledge to Ponder: 


  • Possibly, around 30,000 years ago (in simpler form) to 6,000 years ago, Stars/Astrology are connected to Ancestors, Spirit Animals, and Deities.
  • The star also seems to be a possible proto-star for Star of Ishtar, Star of Inanna, or Star of Venus.
  • Around 7,000 to 6,000 years ago, Star Constellations/Astrology have connections to the “Kurgan phenomenon” of below-ground “mound” stone/wood burial structures and “Dolmen phenomenon” of above-ground stone burial structures.
  • Around 6,500–5,800 years ago, The Northern Levant migrations into Jordon and Israel in the Southern Levant brought new cultural and religious transfer from Turkey and Iran.
  • “The Ghassulian Star,” a mysterious 6,000-year-old mural from Jordan may have connections to the European paganstic kurgan/dolmens phenomenon.

“Astrology is a range of divinatory practices, recognized as pseudoscientific since the 18th century, that claim to discern information about human affairs and terrestrial events by studying the apparent positions of celestial objects. Different cultures have employed forms of astrology since at least the 2nd millennium BCE, these practices having originated in calendrical systems used to predict seasonal shifts and to interpret celestial cycles as signs of divine communications. Most, if not all, cultures have attached importance to what they observed in the sky, and some—such as the HindusChinese, and the Maya—developed elaborate systems for predicting terrestrial events from celestial observations. Western astrology, one of the oldest astrological systems still in use, can trace its roots to 19th–17th century BCE Mesopotamia, from where it spread to Ancient GreeceRome, the Islamicate world and eventually Central and Western Europe. Contemporary Western astrology is often associated with systems of horoscopes that purport to explain aspects of a person’s personality and predict significant events in their lives based on the positions of celestial objects; the majority of professional astrologers rely on such systems.” ref 

Around 5,500 years ago, Science evolves, The first evidence of science was 5,500 years ago and was demonstrated by a body of empirical, theoretical, and practical knowledge about the natural world. ref

Around 5,000 years ago, Origin of Logics is a Naturalistic Observation (principles of valid reasoning, inference, & demonstration) ref

Around 4,150 to 4,000 years ago: The earliest surviving versions of the Sumerian Epic of Gilgamesh, which was originally titled “He who Saw the Deep” (Sha naqba īmuru) or “Surpassing All Other Kings” (Shūtur eli sharrī) were written. ref


  • 3,700 years ago or so, the oldest of the Hindu Vedas (scriptures), the Rig Veda was composed.
  • 3,500 years ago or so, the Vedic Age began in India after the collapse of the Indus Valley Civilization.


  • around 3,000 years ago, the first writing in the bible was “Paleo-Hebrew”
  • around 2,500 years ago, many believe the religious Jewish texts were completed

Myths: The bible inspired religion is not just one religion or one myth but a grouping of several religions and myths

  • Around 3,450 or 3,250 years ago, according to legend, is the traditionally accepted period in which the Israelite lawgiver, Moses, provided the Ten Commandments.
  • Around 2,500 to 2,400 years ago, a collection of ancient religious writings by the Israelites based primarily upon the Hebrew Bible, Tanakh, or Old Testament is the first part of Christianity’s bible.
  • Around 2,400 years ago, the most accepted hypothesis is that the canon was formed in stages, first the Pentateuch (Torah).
  • Around 2,140 to 2,116 years ago, the Prophets was written during the Hasmonean dynasty, and finally the remaining books.
  • Christians traditionally divide the Old Testament into four sections:
  • The first five books or Pentateuch (Torah).
  • The proposed history books telling the history of the Israelites from their conquest of Canaan to their defeat and exile in Babylon.
  • The poetic and proposed “Wisdom books” dealing, in various forms, with questions of good and evil in the world.
  • The books of the biblical prophets, warning of the consequences of turning away from God:
  • Henotheism:
  • Exodus 20:23 “You shall not make other gods besides Me (not saying there are no other gods just not to worship them); gods of silver or gods of gold, you shall not make for yourselves.”
  • Polytheism:
  • Judges 10:6 “Then the sons of Israel again did evil in the sight of the LORD, served the Baals and the Ashtaroth, the gods of Aram, the gods of Sidon, the gods of Moab, the gods of the sons of Ammon, and the gods of the Philistines; thus they forsook the LORD and did not serve Him.”
  • 1 Corinthians 8:5 “For even if there are so-called gods whether in heaven or on earth, as indeed there are many gods and many lords.”
  • Monotheism:
  • Isaiah 43:10 “You are my witnesses,” declares the LORD, “and my servant whom I have chosen, so that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me.

Around 2,570 to 2,270 Years Ago, there is a confirmation of atheistic doubting as well as atheistic thinking, mainly by Greek philosophers. However, doubting gods is likely as old as the invention of gods and should destroy the thinking that belief in god(s) is the “default belief”. The Greek word is apistos (a “not” and pistos “faithful,”), thus not faithful or faithless because one is unpersuaded and unconvinced by a god(s) claim. Short Definition: unbelieving, unbeliever, or unbelief.

