[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, assuming no repercussions for saying no, why not just be upfront about it. He obviously never told Maharishi about it. Shame, as it would've made a great addition to Love and God: What a miracle God has created in love. Let us live it. Let us be in love, and live in love with one another, and say to ourselves, quietly, let thy will be done. A soft impulse of love is the sole life of a melting heart. A tiny hope of love brings the light of dawn through the darkness of the lengthy night. And love, even as a twinkling of the faintest star, keeps the light at the altar shining. And in that faintest light of love, someday the willivet (individual) finds his way, and creeps on in silence, in quietness, drawn by the tiny, tiny love which kept the door open in the hope of fulfillment. But I'm busy, do you fancy a shag? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sundur@ wrote: Finally we know his M O. I had always wondered about that. This makes sense to me. And somewhat admirable in my opinion. Get straight to the point. Two consenting adults. A yes or no will suffice. I hafta say, if a male acquaintance or colleague were just sort of generally horny and not particularly interested in me as a person, I'd vastly prefer Bevan's approach to the standard pass. Right up front, no muss, no fuss. And if I were sufficiently horny and the guy was reasonably presentable, I might even say yes. Assuming there was no *threat* attached if I said no, of course. How was the woman in question treated by Bevan afterward? If he didn't hold her refusal against her, I'd agree that this was actually not a bad way to go about it, for him. Kinda sad he had to do it that way, though. And I wonder whether working all the time was the real reason he wasn't able to cultivate relationships, or if that was just an excuse for a lack of self- confidence with women.
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, geezerfreak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sundur@ wrote: Finally we know his M O. I had always wondered about that. This makes sense to me. And somewhat admirable in my opinion. Get straight to the point. Two consenting adults. A yes or no will suffice. I hafta say, if a male acquaintance or colleague were just sort of generally horny and not particularly interested in me as a person, I'd vastly prefer Bevan's approach to the standard pass. Right up front, no muss, no fuss. And if I were sufficiently horny and the guy was reasonably presentable, I might even say yes. Assuming there was no *threat* attached if I said no, of course. How was the woman in question treated by Bevan afterward? If he didn't hold her refusal against her, I'd agree that this was actually not a bad way to go about it, for him. Kinda sad he had to do it that way, though. And I wonder whether working all the time was the real reason he wasn't able to cultivate relationships, or if that was just an excuse for a lack of self- confidence with women. OK, Barry, here's one to add to the list. Judy defending the unctuous fat boys' pick up line on unsuspecting students. I think we can cut her a break on this one, Geez. Since she's comparing Bevan's pickup routine to the last time guys actually hit on *her*, she's probably working with memories that are at least 30 or 40 years old. One can forget a lot in all that time.
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Kenny H kenhassman@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: - I hafta say, if a male acquaintance or colleague were just sort of generally horny Now wait, I hafta say that this is pretty much the condition of most men most of the time. LOL!! You may have a point there. But there are certainly times when a man approaches a *particular* woman, especially one he has already gotten to know to some degree, because he finds her personality as well as her body attractive. In other words, if it's sincere, there's nothing wrong with a guy making a standard pass, as far as I'm concerned. I can barely think of a time since I was maybe in 7th grade when I was not imagining every woman my vision fell on naked and wondered how to get her to have sex. Looks essentially make no difference. If they have breasts and the rest I am imagining. You mean, that time you and I had lunch, all the while you were... Hmmm. sounds of Ken throwing up in the background
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sundur@ wrote: Yes, assuming no repercussions for saying no, why not just be upfront about it. He obviously never told Maharishi about it. Shame, as it would've made a great addition to Love and God: What a miracle God has created in love. Let us live it. Let us be in love, and live in love with one another, and say to ourselves, quietly, let thy will be done. A soft impulse of love is the sole life of a melting heart. A tiny hope of love brings the light of dawn through the darkness of the lengthy night. And love, even as a twinkling of the faintest star, keeps the light at the altar shining. And in that faintest light of love, someday the willivet (individual) finds his way, and creeps on in silence, in quietness, drawn by the tiny, tiny love which kept the door open in the hope of fulfillment. But I'm busy, do you fancy a shag? Superb!
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Kenny H kenhassman@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: - I hafta say, if a male acquaintance or colleague were just sort of generally horny Now wait, I hafta say that this is pretty much the condition of most men most of the time. LOL!! You may have a point there. But there are certainly times when a man approaches a *particular* woman, especially one he has already gotten to know to some degree, because he finds her personality as well as her body attractive. In other words, if it's sincere, there's nothing wrong with a guy making a standard pass, as far as I'm concerned. I can barely think of a time since I was maybe in 7th grade when I was not imagining every woman my vision fell on naked and wondered how to get her to have sex. Looks essentially make no difference. If they have breasts and the rest I am imagining. You mean, that time you and I had lunch, all the while you were... Hmmm. sounds of Ken throwing up in the background Reading that made me throw up a little in my mouth. I feel violated. Any self-respecting manwhore has gotta have standards Ken!
