Thursday, April 21, 2016

Mothers and 'Suns'

Probably the most absurd and contrived pseudo-relationship that Jim Baker devised within The Source Family was that of the Mother/Sun.  Jim Baker referred to any man who joined The Brotherhood of The Source as being his 'son', but he also likened a man to the sun shining life-giving rays on to woman, whom he equated with the moon having no light of her own only capable of reflecting her man or sun's light and so he referred to the men as both his sons and suns.  So, I decided to use suns in the title, since the mother/sun relationship contrived by Father Yod within The Source Family was hardly a maternal one, because I'm not talking about the relationship between a woman and her biological child or son; but a spurious one concocted by Father Yod between the women in the family whom he gave the title of mother; comprised of the women he was having sex with on an ongoing basis whom he also began to refer to as his 'wives', and the men in his family deemed as his suns.  When Jim Baker decided to adopt and introduce the ceremonial 'sex magick' that he had gleaned from reading Aleister Crowley; he also decided to designate his 'wives'/any of the women whom he started to have sex with from the pool of women within 'the family' as mothers, whose primary purpose was to perform the ceremonial 'sex magick' called qudosh with any one of the men, or suns.  Yes, that was exactly what life was like, being in The Source Family.  Every single woman could have her relationship usurped and undermined at any moment by Father Yod assigning one of his women deemed a mother to engage in ceremonial 'sex magick' with another woman's partner, husband or father of her child.  Absolutely no relationship was respected, but rather continuously transgressed by the often unsettling directives laid down by our self-appointed 'earthly spiritual father', Father Yod because he believed that the role of women a subservient one, as quoted from several passages in his book Liberation,"the Woman's whole life revolves around, and is dependent upon, her Man", and "He(man) is Her security....Her Life....Her reason for BEING", and "the woman's way to Liberation is to serve and inspire Her Man", and "The perfect Woman is both Wife and Mother, to Her Man."  The same kinds of postulations made about women found in other male-dominated faith-based belief systems throughout history; belief systems that believe women are subordinate to men.  Oh, Jim Baker loved to give the appearance of treating women as though they were 'the mothers of all living' espousing how all women should be respected and not lusted after; yet his own behavior and actions appeared to always contradict his own words, and always seemed more self-serving designed to accommodate his own lustful desires masked by the pretense of attaining 'spirit.'  But Father Yod made a distinction between the women labeled as mothers, and those labeled as angels, because the title of mother per Father Yod which had nothing to do with the mothers of babies and small children; implied that the women he was having sex with had a higher status than the rest of the women in The Source Family as though they had received some sort of imaginary transmission (or rather emission) from their seemingly divinely ordained godman Father Yod/Yahowha.  I felt the role of mother as assigned by Father Yod completely undermined the women who were either married or who had formed close, intimate relationships or partnerships with men in 'the family', because those given the title of mother were to be treated and viewed as being special or above everyone else; a belief based on the deluded and erroneous magical thinking that was the mainstay of The Source Family.  Because every aspect of life in Jim Baker's Source Family was originated and fueled by magical thinking along with talismanic ritual belief and repetition.  None of the women who were having sex with Jim Baker were any higher or more evolved or enlightened than those women who did not have sex with the man.  The entire thing was complete and utter poppycock devised and implemented by Father Yod in his ever-increasing desire to control the man/woman relationships within his so-called 'family' by manipulating the sexual behavior of absolutely everyone!  Many of the women who comprised The Source Family lost respect for the men whom they were involved with, due to Father Yod's contrived mother/sun maladaptation.  If a woman was labelled as being an angel within The Source Family, she was seen as having a lesser social position; which is also why some women clamored around 'Yahowha' for the distinction of being called one of 'his women' and given the title of mother.  An angel was not seen as equal in status to that of their counterpart the mother.  I saw the mother and angel distinctions devised by Father Yod create discord, confusion and feelings of disempowerment among the women in 'the family' whose husbands and partners could be randomly 'scooped up' (a cutesy 'source family' term meaning a woman initiating sex with a sun) by a mother assigned by Father YodWomen were expected to acquiesce and standby/allow the men in their lives to be regularly 'scooped up' by their designated mother to engage in ceremonial 'sex magick'.  Yet, Father Yod absolved his own angel, Makushla from having to serve any of the other men/suns or perform 'sex magic' with any of them; so she was given a special dispensation and given a new title of mother/angel and appointed and anointed as being his very own special mother/angel.  Although, Father Yod only allowed Makushla to be called his mother/angel elevating her status within the entire group above all the rest, to such an extent that she was seen as being his spiritual equivalent to be showered and treated with the same reverence and respect, as shown to him.  I believe that the ritualistic 'sex magic' that Jim Baker expected the women to perform with the suns in The Source Family transgressed the personal boundaries of all the women who comprised 'the family' putting us all in stressful, uncertain, compromising and sexually unprotected situations.  Because Father Yod used his power and control as the 'spiritual' leader and ersatz father of the entire group to mandate that both men and women obey and comply with his 'teachings' that he believed would lead to a higher 'spiritual' consciousness.  But, the only woman whose status was elevated within The Source Family was that of Father Yod's own mother/angel; whereas the rest of the women were expected to perform something which his own mother/angel was exempt from having to perform.  It's no wonder that the one woman designated as being 'Yahowha's mother/angel' was left with pleasant memories of being in The Source Family, because she was the only one who had a get-out-of-jail-free card.  Only Father Yod's mother/angel was exempt from having to perform ceremonial 'sex magic' with any number of men within The Source Family; nor did she have to take care of the children during 'children's duty', or do laundry, cleaning or any of the other menial chores performed by the other women within The Source Family; but instead was treated like a queen being pampered and waited on and afforded the luxury of accompanying Father Yod to Europe and India.  Yet, there are some who proclaim that life in The Source Family was 'ahead of its time' and that it was representative of a new 'aquarian age'.  The faux mother/sun relationships devised by Father Yod gave a few women status and perceived power over other women and undermined the man/woman relationships that had already been established within The Source FamilyThe public can now get a better understanding of why so many men and women who were in The Source Family are embarrassed by having been part of such a group and want nothing to do with any of it feeling only degrees of regret and embarrassment for having followed Jim Baker to the extent they did and for having willingly participated in what most consider to have been deviant, sexual practices.  Because the reality was that the only relationship that Father Yod treated as sacrosanct within The Source Family was that of his own with Makushla, but where none of the rules or expected behaviors for the rest of the family members applied to her, because he elevated her above all others.  For me, Jim Baker's behavior resembled more that of Henry VIII minus the beheadings; than that of a man claiming to be the "earthly spiritual father' of a new age.  Because, removing and replacing one woman for another whom he had become sexually enamored; showing favoritism and allowing special treatment and luxuries not afforded to others certainly applied to life in Henry VIII's court, as well as in Jim Baker's court or rather cult.

Tuesday, April 5, 2016

Copyright Infringement and 'Source Family Music'

I met with a lawyer last week who specialized in music copyright law, where I obtained the above copy of the copyright law under section 202 which applies to all of the albums that were produced at The Father House circa 1973-74; who informed me that 'possession of a tape or recording does not automatically transfer any copyrights to the songs or material', which was 'music to my ears', especially since so many other people have felt they have the right to enter into agreements to license, distribute and sell albums that were produced while The Source Family was in existence; in order to make a profit for themselves from albums which contain original songs written and performed by a few of the individuals who were in 'the family' at the time!  Copyright Law reads that as soon as a person's song is recorded on to tape, it automatically conveys copyright of that song to the individual who wrote and performed that song; not to any individual who comes into possession of the 'object' ie album or tape.  Per the copyright law of this country, simply having recordings or tapes in ones possession does not convey any 'rights' to the songs on that medium; especially where no signed contract or agreement has been put into place.  The albums that are being marketed and sold labeled as 'Source Family Music' are in reality albums where no 'mechanical' license or agreements were EVER put into place; until not long after a 'box set' of all the albums was released where a couple of former family members appointed themselves as 'president' and 'vice president' of their recently (supposedly) dissolved 'source foundation' were able to inveigle a couple of the individual songwriters/musicians into signing over their 'rights' to the two people heading the 'source foundation' giving said 'president' and 'vice-president' the rights to sell and license their original songs or performances; but these 'source foundation' agreements were not all-inclusive, because a couple of the songwriters and musicians refused to sign anything!  Yet, somehow these same two individuals felt that conveyed to them the 'rights' to sell and license ALL the songs contained on all of the albums produced circa 1973-74.  But, several of the songwriters and musicians who contributed to the albums produced back in and around 1974 at The Father House in Los Angeles, never signed one of these 'source foundation' contracts, or any licensing agreements with any of the parties who continue to sell what are called 'source family' albums!  In my mind, it has all been a huge copyright infringement; because of the attitudes of entitlement exhibited by a few individuals who believed they could make money from the sale of the music made by individuals other than themselves who they shared space with while being in The Source Family over forty years ago.  I believe that once and for all, the inherent copyrights of each individual's songs and/or performances need to be looked at closely and examined, and administered to correctly where legal licensing agreements are put into place with either the artist themselves, or with their respective heirs, if that artist is deceased; rather than anymore of the continued wholesale sales of albums being marketed and sold as 'Source Family Music'.  Anyone currently selling albums under the banner name of 'Source Family Music'; people who believe they have carte blanche permission to distribute and sell albums which contain original songs written and performed by actual individuals really should investigate and take a closer look, rather than just accepting the belief that all of the songs were 'made by the group' which somehow invalidates the claims of any individual songwriter, singer or musician; any persons who are presently involved with the sales of any of the albums that were produced during the brief period of time at the Father House in Los Angeles circa 1974 really need to determine whether or not they actually have licensing agreements in place with all of the individual songwriters whose songs are featured on those albums, rather than just taking the word of a couple of individuals who have wanted to profit from the sales of the music, and who have also presented themselves as being 'representatives' of the individual songwriters and musicians.  Because in the 'real' world, an individual artist/songwriter is acknowledged and compensated for the use of any of their songs.  None of the original songs on ANY of the albums being marketed and sold as 'Source Family Music' belong to ANYONE but the person(s) who wrote the songs!  But, a very bad precedent was set back in the nineties when Sky Saxon and another former family member took it upon themselves to enter into a deal with a Japanese record label to release a 'box set' of all of the albums that had been made during 'the family'; a deal which netted them both thousands of dollars; but where nothing was paid to any of the individual songwriters or musicians who performed on the albums in this 'box set'; I believe this action set into motion what I see as a continued 'pleasant form' of piracy where other former 'Source Family' members saw an opportunity for themselves to also profit off music which they had nothing whatsoever to do with!  It is my belief, that it is long overdue that things are put right in the continued licensing and sales of original songs contained on all of the albums deemed as 'Source Family Music', along with the correct recognition given to the individual songwriters, singers and musicians of those albums.

**Some people have been under the impression that since none of the songs recorded back in 1973-74 were copyrighted at the time through the US Copyright Office, that it meant those songs fell into 'public domain' which per the attached article 'Orphan Works' states otherwise: "Under current copyright law, if you make a recording, that work is automatically protected from the moment of its creation until 70 years after your death.  If you sign a record label contract in which your copyrights are transferred to the label (which is the typically the case), the record label owns your copyrights for the term of life + 70 years, if you do not exercise your termination rights. If someone else wanted to license or re-release your recording during that time, he/she would need to identify and locate you – or your record label – to ask permission. After the life +70 years term, your work moves into the public domain, in which no permission is needed to use your work."
" https://futureofmusic.org/article/fact-sheet/orphan-works


Here is another site that addresses what falls into public domain, which states the following: "It is important to emphasize that copyright protection is not the only form of legal protection for creative works. Although a work may be in the public domain for copyright purposes, rights to the material may be protected under various legal theories such as trademark or unfair competition laws (which protect against confusingly similar usage by another); an individual’s right of privacy (the right to be left alone); or a person’s right of publicity (an individual’s exclusive right to benefit commercially from his or her name, voice, photograph or likeness)." http://www.copylaw.com/new_articles/PublicDomain.html