For one to answer this question they would have to be objective about reality. For most people, if not all, the search for love is at the core of their existence. Whether love comes from children, a lover, family or friends is irrelevant. The key part here is for one to recognize that whenever the concept of love is involved, sex will soon dominate either directly or indirectly.
I don't mean to be a cynic or a provocateur. There is something cruel but also profound when it comes to this basic realization about sex. We acknowledge our design, our flawed organs that are subject to disease and decay, but neglect to take into full account how the whole process of sex unravels meaning in our lives.
Any hopeless romantic will simply switch off at the thought of their lover's not having sexual organs. No matter how society has imprinted us with specific narratives, at heart, we are still bound by the same instinctive mechanisms. Let us not forget that love and romance was a rather recent invention. Before the era of Romanticism (where love flourished as a meme) choosing a partner based on romantic feelings was considered foolish and in most cases damaging.
Marriage, the pinnacle of today's love narrative, was valued to be up and foremost a business deal and nothing more. Romance was considered to be at best a delusion that was caused by physiological imbalances that lasted as much as a prolonged infection. Fast forward a couple of centuries and into the evolution of neurobiology and we realize that pre-romance societies had the right idea.
If one examines sex as a standalone act they will soon find out that it defines everything around them. Men compete with their counterparts about who has the biggest and strongest car — which functions more or less like an extension of one's dick. A wise old woman once told me "Women don't dress for men, they dress for other women" — which again demonstrates how individuals compete for sexual attention. Even the modest of all family men, bound by tradition and perhaps religion, will want to reproduce his genes as much as possible. They will just use a different narrative.
Whether ones motivations revolve around money, religion, power, fame, family, career or even friends, sex at the core of it all. Everyone has noticed how dear long life friends seem to disappear once they have found their special someone. The reason this occurs is simply because friendship circles are nothing more than the tier 1 phase for finding a potential partner. Once the task is complete then the group loses its meaning. Even if those friends who do choose to remain in the circle, they soon find out that they have rather interesting sexual drama with one another.
Philosophers and religious leaders alike always tried to explain the nature of sex through stories of symbolism and higher meaning. Whether nature takes the role of "mother" or a given God has sex with himself, every single story revolves around this very act of reproduction. Even sociologists and psychologists, socially glorified for taking the concept a bit further, soon find out that a society revolves around copulation and competition and nothing else. This is how societies are created and preserved after all and there is not much romanticism to add to this.
There are winners and there are losers in sex. Always. Eventually you either fuck or get fucked and this notion can be taken both allegorically and pragmatically.
Even the most humble of us never adopt one of the 16,000 children that die every day from hunger. We rather prefer to raise the random genetic conglomerate that will result from a given person that happened to be in proximity in our life. This is how and why we made up the narrative of love. Love is selfish and conditional for one's genetic preservation. If I ask you to love everybody the same would be identical to asking you to fuck everybody the same. The concept would have lost its meaning.
Rationality is immune to sex. This is how mother nature has us at her fingertips and we always seem to be helpless on the matter. We are here for a specific purpose; to preserve our genes. Even those who believe that they have escaped the biological game, will make sure to stay in the "gene code" somehow by striving to put their name on a book's spine or something similar. A meta-fuck if you like.
Whatever choices we think we make, whatever toys we invent, at the core of it all is sex. When life is examined from such a profound perspective, everything else seems to be shallow and pointless. In many societies sex is kept private and often treated as inappropriate for this very reason. We hide its true nature because its bitch-slapping realism scares us. We want to believe that we are something more than petty animals humping each other in an elaborate park of hamster wheels. But are we?
I've been thinking about this a lot recently. There are two things that come to mind when thinking about the desire for sex:
The best way to push your "self" into immortality is to do something so big for humanity, that you exist inside other people's minds as "great". I learned about a doctor in India who restored vision to thousands of poor people who could not afford it. They literally could see the sunset because of one human. This doctor also had rich patients who paid full price for his services. So, he used the money from the rich people to restore vision of the poor. Those people whose vision was restored will think of him, preserving his legacy....
The other thing I want to mention is that I have another reason to want sex that is not connected to extension of my genes:
For me personally, I desire that feeling of ego death. When merging temporarily for the first time with another, part of my ego dies, and it's this merging, this confusion of identity, this wonderful loss of control, and this confusion of "who is who", this escape from the prison of my own mind is what I'm after. I cannot get this feeling on my own (no matter how much fantasy I concoct), and this is the thing that is driving me........