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Expressions of Atheistic Thinking:

  • Around 2,600 years ago, Ajita Kesakambali, ancient Indian philosopher, who is the first known proponent of Indian materialism. ref
  • Around 2,535 to 2,475 years ago, Heraclitus, Greek pre-Socratic philosopher, a native of the Greek city Ephesus, Ionia, on the coast of Anatolia, also known as Asia Minor or modern Turkey. ref
  • Around 2,500 to 2,400 years ago, according to The Story of Civilization book series certain African pygmy tribes have no identifiable gods, spirits, or religious beliefs or rituals, and even what burials accrue are without ceremony. ref
  • Around 2,490 to 2,430 years ago, Empedocles, Greek pre-Socratic philosopher and a citizen of Agrigentum, a Greek city in Sicily. ref
  • Around 2,460 to 2,370 years ago, Democritus, Greek pre-Socratic philosopher considered to be the “father of modern science” possibly had some disbelief amounting to atheism. ref
  • Around 2,399 years ago or so, Socrates, a famous Greek philosopher was tried for sinfulness by teaching doubt of state gods. ref
  • Around 2,341 to 2,270 years ago, Epicurus, a Greek philosopher known for composing atheistic critics and famously stated, “Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him god?” ref

This last expression by Epicurus, seems to be an expression of Axiological Atheism. To understand and utilize value or actually possess “Value Conscious/Consciousness” to both give a strong moral “axiological” argument (the problem of evil) as well as use it to fortify humanism and positive ethical persuasion of human helping and care responsibilities. Because value-blindness gives rise to sociopathic/psychopathic evil.

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

While hallucinogens are associated with shamanism, it is alcohol that is associated with paganism.

The Atheist-Humanist-Leftist Revolutionaries Shows in the prehistory series:

Show one: Prehistory: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” the division of labor, power, rights, and recourses.

Show two: Pre-animism 300,000 years old and animism 100,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism”

Show tree: Totemism 50,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism”

Show four: Shamanism 30,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism”

Show five: Paganism 12,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism”

Show six: Emergence of hierarchy, sexism, slavery, and the new male god dominance: Paganism 7,000-5,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” (Capitalism) (World War 0) Elite and their slaves!

Show seven: Paganism 5,000 years old: progressed organized religion and the state: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” (Kings and the Rise of the State)

Show eight: Paganism 4,000 years old: Moralistic gods after the rise of Statism and often support Statism/Kings: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” (First Moralistic gods, then the Origin time of Monotheism)

Prehistory: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” the division of labor, power, rights, and recourses: VIDEO

Pre-animism 300,000 years old and animism 100,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism”: VIDEO

Totemism 50,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism”: VIDEO

Shamanism 30,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism”: VIDEO

Paganism 12,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” (Pre-Capitalism): VIDEO

Paganism 7,000-5,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” (Capitalism) (World War 0) Elite and their slaves: VIEDO

Paganism 5,000 years old: progressed organized religion and the state: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” (Kings and the Rise of the State): VIEDO

Paganism 4,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” (First Moralistic gods, then the Origin time of Monotheism): VIEDO

I do not hate simply because I challenge and expose myths or lies any more than others being thought of as loving simply because of the protection and hiding from challenge their favored myths or lies.

The truth is best championed in the sunlight of challenge.

An archaeologist once said to me “Damien religion and culture are very different”

My response, So are you saying that was always that way, such as would you say Native Americans’ cultures are separate from their religions? And do you think it always was the way you believe?

I had said that religion was a cultural product. That is still how I see it and there are other archaeologists that think close to me as well. Gods too are the myths of cultures that did not understand science or the world around them, seeing magic/supernatural everywhere.

I personally think there is a goddess and not enough evidence to support a male god at Çatalhöyük but if there was both a male and female god and goddess then I know the kind of gods they were like Proto-Indo-European mythology.

This series idea was addressed in, Anarchist Teaching as Free Public Education or Free Education in the Public: VIDEO

Our 12 video series: Organized Oppression: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of power (9,000-4,000 years ago), is adapted from: The Complete and Concise History of the Sumerians and Early Bronze Age Mesopotamia (7000-2000 BC): by “History with Cy

Show #1: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Samarra, Halaf, Ubaid)

Show #2: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Eridu: First City of Power)

Show #3: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Uruk and the First Cities)

Show #4: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (First Kings)

Show #5: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Early Dynastic Period)

Show #6: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (King Lugalzagesi and the First Empire)

Show #7: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Sargon and Akkadian Rule)

Show #8: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Naram-Sin, Post-Akkadian Rule, and the Gutians)

Show #9: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Gudea of Lagash and Utu-hegal)

Show #10: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Third Dynasty of Ur / Neo-Sumerian Empire)

Show #11: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Amorites, Elamites, and the End of an Era)

Show #12: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Aftermath and Legacy of Sumer)

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

The “Atheist-Humanist-Leftist Revolutionaries”

Cory Johnston ☭ Ⓐ Atheist Leftist @Skepticallefty & I (Damien Marie AtHope) @AthopeMarie (my YouTube & related blog) are working jointly in atheist, antitheist, antireligionist, antifascist, anarchist, socialist, and humanist endeavors in our videos together, generally, every other Saturday.

Why Does Power Bring Responsibility?

Think, how often is it the powerless that start wars, oppress others, or commit genocide? So, I guess the question is to us all, to ask, how can power not carry responsibility in a humanity concept? I know I see the deep ethical responsibility that if there is power their must be a humanistic responsibility of ethical and empathic stewardship of that power. Will I be brave enough to be kind? Will I possess enough courage to be compassionate? Will my valor reach its height of empathy? I as everyone, earns our justified respect by our actions, that are good, ethical, just, protecting, and kind. Do I have enough self-respect to put my love for humanity’s flushing, over being brought down by some of its bad actors? May we all be the ones doing good actions in the world, to help human flourishing.

I create the world I want to live in, striving for flourishing. Which is not a place but a positive potential involvement and promotion; a life of humanist goal precision. To master oneself, also means mastering positive prosocial behaviors needed for human flourishing. I may have lost a god myth as an atheist, but I am happy to tell you, my friend, it is exactly because of that, leaving the mental terrorizer, god belief, that I truly regained my connected ethical as well as kind humanity.

Cory and I will talk about prehistory and theism, addressing the relevance to atheism, anarchism, and socialism.

At the same time as the rise of the male god, 7,000 years ago, there was also the very time there was the rise of violence, war, and clans to kingdoms, then empires, then states. It is all connected back to 7,000 years ago, and it moved across the world.

Cory Johnston:  

The Mind of a Skeptical Leftist (YouTube)

Cory Johnston: Mind of a Skeptical Leftist @Skepticallefty

The Mind of a Skeptical Leftist By Cory Johnston: “Promoting critical thinking, social justice, and left-wing politics by covering current events and talking to a variety of people. Cory Johnston has been thoughtfully talking to people and attempting to promote critical thinking, social justice, and left-wing politics.”

Cory needs our support. We rise by helping each other.

Cory Johnston ☭ Ⓐ @Skepticallefty Evidence-based atheist leftist (he/him) Producer, host, and co-host of 4 podcasts @skeptarchy @skpoliticspod and @AthopeMarie

Damien Marie AtHope (“At Hope”) Axiological Atheist, Anti-theist, Anti-religionist, Secular Humanist. Rationalist, Writer, Artist, Poet, Philosopher, Advocate, Activist, Psychology, and Armchair Archaeology/Anthropology/Historian.

Damien is interested in: Freedom, Liberty, Justice, Equality, Ethics, Humanism, Science, Atheism, Antiteism, Antireligionism, Ignosticism, Left-Libertarianism, Anarchism, Socialism, Mutualism, Axiology, Metaphysics, LGBTQI, Philosophy, Advocacy, Activism, Mental Health, Psychology, Archaeology, Social Work, Sexual Rights, Marriage Rights, Woman’s Rights, Gender Rights, Child Rights, Secular Rights, Race Equality, Ageism/Disability Equality, Etc. And a far-leftist, “Anarcho-Humanist.”

I am not a good fit in the atheist movement that is mostly pro-capitalist, I am anti-capitalist. Mostly pro-skeptic, I am a rationalist not valuing skepticism. Mostly pro-agnostic, I am anti-agnostic. Mostly limited to anti-Abrahamic religions, I am an anti-religionist. 

To me, the “male god” seems to have either emerged or become prominent around 7,000 years ago, whereas the now favored monotheism “male god” is more like 4,000 years ago or so. To me, the “female goddess” seems to have either emerged or become prominent around 11,000-10,000 years ago or so, losing the majority of its once prominence around 2,000 years ago due largely to the now favored monotheism “male god” that grow in prominence after 4,000 years ago or so. 

My Thought on the Evolution of Gods?

Animal protector deities from old totems/spirit animal beliefs come first to me, 13,000/12,000 years ago, then women as deities 11,000/10,000 years ago, then male gods around 7,000/8,000 years ago. Moralistic gods around 5,000/4,000 years ago, and monotheistic gods around 4,000/3,000 years ago. 

“Animism” is needed to begin supernatural thinking.
“Totemism” is needed for supernatural thinking connecting human actions & related to clan/tribe.
“Shamanism” is needed for supernatural thinking to be controllable/changeable by special persons.
Together = Gods/paganism

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope (Said as “At” “Hope”)/(Autodidact Polymath but not good at math):

Axiological Atheist, Anti-theist, Anti-religionist, Secular Humanist, Rationalist, Writer, Artist, Jeweler, Poet, “autodidact” Philosopher, schooled in Psychology, and “autodidact” Armchair Archaeology/Anthropology/Pre-Historian (Knowledgeable in the range of: 1 million to 5,000/4,000 years ago). I am an anarchist socialist politically. Reasons for or Types of Atheism

My Website, My Blog, & Short-writing or QuotesMy YouTube, Twitter: @AthopeMarie, and My Email:

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This