The Third Sex: Gay Vaisnavas

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

Here is a reference you offer in your own article:

 

"Those foolish men of evil conduct who engage in all forms of intercourse, taking advantage of improper wombs, and forcing themselves upon other men (pumsaka), are born again without their organs as neuters." (MB 13.145.52)

This is what I was saying before. The eunuchs are born without sexual organs. They are not homosexuals

 

In modern usage Eunuch refers to one who was castrated (according to my dictionary - maybe there are different meanings in other areas). The Eunuchs described in the Puranas were born castrated so to speak. It is a physical deformaty resulting from sinful activities in their previous life.

 

Arjuna received the "benediction" or "curse" (whichever way we want to read the story) that his body would physically change to that of a eunuch so that he would not be noticed during the last year of his vana-vasa. Otherwise Arjuna was so famous that where ever he went everyone knew him by appearance alone. If he had been seen he would have to continue his stay in the forest.

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

One thing I find offensive about the article is the following statement after which you claim:

 

He [srila Prabhupada] also acknowledges herein that he does not exactly know the nature of these people.

Please read the quote. He does not say he does not know the nature of these people. You are way, way off on this. He does not know the English word to describe these people, and is saying so. He goes on to describe their nature, that they are neither male nor female, that they are born "castrated", etc. Even a foolish person like myself is familiar with such things in the shastras. Who would be so foolish to think a great acharya, conversant in all scriptures, was not aware of the descriptive references to these eunuchs. Your article is of poor taste and lacks any scholarship whatsoever. This is just my personal opinion. Everyone is entitled to their own view.

 

Here is the quote from Prabhupada:

 

SP: (Srila Prabhupada) Jagannatha Misra is father. He was… whatever money and cloth and gold and silver… they were coming… he was also distributing to poor man, some dancers. In India there is a system… what do you call the eunuchs? Those who are neither male or female? What do you call them? What is their name?

 

HD: (Hayagriva dasa) A combination of both?

 

SP: Yes.

 

HD: Male and female? Hermaphrodite.

 

SP: Eunuchs? What is the eunuch?

 

HD: Eunuch. A eunuch is a…

 

SP: Tell me that.

 

HD: Impotent… someone who's been castrated.

 

SP: Oh. That is called a eunuch.

 

HD: Eunuch.

 

SP: Rather, by nature, neither man nor woman.

 

HD: Oh. This is also called asexual. That is to say, no sex.

 

SP: No sex?

 

HD: Hermaphrodite means they have the physical characteristics of both man and woman.

 

SP: Oh? At the same time?

 

HD: At the same time.

 

SP: I do not know exactly, but such people, they have their own society, and their means of livelihood is, that whenever there is some good occasion… marriage or childbirth, like that, so, they go there and pray to God that this child may be very long-living. In this way they make some prayer and get some…

 

Here is the statement of Prabhupada's we should note. He says clearly it is by birth they are "castrated". They are born with no sexual organs.

 

HD: Impotent… someone who's been castrated.

 

Srila Prabhupada: Oh. That is called a eunuch.

 

HD: Eunuch.

 

Srila Prabhupada: Rather, by nature, neither man nor woman.

 

[Amara_dasa 0]

Dear prabhus,

 

So, if you do not accept the Kama Shastras, do you accept the Dharma and Artha Shastras? "Tritiya-prakriti" is mentioned in the Mahabharata, do you accept that? Also the figure 5% is based on a study from the American Psychiatric Association. Do you not accept that as well?

 

My point is that all my references have been based on authoritative texts, and when they contradict your opinions, you cancel them out as not bonafide. On the other hand, many of you are posting your own opinions, which sound very bigoted and condescending, without any references whatsoever.

 

I suppose people will just believe whatever they want to believe, but be forewarned, these opinions are hurting others and are not pleasing to Krishna. Some people use their opinions and quotes to put down women, blacks, Asians, gays, etc., but I would urge you to reconsider your views and thus avoid that ugly path.

 

Also, Gaurachandra... are you the devotee I know from Hawaii, or are you someone else?

Haribol!

 

Your servant and friend,

 

Amara dasa

[Gauracandra 1]

No, I'm not the devotee from Hawaii.

