The Ghost of Christianity

January 7, 2011

I posted this as a comment on this really cool article and figured I’d cross-post it here.

I grew up around a lot of Christians. And as a girl I always wondered: “What the fuck is the Holy Spirit?” If the creator and ruler of existence is God, a “Father”, why is there no “Mother” of the universe? Especially when I learned about parthenogenesis and realized that females ONLY were capable of creating life, and they didn’t need male’s help to do it either. Females create life, not males. Males are “broken” females with a broken chromosome. The “Y” chromosome only contains 200 genes instead of the 1400 genes present in a normal female chromosome. Male chromosomes are not essential for life. The female chromosome, the “X” chromosome is the only life-sustaining chromosome. Without an X chromosome there is no life. Therefore the Y chromosome is quite literally “undead”. It is viral. A virus attaches to the living and implants itself into the RNA of the living, forcing the host to replicate more undead versions of itself.

Rather than Eve being “hewn from Adam’s rib”, males are quite literally created from the life-giving source: Females. Females began creating these half alive half viral lives so they could create new DNA strands for themselves in order to trick parasites from attaching themselves to human mitochondria and to prevent malformed chromosomes from weakening the species. Human life is entirely female.  So why would the creator of life in Christianity be a father? And if he is the creator why did he need to force unwanted childbirth on a lowly human woman to birth his son? Why didn’t he just pop him out of his ass the way he did with Adam?

And who or what is this Holy Ghost floating around all mysterious, literally haunting the supposed Creator of the Universe, telling him what to do? Christians say there is a holy trinity: God, Jesus, Holy Ghost, and this trinity ITSELF is God. A trinity with no purpose? Usually religious trinities have some sort of purpose or balance. In some eastern religions God is represented as a trinity, or being triple-faced. Two of the faces represent good and evil (Duality) while the central face represents wholeness, or the absence of duality. But there is no purpose, no rhyme or reason to the Christian trinity. In fact before God “created” his son (using Mary as a nine-month morning-sickness swollen-ankle “virgin” vessel: a virgin birth is always female by the way, so God must have inserted a broken chromosome into her body somehow, but I digress). Before Jesus, there was no trinity, only a two-fer: God The Source Of All Life and …this “ghost thing” that tells The Source Of All Life what to do. Riggggght.

Obviously I didn’t end up Christian. But I did realize the source of all life is female. Not God, but the Holy Female Spirit.

29 Responses to “The Ghost of Christianity”


  1. It’s because Abrahamic religions are really, really poor plagariasations of the original.

    Love this entry gallusmag :)

  2. Bluetraveler Says:

    I agree with Aileen.
    In many ancient tribes the only or main God is female or androgynous (the aboriginal Rainbow Snake is female, the most primitive Greek God is mother Rhea, the American Great Spirit AKA Nature is often sexless). When there’s a trinity, Good and Evil are male (often two brothers), and the third, often most elusive but important element is female (thus I suspect the Holy Ghost, which is sexless, was female at the beginning). A father who works as a “mother of all life” is a posterior invention, because it goes against what can be commonly seen in Nature, in every species (barring of course amoebas and such). It’s a sign we are living under patriarchy. Patriarchy is so oppressive because, since no one can truly know a father’s child, a patriarch HAS to be oppressive towards female to assure his progeny is really his (and that’s the first cause, IMO, from where all patriarchial oppression stems). It’s because fathers want to be mothers basically.


  3. A father who works as a “mother of all life” is a posterior invention, because it goes against what can be commonly seen in Nature, in every species (barring of course amoebas and such).

    +1

    You familiar with the works of Dr. Mary Daly? I never know if womyn are or not, but she really helped me refine this train of thought :)

    • gallusmag Says:

      I would like to read Mary Daly. I suspect that her ideas influenced a lot of feminist religious writings. I really need to get a fucking library card!

    • Bluetraveler Says:

      Not really. The only thing I know about her, besides the fact she was a lesbian feminist, is that she’s constantly trashed in FTM circles. So I think she’ll probably be interesting…


  4. Nitpick: virgin births that produce males DO occur on a regular basis. Male bees, ants, and wasps come from unfertilized eggs, and parthenogenesis in Komodo dragons results strictly in male offspring. Also, while two sexes are a pretty basal trait in animals, the XX/XY sex-determination system is not. Your “Y chromosome = virus” theory is nonsense.

    A hypothetical mammalian virgin birth would produce a female though, and parthenogenesis can only occur in females (duh), regardless of the offspring’s sex.

    • GallusMag Says:

      Parthenogenisis among all species with an XX/XY sex-determination system results in ONLY female offspring.