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, geezerfreak geezerfreak@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sundur@ wrote: Finally we know his M O. I had always wondered about that. This makes sense to me. And somewhat admirable in my opinion. Get straight to the point. Two consenting adults. A yes or no will suffice. I hafta say, if a male acquaintance or colleague were just sort of generally horny and not particularly interested in me as a person, I'd vastly prefer Bevan's approach to the standard pass. Right up front, no muss, no fuss. And if I were sufficiently horny and the guy was reasonably presentable, I might even say yes. Assuming there was no *threat* attached if I said no, of course. How was the woman in question treated by Bevan afterward? If he didn't hold her refusal against her, I'd agree that this was actually not a bad way to go about it, for him. Kinda sad he had to do it that way, though. And I wonder whether working all the time was the real reason he wasn't able to cultivate relationships, or if that was just an excuse for a lack of self- confidence with women. OK, Barry, here's one to add to the list. Judy defending the unctuous fat boys' pick up line on unsuspecting students. I think we can cut her a break on this one, Geez. Since she's comparing Bevan's pickup routine to the last time guys actually hit on *her*, she's probably working with memories that are at least 30 or 40 years old. One can forget a lot in all that time. I dunno. Based on the her photos on file here, her puss 30 or 40 years ago was not likely to inspire much in the way of action either.
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
This was many years ago but it pertains directly to Bevan and this topic at hand. It was at MIU and Bevan was around a lot. I was sitting with a good friend when a woman friend of his and an acquaintance of mine, a well-placed well thought of woman came over to sit with us and she was really dazed/spaced out. She said she had received a summons to setup an appointment to see Bevan and she just naturally assumed it was something administrative. She went to the appointment, entered his office, sat down, expecting nothing of what was about to be proposed. She said that in a very businesslike and even apologetic manner, Bevan told her he was in an odd position in that he was working all the time, did not have any time at all to cultivate relationships and was wondering if she would have sex with him. I don't remember how she said she excused herself from his office but she was really very discombobulated from the shock of it. She did not become one of his occasional consorts. This was apparently his main method, at least at that time, of finding occasional sex partners. Ken Mm, well I laughed a lot about this one, and the comment thread was very funny as well, and then thought about it for a while and decided that actually it reads like someone has been having problems telling dreams from reality. It sounds so much like a dream sequence that I very much doubt it's true. There are a lot of these rumors running around and it's always I know someone who knew someone else who heard that Unless I have reliable independent corroboration I'll not believe it.
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
This was a first person account told by me, Ken Hassman, who was one of the two people this woman, who had just come from Bevans office, told what happened. I forgot to ask her for permission to make a videotape of her telling us this story but I'll try to remember that next time someone tells me something directly. Ken --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, guyfawkes91 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This was many years ago but it pertains directly to Bevan and this topic at hand. It was at MIU and Bevan was around a lot. I was sitting with a good friend when a woman friend of his and an acquaintance of mine, a well-placed well thought of woman came over to sit with us and she was really dazed/spaced out. She said she had received a summons to setup an appointment to see Bevan and she just naturally assumed it was something administrative. She went to the appointment, entered his office, sat down, expecting nothing of what was about to be proposed. She said that in a very businesslike and even apologetic manner, Bevan told her he was in an odd position in that he was working all the time, did not have any time at all to cultivate relationships and was wondering if she would have sex with him. I don't remember how she said she excused herself from his office but she was really very discombobulated from the shock of it. She did not become one of his occasional consorts. This was apparently his main method, at least at that time, of finding occasional sex partners. Ken Mm, well I laughed a lot about this one, and the comment thread was very funny as well, and then thought about it for a while and decided that actually it reads like someone has been having problems telling dreams from reality. It sounds so much like a dream sequence that I very much doubt it's true. There are a lot of these rumors running around and it's always I know someone who knew someone else who heard that Unless I have reliable independent corroboration I'll not believe it.