I think you cannot fully talk about what sex is like after one has successfully bred unless that is a hard reality for you. I suppose you, @kyriacos could imagine what it's like, but you cannot feel what it's like. For me, after I physically passed on my genes, I noticed that my interest in men has greatly diminished. I no longer create the fantasies that once used to be my mental bread and butter. They only seem made for one thing, and since I no longer want to have children, their appeal is not as enticing.
However, I will not deny that I still want this ego-death experience. The other thing that most people don't talk about it, is the fact that most men are not skilled as far as properly stimulating females. It is a fact that I end up being the one who gets myself off during sex as I know exactly what is necessary. This is a side issue, but one that's important because it also makes finding a mate more or less unnecessary. The only thing that I miss is this feeling of temporary ego-death, which can never be fully realized, mostly because it only exists during the first few encounters, and seems to devolve into boring habits as time goes on.
The quest for new experiences with new reactions, combined with elevated social status and more power is I suppose what drives me, but the prospect of accidentally becoming pregnant is such a negative idea (because I don't want any more kids), that abstaining from sex is the preferred choice.
There's probably an element of mental illness for sure within me, as I have carried some of these maladaptive behaviors with me for my entire life. The cycle tends to be: avoidance of forming relationships, denial of sexual impulses up until the moment that I become crazed with irrational sexual urges, that form and create temporary sexual encounters that are mostly meaningless.
Nikola Tesla did, I think successfully sublimate his sexuality. He was a textbook case of OCD, and he, as far as I have read, didn't have sex with anyone. I do wonder if he masturbated though.
Lovely response stellabelle.
This. This is central to everything. We are mostly sexual today because we don't really get the implications unless we breed. This is how sex has transcended into different kinds of meaning — even if that is denial.
There are those who masturbate and those who don't admit they masturbate.
Tesla was a germaphobe. One could say that he avoided sex because he feared infection. This is why I emphasized that denial of sex is more or less pathology.
Yes, and I share his germaphobia. I went years obsessing over the idea of contracting STDs, and this fear prevented me from years of sex. I suppose that is why I am drawn to Tesla's mental disorders, because I share in some of them. I had OCD pretty bad in my twenties, and also went through a "not touching doorknob" phase as well. And then there is my self-imposed celibacy, of 7 years, which I see perhaps needs to end. But the fear of germs is still with me, the germ I fear the most: sperm.
I have always worn my pathology on my sleeve. It makes me stand out, and could potentially attract someone from far away, one that I'll be too scared to fuck.
With that, I will say that I absolutely cannot wait for my breeding ability to end.
I'd like to return to my pre-pubscent self, one that cannot be impregnated. Then, the real magic could begin as I have found that a significant number of men are horny enough not to care if I'm old. That's one thing that is guaranteed.....young men, who want to get laid, are plentiful. And some of them like to be bossed around because finding a woman who both knows herself and is not afraid to be aggressive is kind of a rare thing.
I think even writing this post is an attempt to get laid. It just occurred to me that your post is accurate on every level.
I would suggest you to read 'The Denial Of Death' from Ernest Becker.
There is so much of you that can be answered and self -discovered it will be a pity if I just spout it here based on my on interpretation. You will thank me later.
I didn't read your post because I'm too distracted
Or addicted? Addiction enslaves and makes us incapable of doing the things in life that realize us fully. Because I'm not addicted, I am able to appreciate your post. Thanks, and an upvote for your sincerity.
@kyriacos and I go way back (on Steemit). I like to f*uck with him occasionally.
Always good to see to you here.
I do wonder what you will write about next.
oh, and yeah, I am an addict, but I don't do drugs anymore.
i'm pretty much addicted to sex stella!
@kyriacos
in regards to talking about the nature of everything...one could also equally argue everything is about Poop. Sooner or later everything and everyone becomes Poop, we're always pooping or getting pooped...eternally :P All is future poop.
Perhaps the real nature of the universe is simply WYSIWYG.? Or maybe it's sex. god i like sex
From an ego driven existence I think you are spot on. However if you move beyond the matrix paradigm, sex becomes a largely irrelevant motivator. Especially if you already have children and no longer have any aspirations for reproduction.
I'd counter that the fear of death(nothingness) is more powerful than the desire to reproduce, however between those 2 you can pretty much sum up the total motivation of humanity.