      Virus:
      “an ultramicroscopic (20 to 300 nm in diameter), metabolically inert, infectious agent that replicates only within the cells of living hosts, mainly bacteria, plants, and animals: composed of an RNA or DNA core, a protein coat, and, in more complex types, a surrounding envelope.”
      (dictionary.com)

      The Y chromosome is an artifact. Unlike the X chromosome it is not capable of forming a living organism. It is only capable of attaching itself to life. Your dismissal of the viral theory is ridiculous.

      • Bluetraveler Says:

        Chromosomal sex varies by species though. Birds have male XX and female XY, and platypuses, being the oddball they are, feature an amazingly complicated chromosomal sex. I guess the Y could be seen as a virus if it doesn’t give any positive trait – XY AIS people, who are androgen-insensitive, do end up getting taller than the female average probably due to some factor in the Y chromosome. I honestly am no expert in this area so beware.

      • Bluetraveler Says:

        I have just realized that this post could be seen as advocating for genetic XY (thus male) superiority compared to XX (female) – that was absolutely not my intention! The thing I was trying to say is that maybe the genes contained in the Y chromosome are not all negative even though it isn’t able to sustain life by itself. I read a long time ago that some pea varieties have way more chromosomes than us – numbers don’t always translate to superiority (nor inferiority). I think it’s likely the Y chromosome decayed over time instead of being born a virus (in any case, somewhere in the future it won’t exist anymore).

      • GallusMag Says:

        Now don’t be Pea-o-phobic! lol


      • “Parthenogenisis among all species with an XX/XY sex-determination system results in ONLY female offspring.”

        I know that. Hence the bit about how a mammalian virgin birth could only result in a female, because mammals have XX/XY sex chromosomes.

        As noted by Bluetraveler, XX/XY isn’t the only sex determination system. There’s even more species that use the ZW/ZZ system where the female has the “viral” chromosome. There’s plenty of others that use different systems altogether, i.e. haploid/diploid. Sexual reproduction is as old as multicellular life itself and nigh universal in eukaryotes, while the XX/XY system is not. Your post gives the impression that all lifeforms were female until the evil zombie chromosomes attacked them or something.

        Furthermore, the term “virus” implies harm (or uselessness at best), while sexual reproduction is beneficial to a species biologically.

      • GallusMag Says:

        “Your post gives the impression that all lifeforms were female until the evil zombie chromosomes attacked them or something.”

        Nothing in my post remotely gives that impression. That is purely your projection.
        Virus refers to an iterating non-life supporting string of genetic matter that attaches to a host. That is all.

    • GallusMag Says:

      Blue said:”The thing I was trying to say is that maybe the genes contained in the Y chromosome are not all negative even though it isn’t able to sustain life by itself. ”

      I never said it was all negative. I said:
      “Females began creating these half alive half viral lives so they could create new DNA strands for themselves in order to trick parasites from attaching themselves to human mitochondria and to prevent malformed chromosomes from weakening the species. “

    • GallusMag Says:

      I’m talking about Religion here in this post folks. Human religious propaganda relating to the Christian trinity under patriarchy. Not bird religion or amoeba patriarchy. And all the cries about “but other species have varying chromosomes” and the repeated misreads of “you said the Y chromosome was all bad” (which I certainly did not say) and “You said the X chromosome was being attacked by evil Y chromosomes” (which is absurd and again not what I said) is starting to sound pretty identical to the oft heard replies of non-feminists on radfem blogs which goes: “What about the MENZ?” “You said something bad about the MENNNNZZZZ!” “We are here to see that the MENNNZZ are not being maligned!” And the fucked up thing is it’s all in your head. Seriously- FUCK OFF.

      • Bluetraveler Says:

        “Virus”, or parasite, is a loaded term. If someone lives with something “like a virus” but gives something in return it’s called symbiosis, otherwise it’s just bad (a virus). We have many symbionte bacteria in our intestine.

        I am not a man apologist in any way. Sex differentiation is only a little part of what Y does (AIS people have that part mutated but do get the rest of Y as well). I think it was my biology professor (a woman) who once said Y was a degraded chromosome; it once was an X but mutated and its little leg became shorter and shorter until it became practically dead. This is connected to men only if you want it to be (society as large does, so that’s why I put the (male) in parenthesis). There have been some rare XX males, and I’m not talking about FTMs, and even a case of an XY woman who gave birth.

        ” [...] And the fucked up thing is it’s all in your head. Seriously- FUCK OFF.”

        Honestly, when you say things like

        “Human life is entirely female”

        people, man apologists or not, can have doubts. I replied not because I wanted to “think about those poor poor menz”, but because you were implying XY=male=not entirely alive (honestly I would have replied if it was just XY=not entirely alive or biologically deficient). I am not a funfem, and probably not a radfem by many radfem standards in that I care about injustice no matter where it comes from, and categorizing all XY people as “half dead” (even if it was not what you were trying to say) is an injustice.