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: sounds of Ken throwing up in the background Barry I forgot, how old are you again, 11 or 12? Ken
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
--- TurquoiseB wrote: --- guyfawkes91 wrote: Not everyone hated them. The really really annoying thing was that they had the best girls in Seelisberg chasing them. Ah, finally...a suitable subject for my last post of the week. I'll start it off, and if others can identify and add more material, maybe it'll still be an active thread on Saturday. :-) The subject for this thread is a social phen- omenon that has appeared in every spiritual movement I've ever seen; the soundtrack for it is provided by the Rolling Stones in a song they called *on the album covers* Star Star. The real name of the song was Starfucker. The lyrics are here: http://tinyurl.com/6k4uma It's not that the women in Seelisberg chased the WYMS guys because they were big, butch Nazis. They were, but that wasn't the attraction. They chased them because they had *access to Maharishi*. They had the closest thing to POWER that one can have in a one-man-rule organization -- access to the one man. The women in Seelisberg also chased the Regional Coordinators and the State Coordinators from the U.S. when they came to town. And the leaders from the different countries as well. And WHY? Because they rightly thought that if they hooked up with these guys maybe *they* would get greater access to Maharishi. Think I'm exaggerating? Think again...think Bevan. What attractive woman in her right mind would want to sleep with that blubberous toad? But they did, because he was a blubberous toady, and for a long time, the Head Toady. He had more access to MMY, and thus the thinking seems to have been, He must have some aspect of personal power or higher evo- lution about him, and if I (ick) fuck him, maybe some of it will rub off on me. As I said before, this is a social phenomenon not limited to the TMO. I have seen it in pretty much every spiritual movement or scene I've ever been around. If it's a movement with primarily men at close proximity to the guru or Big Kahuna, then the women tend to throw themselves at those men. If it's a movement with primarily women at close proximity to the guru, the men (and sometimes the other women) tend to throw themselves at the women who've established their personal power levels by being able to be close to the guru. It's just what happens. It's a law of nature. So I don't think that it's that the ladies in Seelisberg were closet Nazi groupies; they were just good, old-fashioned power groupies. They were sexually attracted -- as women have been since the dawn of time -- to those whose personal charisma had allowed them to rise to the top. In a world where egos seek sustenance in power and proximity to power, I take heart from a story I heard on National Public Radio decades ago. The story told how, in a herd of gorillas (I think it was gorillas), the Alpha Gorilla gets all the females. But in one herd being observed, scientists noticed that one of the females regularly sneaked out of the harem to spend time with a male gorilla of lesser status. The only reason the female would risk a beating, as far as the observers could tell, was because she preferred that particular male's company. From this simply story I like to believe there are males and females of many species - even humans! - who seek the companionship of others not because of power, wealth or appearance, but simply because they prefer the other's company. I blush to admit it.
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- TurquoiseB wrote: It's not that the women in Seelisberg chased the WYMS guys because they were big, butch Nazis. They were, but that wasn't the attraction. They chased them because they had *access to Maharishi*. They had the closest thing to POWER that one can have in a one-man-rule organization -- access to the one man. The women in Seelisberg also chased the Regional Coordinators and the State Coordinators from the U.S. when they came to town. And the leaders from the different countries as well. And WHY? Because they rightly thought that if they hooked up with these guys maybe *they* would get greater access to Maharishi. Ah. Good to know. Here all these years I just figured the Highland Ladies simple figured that guys that were big dicks, must also have big dicks. :)
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
This was many years ago but it pertains directly to Bevan and this topic at hand. It was at MIU and Bevan was around a lot. I was sitting with a good friend when a woman friend of his and an acquaintance of mine, a well-placed well thought of woman came over to sit with us and she was really dazed/spaced out. She said she had received a summons to setup an appointment to see Bevan and she just naturally assumed it was something administrative. She went to the appointment, entered his office, sat down, expecting nothing of what was about to be proposed. She said that in a very businesslike and even apologetic manner, Bevan told her he was in an odd position in that he was working all the time, did not have any time at all to cultivate relationships and was wondering if she would have sex with him. I don't remember how she said she excused herself from his office but she was really very discombobulated from the shock of it. She did not become one of his occasional consorts. This was apparently his main method, at least at that time, of finding occasional sex partners. Ken --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- TurquoiseB wrote: --- guyfawkes91 wrote: Not everyone hated them. The really really annoying thing was that they had the best girls in Seelisberg chasing them. Ah, finally...a suitable subject for my last post of the week. I'll start it off, and if others can identify and add more material, maybe it'll still be an active thread on Saturday. :-) The subject for this thread is a social phen- omenon that has appeared in every spiritual movement I've ever seen; the soundtrack for it is provided by the Rolling Stones in a song they called *on the album covers* Star Star. The real name of the song was Starfucker. The lyrics are here: http://tinyurl.com/6k4uma It's not that the women in Seelisberg chased the WYMS guys because they were big, butch Nazis. They were, but that wasn't the attraction. They chased them because they had *access to Maharishi*. They had the closest thing to POWER that one can have in a one-man-rule organization -- access to the one man. The women in Seelisberg also chased the Regional Coordinators and the State Coordinators from the U.S. when they came to town. And the leaders from the different countries as well. And WHY? Because they rightly thought that if they hooked up with these guys maybe *they* would get greater access to Maharishi. Think I'm exaggerating? Think again...think Bevan. What attractive woman in her right mind would want to sleep with that blubberous toad? But they did, because he was a blubberous toady, and for a long time, the Head Toady. He had more access to MMY, and thus the thinking seems to have been, He must have some aspect of personal power or higher evo- lution about him, and if I (ick) fuck him, maybe some of it will rub off on me. As I said before, this is a social phenomenon not limited to the TMO. I have seen it in pretty much every spiritual movement or scene I've ever been around. If it's a movement with primarily men at close proximity to the guru or Big Kahuna, then the women tend to throw themselves at those men. If it's a movement with primarily women at close proximity to the guru, the men (and sometimes the other women) tend to throw themselves at the women who've established their personal power levels by being able to be close to the guru. It's just what happens. It's a law of nature. So I don't think that it's that the ladies in Seelisberg were closet Nazi groupies; they were just good, old-fashioned power groupies. They were sexually attracted -- as women have been since the dawn of time -- to those whose personal charisma had allowed them to rise to the top. In a world where egos seek sustenance in power and proximity to power, I take heart from a story I heard on National Public Radio decades ago. The story told how, in a herd of gorillas (I think it was gorillas), the Alpha Gorilla gets all the females. But in one herd being observed, scientists noticed that one of the females regularly sneaked out of the harem to spend time with a male gorilla of lesser status. The only reason the female would risk a beating, as far as the observers could tell, was because she preferred that particular male's company. From this simply story I like to believe there are males and females of many species - even humans! - who seek the companionship of others not because of power, wealth or appearance, but simply because they prefer the other's company. I blush to admit it.