Great post and glad to see something that isn't about crypto or steem or pretty women getting more than $10 bucks on this platform. There may be hope that steemit doesn't devolve into another social network/fake news/ego showcase cesspool after all.
Sex though is not only about reproduction but also pleasure and social dominance. All these traits evolved synchronously to facilitate the overall function of sex.
Isn't the fear of death though rooted in sex and vice versa?
I only try to post original content if you check my blog. Don't worry. I am pretty controversial :)
This article is fascinating but particularly speaks to me because as of 2 years ago just about sex became unbearable painful for me due to a disease known as interstitial cystitis.
At first, my deep seated desire to continue seeking romance and dating was so strong I endured some painful encounters. I tried dating without giving the other person sex letting them know upfront this would need to be the case. That didn't work because most people are not asexual. I am not even asexual technically.
Well the thing is as more time went by the less I desired sex or romance and now I am far more productive and no longer waste such a large amount of my time worrying about finding a partner. I guess there is some part of me that feels lacking though if I am being honest.
So, it has me thinking a lot about the reasons I care in the first place and this article shines a lot of light on that for me.
Now that I don't desire to or have sex I definitely see the fact that it is everywhere. Something I really didn't much notice or think about before.
Also, obviously my objective stand-point could change if one day the pain was gone. I am sure I would relatively quickly revert back to a humping animal. XD
thank you for sharing this. i too had a girlfriend with this problem. she had surgery and went away. i can understand where you are coming from
Oh, and I must point out that since getting out of the sex game I have actually obsessively created art and published books and obsessed over creating a legacy.
It's either a fuck or a meta-fuck. Lol :D
Yeah, I got shamefully progressive with that one
Just musing:
Haven't there always been a few members in any group who are motivated in a different way and serve the group because they have their "minds free" from continuing their genetic line and the associated competition?
I refer to "holy men", homosexuals, some very dedicated and single-goal oriented scientists, etc, all those who can't or won't procreate and by not doing so, nor competing to do so, have the time and energy to focus on other things that help the group they are in.
And if there are, maybe we all have at least a bit of that in us.
Nop. I neglected to expand on these individuals but here it is here;
Holy men suppress their sexuality and/or sacrifice it for the greater good of their community that abides to the narrative of sex under a religious context.
Homosexuals seem "off" but they too are actually more obsessed with sex even though reproduction is not involved. Sex is not only for procreation but also for pleasure and dominance (see prisons for example). Also homosexuals before the nuclear family (recent invention) used to live with group families like the rest of us and helped in raising the kids.
Even single oriented scientists like Newton who was presumably "asexual" there was definitely a pathology to him. One cannot be simply asexual without being sick, dead or dying. It is my belief that Newton suffered from a severe form of autism.
If holy men suppress their sexuality for the greater good of the group, how then is everything in their behaviour motivated by sex?
Next you define being asexual as a pathology, that comes quite close to a "no true Scotsman" argument, or a circular argument. It exists, so why is it a pathology? And even if it were a pathology, it still exists as a counterexample.
I still think these examples make it a bit harder to see sex, or at least continuation of genes, as the sole and universal motivator for everyone.
It is, of course, very important, but a universal explanation for all everyone does, well, I'm unconvinced. But that doesn't matter, I wouldn't have thought about it if you had not posted this.
Holy men don't just advocate about all people. They advocate for their own group, own religion and at the core of it all is for them to grow in numbers. Also, let us not kid ourselves. "Holy men' that supposedly deny their sexuality do enjoy it, just behind close doors. Also they are often homosexuals (as it has been demonstrated many times). Even he denial of sex, and thus turning into a holy man, comes down to be about sex.
I believe at least that all healthy organisms have a healthy sexual function. This is why and how they come to exist. If one doesn't "have it" then they are most likely sick. If it is a choice (egg/chicken thing) then again, denial of sex makes one choices revolve around it. (e.g betterment of humanity).
Also, even if your speculation is correct the outliers you mention are to be expected in any species. Nothing is ever 100% is nature. That's the whole point.
While certainly not being one of them, I've definitely met people with massively differing sexual realities. I definitely know a couple of people that just don't give a shit about sex.
Yes, or so it has been until very recently. By very recently, I mean 4,280,000,000 BC to 1950 AD. It's up to us to make it (or not) more.
I don't see artificial wombs and immorality booths coming to the scene anytime soon.
In my opinion, yes sex means a lot in life. But it's not the main goal in life or the purpose of life directly. When you're getting old sex start to mean less. You start looking at your life and see if you had lived a good life. Have you been a good man. Have you done everything you wanted/could. And do you have people around you, that you can share you thoughts, memories, feelings with.
This is the whole point. It is never the direct goal. It's transcendence into everything that gives meaning is.
Rather, everything that we perceive as meaningful has stemmed from functions that promoted reproduction and gene preservation.
it goes full circle.
to say romance is a recent invention,seems you are going through life with blinkers, romance is what keeps people together and has done for centuries,today's generation don't have as much imagination or passion.
But it is. Romance did not exist 900 years ago. It might be the norm today but it wasn't in the past. People had sex. They understood only lust. Romance more or less is a form of manipulation and hypocrisy. You choose to act a certain way that you know the other will appreciate. It is more or less like theater.
history is a lie ,so i wouldn't believe what is said to be the norm 300 years ago.
well, you chose to believe romance much the same way. its just you don't realize that you have been indoctrinated by it and came to believe that is real.
i just go by my feelings ,been in a relationship for a while ,but the romance goes out the window after a few years,but i don't do anything to please anybody,they earn my respect not demand it,the whole idea of doing something to please someone sends shivers up my spine.
Well, now you start getting my point and admitting what I explain in the post.
How do you know?
Read this
http://www.ox.ac.uk/news/arts-blog/did-love-begin-middle-ages
I've always wondered how humans would act sexually totally unconditioned by any kind of authority....I see so much confusion regarding sex and sexuality...so I now go by this law ...DO NO HARM...
Can you imagine that?
Not really. Part of the reason is because sex and violence are intertwined in human culture. There is a reason most women get wet watching men fight for them. There is a reason men strive to appear masculine and socially dominant.
Violence and Sex go hand in hand. Before the introduction of nuclear families (brought by religions) only a handful got to have sex and copulate. Most kings and lords had almost all of the women as concubines.
Other species function much the same way. A few males copulate with the most females. If one wants a share, one has to fight. In our society it might not happen today with direct violence but rather economic, social and political means.
No, we are not.
what are we then?
"But are we?". I answered this question. No, I think we are nothing more than "petty animals humping each other in an elaborate park of hamster wheels". But I guess it's all about perspective. I'm a bit nihilist, so I see it that way. I bet Science would agree.
it does.
Great article by the way!
OMG, Freud lives! And, I believe, in a reincarnated and higher evolved form in one steemer poster in our midst!
Sigmund Shlomo Freud, inventor/creator of psychoanalysis, also saw the universe and humankind all turning on the one fulcrum of SEX! He could see the bright white belfry of a country church, but not understand its symbolism of purity, of Heaven and of God; he'd understand only a phallus pricking the sky in a fertility rite to pagan gods. Or he could see a pristine lake teeming with life surrounded by immaculate white mountain peaks, and not understand anything but that these innocent things were quivering with desire to get royally laid!
If "beauty is in the eye of the beholder", might not lust be in the...whatever of the lascivious? Now there's a philosophical conundrum for all of us; both the less excitable and continent (more or less) among us, and also those among us endowed with a pyrotechnical libido, always charged and ready to go.
For one not trying to be provocative, our poster has provoked quite well. I can't wait for his next post. But first he would be wise to have a long run and an ice cold shower before all his world catches fire!
For such provocativeness, I've given an upvote.
For those interested, here are some unflattering takes on Freud's psychoanalysis and its occult connections.
https://www.henrymakow.com/freud_sabbatean.html
http://www.whale.to/b/mullins49.html
But is is revolved about sex. Being condescending about it doesn't change the facts of evolution (which I know you are in denial).
Who really can understand fully fables that turned into religion. Why would one base their entire philosophy around an alleged supreme being that created everything for their pleasure, putting as around so it can be entertained?
The entire world operates on sex. I am stating an observable fact. You are the one posting fables that were written by goat herders 2000 years ago.
You pose an interesting hypothosis. I belive the following video corresponds & correlates to said theory... please do the video justice and watch it to its conclusion.
Control your pollywag, or it will control you!
Or put another way,
Are you a man with a prick, or a prick with a man?
It's the desire that enslaves us and our society as a whole to center all our reality on sex. But it's an addiction, like drug addiction, alcoholism, and other ingrained self-destructive patterns of behavior. It's NOT NORMAL.
I understand the video you posted as saying that all society lusts, burns, craves for sex as is if it were more urgent to have than the air we breath. And those who do not get it are misfits doomed to die; and maybe even deserve to die, for not being sufficiently sexual. (I don't believe that!)