 

In all honesty, I find this idea that homosexuality is somehow accepted in Vaisnavism rather poorly conceived. At best you have shown that homosexuality has existed in the past (something which I don't think anyone would disagree with). But not that it is an acceptable form of sexual expression. Again, if these statements are hurtful, then please accept them in the best manner possible. That is not my aim. I wish you the best in your spiritual advancement. Hare Krsna.

 

Gauracandra

[Amara_dasa 0]

No, that's alright, I am not hurt. I have been putting up with this type of prejudice all my life! By nature I am a very positive-oriented person, so with this group I am learning that I just have to overlook and not read the negative postings.

 

I really enjoyed reading Brahma's comments, especially on his last letter. I thought they were very well-written and according to shastra, point by point. His positive response is typical of most of the replies I have gotten on my paper so far.

 

I also really appreciated the letter written to Bhakta Albert by His Holiness Tripurari Swami. In that letter, Tripuari prabhu states, "...in general my opinion regarding gay and lesbian devotees is that they should be honored in terms of their devotion and spiritual progress. They should cultivate spiritual life from either a celibate status, or in something analagous to a heterosexual monogamous situation. Gay and lesbian people have always been a part of society from Vedic times to our post modern times. They should be accepted for what they are in terms of their sexual orientation and encouraged like everyone else to pursue spiritual life."

 

P.S. - This is not the ISKCON guru (obviously) who Bhakta Mark was referring to and who was being ridiculed on earlier postings.

 

Hare Krishna!

 

Amara dasa

[animesh 0]

Am I misunderstanding something here? Some of the posts in this thread seem to consider the words "homosexual" and "eunuch" as synonyms. But, they are entirely different.

[Amara_dasa 0]

Hare Krishna!

Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada and all Vaishnavas. I consider all of you as my good friends.

 

I would like to thank Brahma prabhu for addressing this important topic regarding the "third sex." How we treat gay and lesbians is an important social issue that must be addressed openly in our society.

 

My name is Amara dasa, and I am the devotee who wrote the research paper entitled "Tritiya-prakriti: People of the Third Sex." I must say that since I have released this paper the amount of positive feedback I have gotten has been astounding.

Many devotees have written to me saying that this project has been long overdue, and that the information in the Vedas referring to gays and lesbians as a third gender was important for others to understand. Of course, the study of gender and sexuality is a material subject, like astrology or ayur-veda, but it should be understood properly through the Vedas so that we do not mistreat other people and make offenses. Many devotees have told me that it has helped them to better understand their gay and lesbian friends or family members, and others have stated that it has completely rejuvenated their spiritual lives and restored their faith in Vedic culture as a welcoming and all-inclusive one. In this sense, I already consider this service to be a great success and well worth the effort.

 

Of course, I do not want to dwell on the bodily platform. The purpose of my research was to help others understand this subject properly and then move on from there in our service to Lord Krishna. Those who are gay will learn that they were not rejected from Vedic society, and others will learn that none of the three genders are to be mistreated, ridiculed or offended.

 

I must admit that much of the information I uncovered was quite surprising and unexpected. The entire issue of "homosexuality" in the Vedic literatures is clearly treated as a third gender, and not as a "crime" or "vice". Gender, in and of itself, does not determine whether a person is either good or bad. No where is this more clear than in the Dharma and Artha Shastras. Other information, such as the acknowledgement of gay marriage, and the example of Maharaja Virata's proper treatment of Arjuna as a transgender male, all reveal a very enlightened and advanced civilization. Of course, our own society has not yet reached this pinnacle of civilized behavior, but we can be enlivened that progress is gradually being made.

 

In the course of my writing, I spent the entire year praying to Srila Prabhupada and Lord Caitanya for guidance. If this paper has helped to encourage even a few people in their spiritual lives, and assisted others to avoid committing offense, then I already consider the work to be a great success. As a further sign, I have received several requests to have this paper published. It should be out sometime next year in a book concerning innovative thought in South Asian studies.

 

Once again, I thank all of you for your encouragement. Hare Krishna!

 

Yours in the service of Sri Guru and Sri Gauranga,

 

Amara dasa

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

I think that is the point some do not want to accept. The Vedic descriptions of a eunuch is that they are born without sexual organs and as a result belong to neither sex. Thus they are described as the third sex. This has no connection to homosexuals, who are strugling with their mind and the residual karma-vasanas from their past life.

 

Another point, which I forgot to mention is in regards to eunuchs being "auspicious". It is not true. A eunuch is born as such due to their sinful activities in their previous life. Certain signs are auspicious or inauspicious according to the circumstances. For example a crow cawing at the back of one's house, an elephant walking towards one's path, etc. The object is neither auspicious or inauspicious, it is the circumstance that determines the result. If a new child is born, then it is an auspicious sign to see a eunuch, whereas on the battlefield it is an inauspicious sign to see a eunuch.

 

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

Also it is interesting to note that even in Bengali "napumsak" means an impotent person. It does not mean homosexual. Prabhupada uses this word in his gitar-gan (Bhagavad Gita in Bengali poetry) to refer to Arjuna's inability to fight.

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by jndas (edited 08-31-2001).]

[animesh 0]

I was surprised because even those who have absolutely no Vedic knowledge distinguish between these two terms.

 

The word "napumsak" is there not only in Bengali but even in Hindi.

[atma 0]

Amara prabhu: were you pujari in the Honolulu temple in the summer-fall of 91? If that is you, a have a picture of you in Ratha Yatra day. It was a very nice parade and I have very nice memories of my stay in the Honolulu temple.

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

This is what they say in their article:

 

Fact- The "Vedic eunuch" was actually what is known today as the gay or homosexual male.

 

Myth- The Vedic eunuch was an asexual, castrated male no longer relevant to modern society.

 

This is why I say it lacks scholarship. They just put forth what they want people to believe without regard to language, context, or history.

 

Oriya also uses the word "napumsak", and it means one who has no sexual organs.

 

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

No, that's alright, I am not hurt. I have been putting up with this type of prejudice all my life! By nature I am a very positive-oriented person, so with this group I am learning that I just have to overlook and not read the negative postings.

Because Gauracandra disagrees with you he is prejudiced? This is a strange standard you set. You can state "I believe XYZ", but others cannot state "I do not agree that XYZ is true, in fact I belief ABCD."

 

This victim mentality is very prominent nowadays. Portray yourself as a victim of some uncontrollable circumstances, and a victim of the entire society's prejudice.

 

Here there is open discussion. No one has to agree with anyone. Disagreement in itself does not make one prejudiced.

 

Why try to portray those who disagree with you as prejudiced? Maybe I should start saying Shvu is prejudiced because he doesn't accept Krishna as God. Or maybe Jijaji is prejudiced because he doesn't accept ISKCON as a great spiritual institution.

 

The reality is we all just disagree.

[Amara_dasa 0]

Dear prabhus,

 

Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Sri Guru and Sri Gauranga.

 

We are getting into semantics here, which are very relative and change according to time, place, and understanding.

 

The word "eunuch" is defined nowadays as a "castrated male." (Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language, p. 211.) Formerly, it has been used to describe both "intersexed" and "homosexual" people throughout English translations of Vedic literature, due to a lack of specific English (Christian) words. The term "homosexual," wasn't even coined in English until the late 1800's, because Christian society was afraid and refused to deal with that issue (I am sensing that same feeling now.) They only grudgingly accepted the word over the decades. New words such as "intersexed,gay,transgender," etc., all continue to appear in modern society as science becomes more familiar in their understanding of these third gender groups. Indologists have always been puzzled as to why there were so many words in Sanskrit for the "eunuch" such as "napumsaka,kliba,sandha," etc. In his book on "Homosexuality and Hinduism, p. 48," Arvind Sharma raises the point that "...the limited practise of castration in India raises another significant point for the rest of the discussion, namely, whether rendering a word such as "kliba" as "eunuch" regularly is correct..." And once again I will repeat, the occurrence of (physically) intersexed people, call them asexuals, eunuchs, impotents or whatever, is far too rare for them to have formed their own socieities. This is not even to mention that all these words "eunuchs,napumsaka,sandha" etc., are all used in the Kama Shastra to name those practicing homosexual behavior!

