ॐ नमः शिवाय
Om Namah Shivaya |
The Authoritative Manual of Homoerotic Tantra:Mascul-IN-Touch℠
An excerpt from a recent Homoerotic Tantra:Mascul-IN-Touch℠ editorial by Dāka Karuṇā दाक करुणा.
Homoerotic Tantra (तन्त्र): What’s in it for the “Straight” Man
A seeker recently contacted me after having seen an announcement on LinkedIn. His message was:
“Hey Daka, thanks for introducing yourself. I have recently become interested in Yoga and meditation, but I am a straightman in a heterosexual relationship, do you think there is something for me in your teachings?”
The man’s question is similar to ones I have received in the past not only from homosexual and “bisexual” men, men in heterosexual relationships and living a heterosexual lifestyle, but also from men who call themselves “bicurious” − what I call the “fence-sitters.” I have already written an article on the problems of the so-called “bicurious” man, which you can read at The Tragedy of Bicurious.
Complete Table of Contents
Labels and Homoerotic Tantra℠ 5
Inequality of Binary Genderism and Genderized Politics 6
Conflicting Males and Females 8
Cultural Conditioning and Cooperation between Men and Women 8
The Grey Area of Masculine Sensuality 9
Male and Female: Conflicting Negative Tensions 10
A Man’s Freedom in the Heterosexual Relationship 11
The Myth of Equality 12
“What’s in it for me?” 13
To Be or Not To Be Homoerotic 13
Take the Best… 15
Types of homoerotic man 17
Examples of types of seekers who will benefit from Homoerotic Tantra℠ 20
Warning: I am approaching a topic that is loaded with political gunpowder but I have no intention of playing nice just to please or appease those who refuse to accept reality and truth. Yes, some of what I have to say is acutely straightforward; I am shooting from the hip and am taking no prisoners, so be warned. If you are a pabulum-puking libtard who is content with what you find in your political feeding trough, you might want to stop here. It is not my intention to please or to cause suffering; whatever your reaction is your own — your baby, you rock it —, and you will have to take a quiet moment for self-reflection and examination to know why you’re reacting the way you are. If you manage only that, I have achieved a great purpose.
Labels and Homoerotic Tantra℠
The present question centers on men who identify themselves with the label, “heterosexual,” and who are engaged in a so-called heterosexual relationship but who are attracted or curious about homoerotic yogic tantra (तन्त्र), whether in its character as a spiritual discipline or for more, shall we say, covert reasons.
While I have no intention of entering into a psychoanalytical treatise of why a man pursues a particular social trajectory and pastes a label across his chest, whether he is of the [L]GBTQ or the straight camp, I am intrigued that a man should need to ask whether he would benefit from a program and discipline that is based on awakening, self-awareness, truth, and liberation, considering the erotosensory and erotosensual skills that accompany the evolution and transformation of the triad of physical, mental/emotional, and psychospiritual aspects.
While I teach the complementarity of the masculine and feminine principles, these are to be understood as convenient designations of subtle forces and have nothing whatsoever to do with biological gender or sex. They are metaphysical and metapsychological terms of art that are not intended to establish nor to endorse the artificial phenomenon of cultural genderized conditioning or the stereotypes evoked by heteronormative assumptions of what a “man” is or should be or what a “woman” is or should be, nor how one human being should interact with or engage another human being.
To read or download the full-text of this article, please click here.
 The term “straight” can be usually be used as a synonym for the shortened form “hetero”. The term straight likely originated as a mid-20th century as a gay slang term for heterosexuals, presumably originating from the phrase “to go straight,” as in “straight and narrow”. One of the first uses of the word in this way was in 1941 by author G. W. Henry. Henry’s book recorded conversations with homosexual males and used this term in connection with people who are identified as ex-gays. It is now simply a colloquial term for “heterosexual”, having changed in primary meaning over time. Some object to usage of the term straight because it implies that non-heteros are crooked.
The source of the expression is the Bible, specifically Matthew 7:13/14. The King James’ Version:
Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
 Henry Havelock Ellis (1859 – 1939) . An English physician, eugenicist, writer, progressive intellectual and social reformer who studied human sexuality. He co-wrote the first medical textbook in English on homosexuality in 1897, and also published works on a variety of sexual practices and inclinations, as well as on transgender psychology.
 Bi-curious is a term for a man, usually a man whose is orientation tends primarily to be heterosexual, and who is curious or open about engaging in erotosensual activity with a person of his own gender. The term is sometimes used to describe a variety of erotosensual orientations ranging between homosensuality and “bisexuality,” a term that I find to be absolutely silly. The continuum of interaction includes primarily heterosexual or primarily homosexual, but such men are likely to self-label while avoiding actually admitting a “bisexual” identity. We could also apply the terms heteroflexible and homoflexible when referring to men who labels himself bi-curious”, people, although some writers would distinguish heteroflexibility and homoflexibility not having the urge to “experiment with sexuality” implied by the bicurious label.
 The term heterosexual is a modern invention, and first appears in 1892, in C.G. Craddock’s translation of Krafft-Ebbing’s “Psychopathia Sexualis;” it is a compound of hetero- “other, different” + sexual. The noun is recorded by 1914 but was not in common use until the 1960s. Colloquial shortening hetero is attested from 1933. The term homosexual dates back to the same source; that is, 1892, in C.G. Chaddock’s translation of Krafft-Ebing’s “Psychopathia Sexualis,” from German homosexual, homosexuale (by 1880, in Gustav Jäger), from Greek homos “same” (see homo- (1)) + Latin-based sexual.
H.H. Ellis had a very low opinion of the term homosexual:
‘Homosexual’ is a barbarously hybrid word, and I claim no responsibility for it. It is, however, convenient, and now widely used. ‘Homogenic’ has been suggested as a substitute. [H. Havelock Ellis, “Studies in Psychology,” 1897], “Studies in Psychology,” 1897]
This is the end of the excerpt.
The complete article can be requested from firstname.lastname@example.org. Please see details below.
Please note that the complete Homoerotic Tantra:Mascul-IN-Touch℠ and Homoerotic Hesion℠ collection of PDF articles and exercises, and supplemental material is available only to registered śiṣya-s (aspirants) and prāvitṛi (प्रावितृ) (patrons, sponsors, supporters).
Homoerotic Tantra:Mascul-IN-Touch℠ and Homoerotic Hesion℠ Program Modules.
Individuals not registered as śiṣya-s (aspirants) or as patrons/sponsors may obtain copies of articles for a do $/€15.00 or CAD$ 18.00 per article, paid in advance. Please request payment instructions from Daka.