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Kenny H [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This was many years ago but it pertains directly to Bevan and this topic at hand. It was at MIU and Bevan was around a lot. I was sitting with a good friend when a woman friend of his and an acquaintance of mine, a well-placed well thought of woman came over to sit with us and she was really dazed/spaced out. She said she had received a summons to setup an appointment to see Bevan and she just naturally assumed it was something administrative. She went to the appointment, entered his office, sat down, expecting nothing of what was about to be proposed. She said that in a very businesslike and even apologetic manner, Bevan told her he was in an odd position in that he was working all the time, did not have any time at all to cultivate relationships and was wondering if she would have sex with him. You're kidding! Ha! Who the hell does he think he is Casanova? Ha! That's gotta be the worst line I ever heard of. Did he get any takers? I don't remember how she said she excused herself from his office but she was really very discombobulated from the shock of it. She did not become one of his occasional consorts. This was apparently his main method, at least at that time, of finding occasional sex partners. What! He did! I love this, Is it true? What a nerve. The Age of Enlightenment, who would have thought it would be as funny as this. Ken
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Hugo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Kenny H kenhassman@ wrote: This was many years ago but it pertains directly to Bevan and this topic at hand. It was at MIU and Bevan was around a lot. I was sitting with a good friend when a woman friend of his and an acquaintance of mine, a well-placed well thought of woman came over to sit with us and she was really dazed/spaced out. She said she had received a summons to setup an appointment to see Bevan and she just naturally assumed it was something administrative. She went to the appointment, entered his office, sat down, expecting nothing of what was about to be proposed. She said that in a very businesslike and even apologetic manner, Bevan told her he was in an odd position in that he was working all the time, did not have any time at all to cultivate relationships and was wondering if she would have sex with him. You're kidding! Ha! Who the hell does he think he is Casanova? Ha! That's gotta be the worst line I ever heard of. Did he get any takers? Bill, apparently, didn't use lines. He just dropped his drawers. I don't remember how she said she excused herself from his office but she was really very discombobulated from the shock of it. She did not become one of his occasional consorts. This was apparently his main method, at least at that time, of finding occasional sex partners. What! He did! I love this, Is it true? What a nerve. The Age of Enlightenment, who would have thought it would be as funny as this. Ken What did they say when he dropped his drawers and revealed his very synched up, wet, loincloth -- used to cultivate celibacy? (aka the wet diaper)
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Kenny H [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This was many years ago but it pertains directly to Bevan and this topic at hand. It was at MIU and Bevan was around a lot. I was sitting with a good friend when a woman friend of his and an acquaintance of mine, a well-placed well thought of woman came over to sit with us and she was really dazed/spaced out. She said she had received a summons to setup an appointment to see Bevan and she just naturally assumed it was something administrative. She went to the appointment, entered his office, sat down, expecting nothing of what was about to be proposed. She said that in a very businesslike and even apologetic manner, Bevan told her he was in an odd position in that he was working all the time, did not have any time at all to cultivate relationships and was wondering if she would have sex with him. I don't remember how she said she excused herself from his office but she was really very discombobulated from the shock of it. She did not become one of his occasional consorts. This was apparently his main method, at least at that time, of finding occasional sex partners. ...if it was only that easy... Ken --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: --- TurquoiseB wrote: --- guyfawkes91 wrote: Not everyone hated them. The really really annoying thing was that they had the best girls in Seelisberg chasing them. Ah, finally...a suitable subject for my last post of the week. I'll start it off, and if others can identify and add more material, maybe it'll still be an active thread on Saturday. :-) The subject for this thread is a social phen- omenon that has appeared in every spiritual movement I've ever seen; the soundtrack for it is provided by the Rolling Stones in a song they called *on the album covers* Star Star. The real name of the song was Starfucker. The lyrics are here: http://tinyurl.com/6k4uma It's not that the women in Seelisberg chased the WYMS guys because they were big, butch Nazis. They were, but that wasn't the attraction. They chased them because they had *access to Maharishi*. They had the closest thing to POWER that one can have in a one-man-rule organization -- access to the one man. The women in Seelisberg also chased the Regional Coordinators and the State Coordinators from the U.S. when they came to town. And the leaders from the different countries as well. And WHY? Because they rightly thought that if they hooked up with these guys maybe *they* would get greater access to Maharishi. Think I'm exaggerating? Think again...think Bevan. What attractive woman in her right mind would want to sleep with that blubberous toad? But they did, because he was a blubberous toady, and for a long time, the Head Toady. He had more access to MMY, and thus the thinking seems to have been, He must have some aspect of personal power or higher evo- lution about him, and if I (ick) fuck him, maybe some of it will rub off on me. As I said before, this is a social phenomenon not limited to the TMO. I have seen it in pretty much every spiritual movement or scene I've ever been around. If it's a movement with primarily men at close proximity to the guru or Big Kahuna, then the women tend to throw themselves at those men. If it's a movement with primarily women at close proximity to the guru, the men (and sometimes