 

The word "napumsaka" literally means in Sanskrit "not male." It is commonly used in Sanskrit texts to describe both neutered (castrated or intersexed) and homosexual people. In astrological texts, "napumsaka" is used to describe any of the five members of society who do not engage in the act of procreation, namely, children, the elderly, the neutered, the celibate and the transgender sex (homosexuals). These groups were protected in Vedic society, along with the second gender (women), the cows and the brahmana class.

 

Also, I have never stated that all "eunuchs" were homosexuals. Some were no doubt also "interesexed" or "asexual." But in all cases, before making general assumptions about this word, one must be careful to take into consideration the context of the story as well as the behavior of the person being described.

 

In regard to dealing with prejudice, I was not referring to Gauracandra prabhu or any of our members specifically. Anyone is free to disagree with others, that happens all the time. But when that disagreement is used to mistreat and demean other people as human beings, that is called prejudice. It happens to gay people all the time in our "modern" society on the physical (violence), verbal (ridicule), social (denying their very existence), ethical (mistreating), legal (denying basic rights), and so-called religious (condemnation) platforms. I am not specifically accusing anyone within this group of being prejudiced, the other readers can judge that for themselves. I have, however, noticed ridicule and social denial on some of the postings, but I suppose that is to be expected.

 

Now I will continue with my japa, which I am very much looking forward to. Hare Krishna!

 

Your servant,

 

Amara dasa

 

[BDas 0]

Yes, we just disagree...........

 

Some authorities say that 5% of the population is Gay. I have heard others say 1 to 2% is the correct figure. I am inclined to accept the 1 to 2% figure over all.

 

Here in SF the number is at 10% or more. SF is the Gay Mecca and people have been migrating here for that reason since the late 60s.

 

The Gay voting population is put at 20% and thus they exert tremendous political power.

 

Estimates on the percentage of Gay white men in SF go from 30 to 40% of the cities white male population. Therefore here it is almost impossible not to know or work with a Gay person in one way or another.

 

To know someone as a person is different than knowing them as a statistic.

 

I joined the movement at 18 in Pittsburgh and never knew a Gay person. In the movement I got to know many although at the time I was so naive that did not know they were Gay.

 

I had Gay brahmacharies on my bus who I thought were great and holy devotees. Many are still serving in some capacity. I believe still they are great and holy devotees even though I know they are gay or you can say attracted in that way.

 

I also know a few Gay sanyassis who have been celebate for over 25 years and have never been involved in scandal of any kind.

 

Gays are coming out of the closit here in SF and all over the world. Gays, women and minorities are standing up for their rights and demanding to be heard. They have many stories to tell of discrimination and abuse.

 

This is true in our Krishna Consciousness movement as well. Women will not be silenced and Gay devotees will come out.

 

How we will adjust to include all types of diverse people into the over-all movement of Krishna consciousness is yet to be seen.

 

But adjust we will, the history of the movement proves this. Women devotees are forcing their male counterparts to make necessary adjustments and address their grievences, and rightly so.

 

Gay devotees will come out more and more and in doing so demand some kind of acceptance

 

Krishna consciousness cannot be checked.

Those who feel disinfranchised will start there own KC movements and in time those groups will in some way be accepted as part of the overall movement of Devotional Service.

 

That is because thesis-antithesis and synthesis, is a fact of life.

 

And we are now in the information age where everyone can get there message out without fear and intimidation.

 

I remember a time when anyone who said they were a follower of Srila Sridhar Maharaja was considered a deviant outcast. Now we are more or less accepted even by most devotees in ISKCON.

 

Hare Krishna, Brahma

[Gauracandra 1]

I have still yet to figure out the whole point of this. Right now, you are gay. You come to the temple, chant Hare Krsna, and worship with all others. I don't see anything wrong with that. However, there is NO evidence I have seen that homosexuality was once accepted by Vaisnavas as a normal and healthy activity. I don't see any Vaisnava literatures that encourage gay marriage. I don't see any Vaisnava literatures that say such pairings should be encouraged. If anything I can easily cite from scripture statements against homosexuality (Manu Samhita anyone?) You may want it to be seen as good and perhaps that is the agenda, but there is no evidence that it was seen as such in the past. Come to the temples, chant and dance, but lets not make up some concocted philosophy that suggests that Vaisnavas say homosexuality is a normal, healthy occurence. Such statements don't exist. Ultimately I think you, like many gay groups, want to make others accept homosexuality as normal. So you are trying to pretend the philosophy accepts it. I say we should keep our own faults to ourselves and work on correcting them. Simply concocting a philosophy that vice=virtue won't do anyone any good.

 

Gauracandra

[Bhaktaboy 0]

 

All glories to the spiritual master!

 

Haribol network friends,

 

I wish to make my statement short seeing that this discussion on sexuality has been expressed from almost every angle over the last few decades. I would like to simply state that all people are welcome in the Sankirtana movement and are expected to adhere to same standards of conduct in order to be successful. Let us honor Bhakti Devi, and allow her to decide in whose hearts she would like to reside. As my Guru Maharaja says, Bhakti Devi can decide whether to reside in the heart of a sincere devotee or not. If there is an offense committed She can decide to leave. She also places herself in the hands of the Guru to be distributed. Maybe Guru and Bhakti Devi should make these kinds of judgements. Besides this, let us each look towards our own concerns and advancement. It is always easier to find fault in others than it is to face our own attachments and shortcomings. Remember sex desire is something we ALL struggle with. Fault finding is also called Aparadha which is synonymous with spiritual suicide.

The best of luck in your spiritual endeavors,

Your friend and servant,

Albert

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

Let us honor Bhakti Devi, and allow her to decide in whose hearts she would like to reside.

I think everyone agrees with this, but what some take objection to is an attempt to propagate that homosexuality is accepted as natural in Vedic culture, and that homosexuality is perfectly in line with Gaudiya Vaishnavism.

 

Up till now we have no evidence of a single pure devotee in the line of Sri Chaitanya or any other authorized sampradaya that was a homosexual. It is a modern fabrication of the 21st century. We do have many cases of pure devotees who lived as grihastas with families, etc., but not of homosexuals. Neither do we find references from our acharya's that it is an acceptable practice, yet we do find statements that marriage according to religious principles between men and women is an acceptable companion to bhakti.

 

Why try to propogate something that was never propogated by our acharya's? If, as the author of the article claimed, the Vedic culture was full of homosexuals, to the tune of 5% (anyone actually foolish enough to believe this?), then there must have been plenty of homosexual devotees belonging to the various sampradayas, and the respective acharyas must have spoken something directed specifically to this unique individuals. The fact is there are no such direction given by the acharyas because homosexuality was a sin, and was against the flow of the bhakti-ganga.

 

[Maitreya 0]

 

Actually I am afraid what is happening is that some homosexuals are trying to condition the minds of the other devotees on this issue.This is the same conditioning program that has been going on for decades in the general populace and now they are trying it in Lord Caitanya's movement.

 

Obviously Lord Caitanya's movement is open to everybody.But we have to drop our designations along the way.

 

My hetero promiscuous sex life didn't fit with Krishna's definition of sex life that is not contray to religious principles.It doesn't mix with Lord Caitanya's movement.

 

Neither does homosex.And as far as the loving partner crap goes,that is just an emotional problem that will be cured in time by the Maha-mantra.Until then please keep it to yourselves.

 

 

Here are a couple of things Prabhupada had to say on it.One of which is to write papers and openly "Challenge strongly" the idea that homosex and religion mix.

 

 

Prabhupäda: ...not sentimental. There is no religion, and still, they are professing, “I profess this religion,” Where is your religion? If actually there was religion in the human society, why there are so many problems? There should not have been so many problems. The problems are in the animal society. Why there should be problem in human society? Because they have given up the real principles. They are simply animals. Therefore there are so many problems. Actually there is no problem. Even they are not animal. Less than animal. In animal society there is no problem. There is problem, but not so acute. They are free. Just like the ducks, the pigeons, they fly from one country to another. They have no problem of immigration department, passport, or visa. They have no problem. These rascals should understand that they have created problem on account of their animalistic, less than animalistic civilization. There is no limit of sense gratification. The sense gratification, homosex, they are supporting. Just see. Just see. At least, in animal society there is no homosex. They have created homosex, and that is being passed by the priest, the religious heads. You know that?

Devotee: Yes, I’ve heard.

Prabhupäda: Just see. If you say that they are animal civilization, that is a great credit for them. It is less than animal civilization. Write all this in papers and everything, all openly. Challenge strongly. First of all, realize, then challenge. [break] Conversations Aug.25 1971

 

Prabhupäda: No no, what is their value? When they are sanctioning abortion, homosex, now they are finished. They have no value.

