I’m not quite sure of your first point since you inadvertently included a double negative. (Are you aware that Firefox includes a spell checker which I find quite helpful though I don’t think it catches double negatives.)
I’m not an archeologist so the significant points about Neanderthal for me is that they coexisted with Cro Magnon in Europe for a significant length of time. Cro Magnon was artistic from the cave drawings while there is little or no evidence Neanderthal was. A significant Neanderthal grave was found that contained an elderly man with a wizened arm, leading to speculation regarding why they would have supported a man who couldn’t carry his own weight, as it were. Also significant is the fact that Neanderthal had a larger brain than we. I think it has been recently discovered that they did have a crucial bone that allows for speech. Whether or not they had a religious impulse is speculative but since no cave art has been found in their caves this bears on the Garden of Eden feature of most significance to me, that of the writers view that objective awareness accompanied the arrival of the distinction between good and evil. The lack of cave art suggests to me that Neanderthal was a pre Garden of Eden creature if you will forgive me putting it that way.
Regarding your second point, this is the crucial feature of my philosophy. One has to convince oneself of the opposition of the sexes to understand it which is a hurdle for most. After that it is necessary to assign discernable attributes. Approaching it from the most basic level, physics postulates the existence of a form of matter known as anti matter. In fact I believe it has been observed in a laboratory experiment. The interesting thing about anti matter is that when combined with matter they put each other out, as it were. In other words the physical universe was created from nothing suggesting our conception of nothing is flawed. Anyway, everything that exists must have an opposite to exist at all in such a place which includes humans, I have an oriental painting of two horses, one black and one white, eyeing each other. The artist was representing this aspect of reality, in my view.
After satisfying oneself about the oppositional nature of the universe and realizing that all entities have attributes (features that define them) the next task is to settle on attributes of the sexes. You will appreciate that one is getting into controversial territory here, since people tend to identify with their gender and also admire these attributes whichever gender one associates them with. This isn’t really a problem since gender is both a physical and mental reality. That is, ones mentality is to some extent under one’s control so that a physically masculine person can emphasize his feminine side mentally and vice versa if that is important to them. The attributes settled on will be a judgement question and different people may come to different conclusions but the oppositional nature of reality requires that they be opposites.
My method of identifying these attributes was to imagine the likely scenario when nature invented sexual reproduction since these basic attributes flow from that stage in the development of life on Earth. After that it is necessary to think of the ideological implications of this fact.
The development of this philosophy has been satisfying to me because of its ability to make comprehensible the nature of many of the problems facing modern man which I can’t go into here.


Meden Agan
[homepage.mac.com]