My writing as AmLearning January 10, 2004

THE WRITINGS OF AMLEARNING - 1/10/04
Site Map		To the people who wrote me privately: To you both, Although you deleted your emails to me, I copied them and have them ready to post tomorrow, unless you come to this forum and speak up for yourselves, find the words to speak your mind. How much more abuse is going to go on? When will the perfect moment be for the truth to be spoken? It has been DECADES of abuse going on!!! HOW MUCH MORE ABUSE HAS TO GO ON BEFORE YOU SPEAK UP????? Miranda Shaw and I sat next to each other on a plane ride from Germany to America in 1990. I told her about Sogyal's abuses 3 YEARS before she took any action. Hundreds more women were abused in that time. One woman was institutionalised that I know about as a direct result of Sogyal's abuse of her. Miranda was the one who referred Jane Doe to me, so that I could comfort this poor woman who had been sexually connived and beaten by Sogyal JUST AFTER HER FATHER HAD DIED. It was a miracle Jane Doe's husband didn't divorce her for sleeping with Sogyal, that her entire life didn't shatter and fall apart in a total mental/emotional breakdown. What kind of a man seduces women who have just lost a loved one, who are GRIEVING and lost, in need of spiritual comfort? This is some kind of emotional necrophilia to be such a predator! This is monstrous! When are you, who posted me, who know what has been going on, going to speak up????!!!! Miranda was VERY focused on her success. She wanted to write about women and sex practices in Buddhist history. It's an exciting subject, one that the author and a publisher COULD MAKE MONEY ON. I don't think the practices she wrote about have EVER happened with Tibetan lamas, or maybe anybody. I'm not convinced that she thought that either. She did technical, scholarly research based on religious texts. People write about dragons and Loch Ness monsters, but do those things really EXIST? Religious texts can say ANYTHING, and they often do. Are cult texts to be believed? I don't think so! Anybody can write about or publish anything. I've published a couple of books myself. One was written when I was 19, it was commissioned. I wrote the book in a single month, researching it while taking school exams. I did the best I could at the time, but I was instructed by my editor to write information to fit the images they had bought for the book. Words to match the pictures. It was a comparative history book on religion. A commissioned coffee-table book. It was intended to make money, that was all. It was published on 2 continents, and by a reputable, internationally renowned publisher. I made a considerable sum of money for a 19 year old's first effort at writing. The contents of the book were never questioned for a second. I was commissioned, I wrote, it was published as fact. I wrote all kinds of errors in that book, some I knew about because my writing had to fit the pictures, as I was hired and paid to do, and some by accident. That book is now quoted all the time on the web, as correct, as fact. None of what I wrote was checked up on as being fact. So I KNOW that editors don't find out whether something is true before they publish something. The publishing industry is just that, an industry, they sell PRODUCTS, books, not truth. My writing for that book was based on other books that were published with the wrong information. Just because something is published doesn't mean in any way that it is true. Just because a person has a degree does not mean that person knows what they are talking about, or that they are necessarily a person of integrity, telling the truth they know, or that they even know the truth about anything. What I'm trying to say is that I think that the tantric sex thing is not true. I don't think that women or men get enlightened doing tantric sex, or that it gives anybody anything, except the simple sex act. I don't think it cuts through any dualistic tendencies AT ALL!!! Ever. I think that is some kind of way to jazz up the plain old sex act into being something it's not. June Campbell was used by Kalu Rinpoche for sex.  He told her she would be going to Vajra Hell if she didn't do what he wanted, and by the way she had to screw his sleazy nephew too, or else. Some enlightened being there. Not. What an ugly, cruel power game, with a nun, who devoted herself diligently to learning Tibetan, to being his translator, taking vows to live her life chastely, to helping others. She never spoke about her feelings of anger, or the terrible betrayal she felt, because Tibetan Buddhists, all, are ASHAMED AND HORRIFIED by expression of anger, as if THAT, expressing anger, were immoral, and not the abuses committed! So she wrote her book with calm, not bringing her emotions into the picture at all, but she was reviled anyway by the Tibetan Buddhist community, not for telling the truth, but because people didn't want to be disillusioned from their fairy tale malarky! She was betrayed, used for sexual purposes in ugly, hurtful ways. It had NOTHING to do with anybody's being enlightened! That is just some Western or Tibetan fantasy that was rigged so lamas could use women sexually and cover it up as something fancy. The word in Tibetan for female IS INFERIOR BIRTH. For a thousand years nuns were not called nuns, they were called Auntie. Women did not get respect in Tibet, ever. It was a male theocracy. Women were not taught to read or do anything. It was polyandrous, forcing one woman to sleep with a handful of brothers, to keep the land from being legally parceled out to the different brothers. If all the brothers married one woman, they could keep their pitiful piece of land in one piece and not have to divide it up among their separate families. They respected a piece of barely arable farmland more than they respected any woman. Women did not and do not have any power or respect in Tibetan culture, period. That is a fabrication of Western women who want to believe that without ever knowing anything about Tibetan society up close, just reading books by Western authors who idealised Tibet as some kind of Shangri-La. What kind of man, lama or not, goes around saying his wife likes bigger dicks than his, so she should quietly screw other men? Say wha !???! This was the sacred bond between Gyatrul and Sangye? Neither of them seem to be any more enlightened from their experience. And why should they be? It was always and only, just plain old sex. Sex is for pleasure and making babies, to be done in appropriate ways with partners who have consented as peers, not as disciple or teacher, child and parent, child and trusted elder, parishioner and priest, patient and therapist, client and lawyer. If 2 peers, friends, want to have "tantric sex", I say go for it, have a folie a deux! Go for the mutual delusion. But when it is a power play, a sadistic one of spiritual betrayal, a cruel game of seduction of people who are vulnerable, very vulnerable to what they are being told, that is NOT okay. In the West is is AGAINST THE LAW. It is against the law, not for frivolous reasons, but because the VICTIMS, yes, the person who gets used this way, is seen as a victim of a crime, of abuse, are deeply DAMAGED by this abuse, this appropriation of power. It is like a child getting screwed by a parent. It is an abuse of power. If a little child flirts with daddy, it doesn't matter how turned on daddy gets, it's a CRIME to use this vulnerable child in a sexual way for the gratification of the adult. That is how a spiritual "disciple" is seen in the eyes of the law, as a person who is very vulnerable, like a child. Psychiatrically, such a violation by a spiritual teacher is treated as if the sexual abuse were a type of incest. In my experience with Tibetan people in general, they are not remotely romantic at all. Not in ANY way that a Westerner would consider romantic. There is no literature per se, almost no stories at all, and none that I have ever heard about involving "love". In fact, I have never heard the Tibetan word for love before in the 30 years since studying and knowing how to speak the language. There is "compassion" as in compassion, "nyingje", for all sentient beings. There is the Tibetan expression, "Goe gi do" that passes for "I love you", which is "I want you (sexually)". The colloquial word for sex in Tibetan, "layka' is "work". Maybe the lack of romantic literature in Tibet, or literature that has anything to do with the relationship between men and women as peers, is because Tibetan men did not have romantic love with women. There was almost no literature at all in Tibetan culture.  All writing and the use of the intellect was utterly taken over by the male theocracies of the monasteries. Society was almost 90% illiterate; a lot of the religious texts were just memorised, not read to be understood, basically just a form of brainwashing. Tibetan men generally do have exceptionally small penises, and it is generally known in conversations I've had with Tibetan women over the decades that Tibetan men cannot perform sexually in any way for more than a few seconds, or that Tibetan women get little or no pleasure out of the sex act with a Tibetan man. This is something joked about frequently by Tibetan women themselves, that sex is nothing to them, a disappointment to be endured for the sake of having children. Maybe