Karandhara: Well, most or a greater proportion of the traditional Christians condemn homosex and abortion. A good quantity of the traditional Christians, they condemn abortion and homosex.

Prabhupäda: Yes, they are good, but mostly, as you were telling me that, that Pope is disgusted... Yes. Nobody cares for the Bible or the Pope. That is everywhere, not only Christian. Actually there is no religion at the present moment. All animals. We don’t blame only the Christians. The Hindus, Muslim, everyone. They have lost all religion.Dec 8,1973 Converstions

 

 

[nine9 0]

Originally posted by Maitreya:

Neither does homosex.And as far as the loving partner crap goes,that is just an emotional problem that will be cured in time by the Maha-mantra.Until then please keep it to yourselves.

 

Please retract your "loving partner crap" comment. I, myself, take extreme offence. Until my Guru Maharaja says otherwise I know my relationship is valid. The fact that it is not based on sex is good, too. End of story.

 

Maitreya, Gauracandra, are you really advocating breaking up all relationships, prabhus? Ask yourself that. In no way am I attempting to convert anyone - in fact I wish I had not been born into this position that I am - but I cannot do anything about it. I wish no-one was gay, and would actually advise those not in relationships to not dwell on it any further. However, the main thrust of my efforts is for people already in relationships. I do not want to see good bona fide relationships that aid the partners' sadhana broken up.

 

Your aspiring servant,

 

Rama Kesava dasa

(Mark)

 

 

[This message has been edited by nine9 (edited 09-26-2001).]

[talasiga 0]

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. This is particularly relevant when considering a field of possibility or probability.

 

For instance, it is possible for lightning to kill a human or other animal and probable that in a big storm lightning has, in fact, killed some creature somewhere. Absence of evidence does not disprove this probability.

There is every chance that some unfound lightning struck body is lying somewhere.

 

However, in the case of the sun emitting black light: this would, on the basis of PROBABILITY, be accepted as impossible. In this situation the absence of evidence for black sunlight could be seen to disprove black sunlight as the absence of evidence, ipso facto, supports the probable impossibility.

 

Homosexuality or transgender (transcended gender) relationships probably existed in any society. So, notwithstanding that a culture may not have a specific word for the phenomenon and uses other words metaphorically or euphemistically, there is a field of probability that allows the absence of evidence to not amount to evidence of absence.

 

 

------------------

talasiga@hotmail.com

 

 

PS see also:

 

http://members.aol.com/sabrin1315/mohini.htm

 

http://www.fortunecity.com/victorian/parkwood/388/Mohini-Attam.html

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by talasiga (edited 09-01-2001).]

[Gauracandra 1]

Mark,

 

My concerns are not related to people who have homosexual partners (sexual or non-sexual). We all have our own backgrounds, and we can all come together to worship as brothers and sisters. Again, I would easily embrace you as brother. That being said, I simply object to this notion that we should distort the Vaisnava scriptures to suggest that homosexuality is accepted. Let us work internally on our own particular situation, but let us not rearrange the philosophy to suit our lifestyles.

 

Gauracandra

[Gauracandra 1]

Random,

 

That was not appropriate. Lets avoid personal insults. Just one man's opinion.

 

Gauracandra

[talasiga 0]

Originally posted by Gauracandra:

That was not appropriate. Lets avoid personal insults. Just one man's opinion.

 

Gauracandra

That was just a bit of random crap

probably prompted by a reaction

against anal sex

- understandable

but, yes,

"inappropriate"

because this thread is substantially

about "homosexuality" as regards, not

sexual practice but, loving intimacy in same gender relationships - a level of intimacy

traditionally relegated to heterosexual relationships.

 

Surely anyone who has been involved with any stream of devotional or spiritual life must be able to appreciate, or, at least, conceive as reasonable, loving intimacy between people existing beyond the strictures of sexual practice (body), the biology of gender (body), the traditional norms of society (aggregate bodies) ?

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

Sorry, but I had to delete a few posts to keep the discussion philosophical and free from insults. Nothing personal to anyone.

 

If I dont step in now it will only go down hill from here.