      • GallusMag Says:

        There are plenty of benign viruses and retroviruses, but that’s not the point.

        “categorizing all XY people as “half dead” (even if it was not what you were trying to say) is an injustice.”

        Yes, that’s what I’m saying. Not exactly “half dead”, but lacking half of the normal (female) life-sustaining chromosomes.

      • Bluetraveler Says:

        Again this goes back to what I was saying – peas then must be super alive. I do agree with everything else you said in the original post Gallus but genetics is a complex science (for example, a gene alone feedbacks with others in many different ways. Simple mendelian genes as those who control eye color are very rare) and if you want to make such a radical theory as “Y is a virus” then go ahead…with solid proof and credentials. The radicalness of an idea doesn’t really scare me. I just think, from the little I know, it’s wrong.

      • GallusMag Says:

        Peas super alive?
        I agree with your hypothesis and would like to subscribe to your newsletter. :)

  5. Bluetraveler Says:

    I don’t have one ‘cuz I’m PEAPHOBIC!!!

    An example of the extreme versatility of genes and how they interact with their environment is the case of the axolotl (a permanent young-looking salamander). Its secondary sexual characteristics don’t activate until it gets out of its usual habitat (dark caves). If it does, it becomes a normal salamander and loses its eternally young-looking “axolotl” status. The axolotls have the same genes as normal salamanders, but due to their different environment they express them very differently. This is just an example of how genetics is complicated (super-folded on itself) and even some modern biologists (like Dawkins) still believe genes work in mechanically easy-to-understand ways. But evidence this doesn’t happen is piling into itself.

    Though honestly I do believe this train of thought leads to nowhere in regards to patriarchic religions…my bottom point is, your “XY people less alive” theory is…weird. You are either alive (even in a comatose state) or dead. Zombies are after all an invention. Humanity, which is different from being alive, doesn’t depend on it (serial killers are very alive, and that’s a problem). And I personally don’t think humanity is gene-dictated beyond the basic “human caryotype” model.

    I’d rather be a bonobo anyway.

    • Bluetraveler Says:

      (I know you didn’t make the connection between alive = more human in your original post, but if something is less alive as in human life, my first logical connection is that it’s also less human, which is probably why Ray viewed the original post that way.)

    • GallusMag Says:

      lol you and the bonobos.
      Have you read “Demonic Males”? It’s quite good. All about your beloved bonobos. :)

    • Bluetraveler Says:

      I have made a mistake here at the beginning: it’s obvious that Y alone can’t sustain life, and that X, which develops female traits, is the only viable chromosome for life. When I saw “human life is entirely female” I thought Gallus was saying XY people are existentially/morally/spiritually half-dead, which is a thing I absolutely don’t think, and which puts even more stigma to most Intersex people who as a class are already bashed and exploited; it’s obvious that only “female” chromosomes can sustain life, and thus all human life was female in the beginning (male is a mutation). I apologize for this and call myself a huge ass.

  6. FCM Says:

    dropping a link, re the mary daly comments. i am reading daly now for the first time, and i can report that after 2 chapters, my perspective has changed. here ya go:

    http://factcheckme.wordpress.com/2011/01/12/24-hour-menergy/

  7. FeistyAmazon Says:

    And serial killers and rapists often have an XYY chromosome making them super aggressive and dangerous. Those with XXY chromosomes are more effeminate and often transition to female(MTF’s), but I don’t think there are ANY humans that have strictly a Y chromosome and no X, they would not be viable and wouldn’t survive.

    Gallus Mag is right, humans in the womb are FEMALE, until the androgens are released often from the Y chromosome and the fetus begins to develope as male. Female is the original state of the human fetus, and ONLY female species can reproduce parthenogenically, like the Whiptail Lizard(we had a Lesbian hangout in SF called the Whiptail Lizard Lounge, that lasted a few years before the menz tried to take it over, like usual.)

    And she is also right, that the Goddess/Mother Earth/Primal Female was honored and worshipped for 20,000 plus years before ANY male dieties ever wear because of Her mysterious powers and ability to give birth and give forth all the life, animals, plants, trees that help us survive, as well as other more subtle Female mysteries. It wasn’t till men figured they had a part in reproduction when women became enslaved by them so only THEY could control her and valued only her sons and owned her womb so to speak. Daughters were only good for marrying off, status, or as workhorses. And male dominated religion has been the greatest enslaver of women, their minds and Spirits ever since…..
    -FeistyAmazon


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 522 other followers

%d bloggers like this: