There is neither Jew nor Gentile, there is neither bond nor free, male nor female, for you are all a symbiogenesis in Christ Jesus. . . And if anyone is in Christ, he's a new species: for him, the old things are no more. All of these have become utterly new.
Galatians 3:28; 2 Corinthians 5:17.
In Lynn Margulis and Dorian Sagan's book on the evolution of species (Acquiring Genomes
) they question the Neo-Darwinian theory of speciation and suggest that speciation is in fact most often, and mostly, the result of symbiogenesis (p.12). They concede that often the symbiosis between the the two parties to the relationship is a relationship between a parasite and a host, and that though often times the parasite will kill the host, ending the relationship (resulting in death to the parasite), sometimes the interrelationship becomes, "convivial to the point where neither organism exists without the other . . . These mergers, long-term biological fusions beginning as symbiosis, are the engine of species evolution
Parasitism is a close relationship between species, where one organism, the parasite, lives on or inside another organism, the host . . . and is adapted structurally to this way of life. . . There are six major parasitic strategies of exploitation of animal hosts, namely parasitic castration, directly transmitted parasitism (by contact), trophically-transmitted parasitism (by being eaten), vector-transmitted parasitism, parasitoidism, and micropredation. One major axis of classification concerns invasiveness: an endoparasite lives inside the host's body; an ectoparasite lives outside, on the host's surface.
The Talmud claims that a female's "passion" is insider her, while a male's is outside him. In his cult-classic, Sex and Character
, Otto Weininger implies that the female is indwelt by the demon (the majority of the clitoris, which is the female analogue to the male-organ, exists inside the female body), while it's an ectoparasite so far as the male body is concerned (it's attached and dangles on the outside of the body). To the extent that the original human's genitalia was what we now consider "female" (now that there's duality of gender) we can say that if Genesis 2:21 is the initial creation or graft of the newfangled organ that initially creates gender-duality, i.e., the phallus, then the phallus is an ectoparasite that lives outside the temple of the prototype human body and which uses "parasitic-castration" (and thereafter "directly-transmitted-parasitism") as the strategy for parasiting the original human body (the first case of this parasitic-castration
, and directly-transmitted-parasitism,
leading to the conception and birth of the ******* Cain).
Parasitic castration is the strategy, by a parasite, of blocking reproduction by its host, completely or in part, to its own benefit. This is one of six major strategies within parasitism.
How perfect is it then that Abraham uses ritual-castration
to undo the parasitic-castration
related the the deviled-flesh that all the phallic-cults in the ancient world either demonized or worshiped as a demon lord. More importantly, if Genesis 2:21, is the graft whereby the phallus first becomes an ectoparasite, as the Talmud and Jewish midrashim in general toy with throughout midrash, then the original human presumably possessed an original, non-phallic, mechanism for reproduction which was side-tracked in the very beginning by the original desecration of the human body (the graft of the ectoparasite: the phallus, Gen. 2:21). Naturally this implies that the actual firstborn of the first actual human was supposed to be born of a virgin (a biological temple with an intact veil).
How perfect then that Abraham's first spiritual offspring is born of a virgin (whose hymenal veil is intact until her firstborn's birth rather than his conception) long after he (Abraham) ritually castrates the ectoparasite from his body thereby telling all those with circumcised ears precisely what happened in the garden, but which wasn't, nevertheless, written, in the written writ of the Torah. Abraham's covenant-founding ritual is an eschatological-afflatus (a chok
חק, or plural chukkim
חקים) which must quite logically be retroactively applied; its meaning is covered-up by the very fore skene of the ritual until the event foretold in the ritual retroactively tells the ritual's fortune.
The orthodox Jewish/Christian claim that the "male" is the first, or initial gender, is correct only technically, semantically, logically. Which is to say that although the woman is the first human (the first human --ha-adam
--is a woman), the fact that this first human is a singularity logically implies the woman isn't the first "gender." The male is the first instance of gender-differentiation in flesh since the creation of the phallus instantaneously creates gender (male and female). Ergo, the male is the first "gender" and the creative instance of gender-differentiation, while the woman is the first human, and the original body-type of the original human.