the other women) tend to throw themselves at the women who've established their personal power levels by being able to be close to the guru. It's just what happens. It's a law of nature. So I don't think that it's that the ladies in Seelisberg were closet Nazi groupies; they were just good, old-fashioned power groupies. They were sexually attracted -- as women have been since the dawn of time -- to those whose personal charisma had allowed them to rise to the top. In a world where egos seek sustenance in power and proximity to power, I take heart from a story I heard on National Public Radio decades ago. The story told how, in a herd of gorillas (I think it was gorillas), the Alpha Gorilla gets all the females. But in one herd being observed, scientists noticed that one of the females regularly sneaked out of the harem to spend time with a male gorilla of lesser status. The only reason the female would risk a beating, as far as the observers could tell, was because she preferred that particular male's company. From this simply story I like to believe there are males and females of many species - even humans! - who seek the companionship of others not because of power, wealth or appearance, but simply because they prefer the other's company. I blush to admit it.
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Kenny H wrote: This was many years ago but it pertains directly to Bevan and this topic at hand. It was at MIU and Bevan was around a lot. I was sitting with a good friend when a woman friend of his and an acquaintance of mine, a well-placed well thought of woman came over to sit with us and she was really dazed/spaced out. She said she had received a summons to setup an appointment to see Bevan and she just naturally assumed it was something administrative. She went to the appointment, entered his office, sat down, expecting nothing of what was about to be proposed. She said that in a very businesslike and even apologetic manner, Bevan told her he was in an odd position in that he was working all the time, did not have any time at all to cultivate relationships and was wondering if she would have sex with him. I don't remember how she said she excused herself from his office but she was really very discombobulated from the shock of it. She did not become one of his occasional consorts. This was apparently his main method, at least at that time, of finding occasional sex partners. ...if it was only that easy... These days Bevan's assignations must be greatly facilitated by the use of Microsoft Outlook's Calendar function. Just send the woman a meeting invitation, and schedule it in the busy day. ;-)
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Kenny H [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This was many years ago but it pertains directly to Bevan and this topic at hand. It was at MIU and Bevan was around a lot. I was sitting with a good friend when a woman friend of his and an acquaintance of mine, a well-placed well thought of woman came over to sit with us and she was really dazed/spaced out. She said she had received a summons to setup an appointment to see Bevan and she just naturally assumed it was something administrative. She went to the appointment, entered his office, sat down, expecting nothing of what was about to be proposed. She said that in a very businesslike and even apologetic manner, Bevan told her he was in an odd position in that he was working all the time, did not have any time at all to cultivate relationships and was wondering if she would have sex with him. I don't remember how she said she excused herself from his office but she was really very discombobulated from the shock of it. She did not become one of his occasional consorts. This was apparently his main method, at least at that time, of finding occasional sex partners. Muktananda was more direct...and more successful. He would just grab their tits...or put them in that stirrup contraption he had built. Judging by success, I guess Bevan wasn't as highly evolved as Muktananda was... Ken --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: --- TurquoiseB wrote: --- guyfawkes91 wrote: Not everyone hated them. The really really annoying thing was that they had the best girls in Seelisberg chasing them. Ah, finally...a suitable subject for my last post of the week. I'll start it off, and if others can identify and add more material, maybe it'll still be an active thread on Saturday. :-) The subject for this thread is a social phen- omenon that has appeared in every spiritual movement I've ever seen; the soundtrack for it is provided by the Rolling Stones in a song they called *on the album covers* Star Star. The real name of the song was Starfucker. The lyrics are here: http://tinyurl.com/6k4uma It's not that the women in Seelisberg chased the WYMS guys because they were big, butch Nazis. They were, but that wasn't the attraction. They chased them because they had *access to Maharishi*. They had the closest thing to POWER that one can have in a one-man-rule organization -- access to the one man. The women in Seelisberg also chased the Regional Coordinators and the State Coordinators from the U.S. when they came to town. And the leaders from the different countries as well. And WHY? Because they rightly thought that if they hooked up with these guys maybe *they* would get greater access to Maharishi. Think I'm exaggerating? Think again...think Bevan. What attractive woman in her right mind would want to sleep with that blubberous toad? But they did, because he was a blubberous toady, and for a long time, the Head Toady. He had more access to MMY, and thus the thinking seems to have been, He must have some aspect of personal power or higher evo- lution about him, and if I (ick) fuck him, maybe some of it will rub off on me. As I said before, this is a social phenomenon not limited to the TMO. I have seen it in pretty much every spiritual movement or scene I've ever been around. If it's a movement with primarily men at close proximity to the guru or Big Kahuna, then the women tend to throw themselves at those men. If it's a movement with primarily women at close proximity to the guru, the men (and sometimes the other women) tend to throw themselves at the women who've established their personal power levels by being able to be close to the guru. It's just what happens. It's a law of nature. So I don't think that it's that the ladies in Seelisberg were closet Nazi groupies; they were just good, old-fashioned power groupies. They were sexually attracted -- as women have been since the dawn of time -- to those whose personal charisma had allowed them to rise to the top. In a world where egos seek sustenance in power and proximity to power, I take heart from a story I heard on National Public Radio decades ago. The story told how, in a herd of gorillas (I think it was gorillas), the Alpha Gorilla gets all the females. But in one herd being observed, scientists noticed that one of the females regularly sneaked out of the harem to spend time with a male gorilla of lesser status. The only reason the female would risk a beating, as far as the observers could tell, was because she preferred that particular male's company. From this simply story I like to believe there are males and females of many species -
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
Finally we know his M O. I had always wondered about that. This makes sense to me. And somewhat admirable in my opinion. Get straight to the point. Two consenting adults. A yes or no will suffice. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Kenny H [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This was many years ago but it pertains directly to Bevan and this topic at hand. It was at MIU and Bevan was around a lot. I was sitting with a good friend when a woman friend of his and an acquaintance of mine, a well-placed well thought of woman came over to sit with us and she was really dazed/spaced out. She said she had received a summons to setup an appointment to see Bevan and she just naturally assumed it was something administrative. She went to the appointment, entered his office, sat down, expecting nothing of what was about to be proposed. She said that in a very businesslike and even apologetic manner, Bevan told her he was in an odd position in that he was working all the time, did not have any time at all to cultivate relationships and was wondering if she would have sex with him. I don't remember how she said she excused herself from his office but she was really very discombobulated from the shock of it. She did not become one of his occasional consorts. This was apparently his main method, at least at that time, of finding occasional sex partners. Ken --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Gillam jpgillam@ wrote: --- TurquoiseB wrote: --- guyfawkes91 wrote: Not everyone hated them. The really really annoying thing was that they had the best girls in Seelisberg chasing them. Ah, finally...a suitable subject for my last post of the week. I'll start it off, and if others can identify and add more material, maybe it'll still be an active thread on Saturday. :-) The subject for this thread is a social phen- omenon that has appeared in every spiritual movement I've ever seen; the soundtrack for it is provided by the Rolling Stones in a song they called *on the album covers* Star Star. The real name of the song was Starfucker. The lyrics are here: http://tinyurl.com/6k4uma It's not that the women in Seelisberg chased the WYMS guys because they were big, butch Nazis. They were, but that wasn't the attraction. They chased them because they had *access to Maharishi*. They had the closest thing to POWER that one can have in a one-man-rule organization -- access to the one man. The women in Seelisberg also chased the Regional Coordinators and the State Coordinators from the U.S. when they came to town. And the leaders from the different countries as well. And WHY? Because they rightly thought that if they hooked up with these guys maybe *they* would get greater access to Maharishi. Think I'm exaggerating? Think again...think Bevan. What attractive woman in her right mind would want to sleep with that blubberous toad? But they did, because he was a blubberous toady, and for a long time, the Head Toady. He had more access to MMY, and thus the thinking seems to have been, He must have some aspect of personal power or higher evo- lution about him, and if I (ick) fuck him, maybe some of it will rub off on me. As I said before, this is a social phenomenon not limited to the TMO. I have seen it in pretty much every spiritual movement or scene I've ever been around. If it's a movement with primarily men at close proximity to the guru or Big Kahuna, then the women tend to throw themselves at those men. If it's a movement with primarily women at close proximity to the guru, the men (and sometimes the other women) tend to throw themselves at the women who've established their personal power levels by being able to be close to the guru. It's just what happens. It's a law of nature. So I don't think that it's that the ladies in Seelisberg were closet Nazi groupies; they were just good, old-fashioned power groupies. They were sexually attracted -- as women have been since the dawn of time -- to those whose personal charisma had allowed them to rise to the top. In a world where egos seek sustenance in power and proximity to power, I take heart from a story I heard on National Public Radio decades ago. The story told how, in a herd of gorillas (I think it was gorillas), the Alpha Gorilla gets all the females. But in one herd being observed, scientists noticed that one of the females regularly sneaked out of the harem to spend time with a male gorilla of lesser status. The only reason the female would risk a beating, as far as the observers could tell, was because she preferred that particular male's company. From this simply story I like to believe there are males and females of many species - even humans! - who
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Finally we know his M O. I had always wondered about that. This makes sense to me. And somewhat admirable in my opinion. Get straight to the point. Two consenting adults. A yes or no will suffice. I hafta say, if a male acquaintance or colleague were just sort of generally horny and not particularly interested in me as a person, I'd vastly prefer Bevan's approach to the standard pass. Right up front, no muss, no fuss. And if I were sufficiently horny and the guy was reasonably presentable, I might even say yes. Assuming there was no *threat* attached if I said no, of course. How was the woman in question treated by Bevan afterward? If he didn't hold her refusal against her, I'd agree that this was actually not a bad way to go about it, for him. Kinda sad he had to do it that way, though. And I wonder whether working all the time was the real reason he wasn't able to cultivate relationships, or if that was just an excuse for a lack of self- confidence with women.
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - I hafta say, if a male acquaintance or colleague were just sort of generally horny Now wait, I hafta say that this is pretty much the condition of most men most of the time. I can barely think of a time since I was maybe in 7th grade when I was not imagining every woman my vision fell on naked and wondered how to get her to have sex. Looks essentially make no difference. If they have breasts and the rest I am imagining. KH and not particularly interested in me as a person, I'd vastly prefer Bevan's approach to the standard pass. Right up front, no muss, no fuss. And if I were sufficiently horny and the guy was reasonably presentable, I might even say yes. Assuming there was no *threat* attached if I said no, of course. How was the woman in question treated by Bevan afterward? If he didn't hold her refusal against her, I'd agree that this was actually not a bad way to go about it, for him. Kinda sad he had to do it that way, though. And I wonder whether working all the time was the real reason he wasn't able to cultivate relationships, or if that was just an excuse for a lack of self- confidence with women.
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sundur@ wrote: Finally we know his M O. I had always wondered about that. This makes sense to me. And somewhat admirable in my opinion. Get straight to the point. Two consenting adults. A yes or no will suffice. I hafta say, if a male acquaintance or colleague were just sort of generally horny and not particularly interested in me as a person, I'd vastly prefer Bevan's approach to the standard pass. Right up front, no muss, no fuss. And if I were sufficiently horny and the guy was reasonably presentable, I might even say yes. Assuming there was no *threat* attached if I said no, of course. How was the woman in question treated by Bevan afterward? If he didn't hold her refusal against her, I'd agree that this was actually not a bad way to go about it, for him. Kinda sad he had to do it that way, though. And I wonder whether working all the time was the real reason he wasn't able to cultivate relationships, or if that was just an excuse for a lack of self- confidence with women. OK, Barry, here's one to add to the list. Judy defending the unctuous fat boys' pick up line on unsuspecting students.
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Kenny H [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: - I hafta say, if a male acquaintance or colleague were just sort of generally horny Now wait, I hafta say that this is pretty much the condition of most men most of the time. LOL!! You may have a point there. But there are certainly times when a man approaches a *particular* woman, especially one he has already gotten to know to some degree, because he finds her personality as well as her body attractive. In other words, if it's sincere, there's nothing wrong with a guy making a standard pass, as far as I'm concerned. I can barely think of a time since I was maybe in 7th grade when I was not imagining every woman my vision fell on naked and wondered how to get her to have sex. Looks essentially make no difference. If they have breasts and the rest I am imagining. You mean, that time you and I had lunch, all the while you were... Hmmm.
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, geezerfreak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Kinda sad he had to do it that way, though. And I wonder whether working all the time was the real reason he wasn't able to cultivate relationships, or if that was just an excuse for a lack of self- confidence with women. OK, Barry, here's one to add to the list. Judy defending the unctuous fat boys' pick up line on unsuspecting students. Don't get too overstimulated there, geeze. Read what I wrote, not what you wish I'd written.
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, geezerfreak geezerfreak@ wrote: snip Kinda sad he had to do it that way, though. And I wonder whether working all the time was the real reason he wasn't able to cultivate relationships, or if that was just an excuse for a lack of self- confidence with women. OK, Barry, here's one to add to the list. Judy defending the unctuous fat boys' pick up line on unsuspecting students. Don't get too overstimulated there, geeze. Read what I wrote, not what you wish I'd written. Overstimulated by you, chubs? Not a chance.