this is why all the emphasis on what passes for the expression of love in the Tibetan Buddhist texts always refers to love one would have for a mother? Tibetan marriages are arranged. It's a business arrangement between families for the tribal purpose of creating laborers and landowners. One son, if it could be afforded to hand over a potential farmhand, was traditionally, somewhat routinely, given to the monastery when he was a tiny boy, handed over like a sacrificial lamb to a theocratic city of pseudo-monks; run by men, for men. These pseudo-monks didn't work and were totally supported by the poor laborers, the farmers outside the monastery perimeter. Inside the monastery these pseudo-monks brainwashed themselves, and the outside people were treated like inferiors who had to crawl and scrape for the "blessing" of these pseudo-monks (who were in fact, raping each other, when they weren't brainwashing each other, inside the monastery walls). A number of educated Tibetan people understand that those chosen to be "rinpoches" were because of their relationship to politically powerful families. Or a child was chosen from an area for politically strategic reasons. What are you, who posted me privately, waiting for? For there to be nothing to be afraid of? For your reputations to be protected? You both think you are spiritual and moral people, but what kind of integrity do you think you have when you can help put an end to the abuse, NOW, but you are not doing it??!!! Why would you not come to this forum, where I publicly spoke out about what I suffered, and support me here? Either of you could have chosen anonymous names, unrelated to your actual identity, and offered your support, your experience, written about your thoughts and feelings in any way you like, in such a way that nobody knew who you are, but still validating what I said was true, or that you had experienced similar abuses yourselves. Why write to me privately, wanting my sympathy, my comforting, or to confess your knowledge about abuses to me, when there are people out there, now, being abused, used, assaulted, pimped, whose inner and in some cases outer lives are being destroyed by these abuses? WHY ARE YOU KEEPING YOUR PART IN THIS SECRET??? Is it because you know that you are still perpetuating this abuse by keeping it secret? Please, be decent people and come forward and speak up, openly. As for the person who said they think my intention to post what they said to me in private here is blackmail, the legal definition of blackmail is:  "obtaining or procuring something by illegal means, such as by force or coercion." You CHOSE to write to me. I did not coerce you. I did not obtain the information you told me illegally, by force or coercion. You didn't know me. There was no trust I earned with you. I posted here publicly to support Tara and Odysseus in their truth telling, by my own truth-telling. My intention in doing that was to HELP END THE ABUSES AND TO TELL THE TRUTH. When I read your second post to me I felt literally sick for 12 hours. How could you have helped that abuse, so directly to continue and think for a second that you are a therapist! A trained therapist???!!! OMG, I was horrified! From what you told me you were a co-perpetrator who had been trained to know better! And you had the gall to tell me that it was Tara's ANGER that you feel is sick? Buddy, you are the sick one. Tara has every reason to be angry. That anger she is expressing is sane. NOT expressing anger about these abuses is what is wrong. So what if she is expressing the anger in ways that are not esthetically pleasing to you? So what if she refers to male genitalia? It was male genitalia that was being used to abuse these female disciples, con them into the sex act. Do I think Tara is going to cut off any male genitalia? No. I think she has a deep and loving relationship with Odysseus and at the moment is caring for her FATHER, who is dying of cancer. It's not men who are so bad for their having genitalia or sex with men that is bad. It's the ABUSE of power by men who set themselves up to be worshipped as reincarnate lamas, holy teachers of The Truth.  It's conning women into sex acts to use them and camouflage  it as something that it is not. Hiding the truth about these ILLEGAL abuses that are going on on a MASS SCALE for DECADES is wrong. Letting it go on by not talking about it is wrong. Have a look in your heart. Have some cojones to talk about this, openly. Here, now. That is the right thing to do. Protect your identity if you want to but come here and speak the truth and let it help others. Let this be a place where this sexual abusing of women by Tibetan lamas starts to end.