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Kenny H kenhassman@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: - You mean, that time you and I had lunch, all the while you were... Hmmm. Judy I confess guilt. BUT as a guy you learn to ignore it! It's like talking to someone you want to tell to shut the f*ck up or go jump off a bridge and instead you tell them what a pleasure it was to meet them. You ignore the inappropriate thoughts. Many people who don't either a) get lucky or b) end up in prison. One of the reasons I stopped teaching was I really was afraid I was going to tell the students what I was thinking instead of having to be neutral most of the time and strident within limits. It was getting increasingly difficult to hold back. KH
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
Yes, assuming no repercussions for saying no, why not just be upfront about it. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sundur@ wrote: Finally we know his M O. I had always wondered about that. This makes sense to me. And somewhat admirable in my opinion. Get straight to the point. Two consenting adults. A yes or no will suffice. I hafta say, if a male acquaintance or colleague were just sort of generally horny and not particularly interested in me as a person, I'd vastly prefer Bevan's approach to the standard pass. Right up front, no muss, no fuss. And if I were sufficiently horny and the guy was reasonably presentable, I might even say yes. Assuming there was no *threat* attached if I said no, of course. How was the woman in question treated by Bevan afterward? If he didn't hold her refusal against her, I'd agree that this was actually not a bad way to go about it, for him. Kinda sad he had to do it that way, though. And I wonder whether working all the time was the real reason he wasn't able to cultivate relationships, or if that was just an excuse for a lack of self- confidence with women.
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, geezerfreak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] OK, Barry, here's one to add to the list. Judy defending the unctuous fat boys' pick up line on unsuspecting students. Not a student. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, geezerfreak geezerfreak@ wrote: [...] OK, Barry, here's one to add to the list. Judy defending the unctuous fat boys' pick up line on unsuspecting students. Not a student. Lawson Are you sure? He did have a way with a word.
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, geezerfreak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, geezerfreak geezerfreak@ wrote: [...] OK, Barry, here's one to add to the list. Judy defending the unctuous fat boys' pick up line on unsuspecting students. Not a student. Lawson Are you sure? He did have a way with a word. Well, the person in question whom he propositioned was allegedly waiting for him to bring up administrative issues, which doesn't sound like what a student would say if summoned into the office of the president of the university. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, geezerfreak geezerfreak@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, geezerfreak geezerfreak@ wrote: [...] OK, Barry, here's one to add to the list. Judy defending the unctuous fat boys' pick up line on unsuspecting students. Not a student. Lawson Are you sure? He did have a way with a word. Well, the person in question whom he propositioned was allegedly waiting for him to bring up administrative issues, which doesn't sound like what a student would say if summoned into the office of the president of the university. Lawson Really Lawson? And what exactly do you base this on?
[FairfieldLife] Star Star (was Re: My visit to Seelisberg)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, guyfawkes91 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not everyone hated them. The really really annoying thing was that they had the best girls in Seelisberg chasing them. Ah, finally...a suitable subject for my last post of the week. I'll start it off, and if others can identify and add more material, maybe it'll still be an active thread on Saturday. :-) The subject for this thread is a social phen- omenon that has appeared in every spiritual movement I've ever seen; the soundtrack for it is provided by the Rolling Stones in a song they called *on the album covers* Star Star. The real name of the song was Starfucker. The lyrics are here: http://tinyurl.com/6k4uma It's not that the women in Seelisberg chased the WYMS guys because they were big, butch Nazis. They were, but that wasn't the attraction. They chased them because they had *access to Maharishi*. They had the closest thing to POWER that one can have in a one-man-rule organization -- access to the one man. The women in Seelisberg also chased the Regional Coordinators and the State Coordinators from the U.S. when they came to town. And the leaders from the different countries as well. And WHY? Because they rightly thought that if they hooked up with these guys maybe *they* would get greater access to Maharishi. Think I'm exaggerating? Think again...think Bevan. What attractive woman in her right mind would want to sleep with that blubberous toad? But they did, because he was a blubberous toady, and for a long time, the Head Toady. He had more access to MMY, and thus the thinking seems to have been, He must have some aspect of personal power or higher evo- lution about him, and if I (ick) fuck him, maybe some of it will rub off on me. As I said before, this is a social phenomenon not limited to the TMO. I have seen it in pretty much every spiritual movement or scene I've ever been around. If it's a movement with primarily men at close proximity to the guru or Big Kahuna, then the women tend to throw themselves at those men. If it's a movement with primarily women at close proximity to the guru, the men (and sometimes the other women) tend to throw themselves at the women who've established their personal power levels by being able to be close to the guru. It's just what happens. It's a law of nature. So I don't think that it's that the ladies in Seelisberg were closet Nazi groupies; they were just good, old-fashioned power groupies. They were sexually attracted -- as women have been since the dawn of time -- to those whose personal charisma had allowed them to rise to the top. Feste, how much experience do you have with WYMS? These guys were fucking Nazis, I kid you not. They were rude, arrogant, deceitful, manipulative and even physically violent at times. Very dark souls that Maharishi surrounded himself with in Seelisberg. Supreme pricks that guarded Maharishi. Think of Hitler's inner elite circle of generals and you have WYMS down pat. Everybody hated these supreme assholes.