But it's a lie based on the addiction to sex that pervades and penetrates everywhere, through porno and other exposures to sex too early in life before we have a chance to know better. Sex addiction has become the norm, and that is abnormal. It's something being done to us precisely to destroy us. That's why I put the links (in one of the above replies) to articles on Sigmund Freud, long dead though his influence remains with us, addicting us, perverting us and killing us.
Convince yourself that you should not be the slave of your sex impulses and you'll be one first step out of this death trap. Can't do it? Pray to God for a miracle. Many of us need it.
On second thought, I better put the links on Freud here:
https://www.henrymakow.com/freud_sabbatean.html
http://www.whale.to/b/mullins49.html
I could call your religiosity an addiction as well. An addiction that can also kill and killed plenty of people throughout ages.
Why is sex a lie? You have sex, you get pleasure. In the same way some others pray and get pleasure. We have biological mechanisms that reward some actions. Again, a fact.
I am not saying that sex is the end to everything. All I am saying is that society clearly is unable to escape from it since it defines what it is to be a living breathing organism that reproduces on this earth.
Also please tone it down with the condescension. You are the one with an imaginary friend much like Santa. You have no evidence, no basis. You just accuse others to make your point.
This is very poor way to make an argument.
Sorry. "Religiosity" is an undefined term, so far as I'm concerned. It's so misused and abused that there's no point using it. It makes more sense to talk of sex in terms of toilet training: when/where/with whom should sex be had, and when not.
Sex is intimately connected with life, and life is not a triviality. On earth, I think human life is the highest value. Life and its conduit, sex, are on the same plain in dignity. Lack of respect for the one is lack of respect for the other. Both must be honored.
IT IS NOT PERMISSIBLE TO TREAT SEX AS A FUNCTION OF PLEASURE. What do you think of this: If killing a man gives me pleasure, should I be allowed to murder him?
That, at bottom, is your argument. Show me I'm wrong! Is that how you want to argue? Or am I being "condescending" for asking?
YOU MUST CHANGE.
Love, Apollonius.
If it wasn't then your God wouldn't have made it feel so good.
Well, God did it. Actually in the Bible it explains how some times is justifiable
You have a loooong way to go in regards to debating religion. Before you accuse others of bad deeds check your own magical book first.
Where/when did God kill man for pleasure?
Seriously, are you a Freudian? Your article is Freudian as it interprets everything as sexual. All that exists wants to be screwed, right?
Wiped the entire planet with a flood, even the innocents because he didn't like how some where behaving in his little creation
No I am not. I just explain things from a biological perspective based on evolutionary theory. I know you don't believe in that either so there is no reason elaborating more about it.
Forget about complaining about "my God", "my religion". I feel weakness on your part: you're reaching desperately for a straw man with which to cover your rear end.
In your article, you propose a pan-sexualist interpretation of "reality", implying a promiscuous outlook on life. I think that is evil because of the moral and physical damage that this world view brings with it: pleasure is implicitly chosen as a value superior to human life, which leads perforce to mass murder (STDs, abortion, trafficking in human beings and children, trading human organs, the destruction of families and youth, all self-perpetuating as more and more people become addicted to sex, yes, zombies of sex.)
No where does God come into this complaint. The evil of which I accuse this pansexualism and of which you too must be accused is not played out except here on earth. That your Theology or someone else's Theology also condemns pansexualism does not enter this conversation.
So I accuse you of pansexualism/Freudianism, and connect this with the wide spread destruction of human life and happiness on earth. Your reaching out to God makes me feel you're running away from the issue and covering your back with this STRAW MAN of "my God" and "my religion".
Do you think you could stay on theme? You're accused. Defend yourself or change, for the good of humanity, both yours and that of the rest of us.
sais the guy who tries to connect me with Freud with every other line...
now THAT's what i call a strawman...trying to connect your version of ethos (your religion) to a general standard about the entire planet.
People on earth have never been happy and more prosperous.
My position is the evolutionary theory. There are mountains of evidence.
sex is natural.
couldn't be anything else
But sex addiction is perversion leading to death and social dysfunction.
life is a sexually transmitted disease, always leading to death
Do you really think that life is a disease, tantamount to death? So then (it would follow that) the good that is life is no better than the evil that is death:
good = life = death = evil;
Therefore, good = evil?
Or maybe you think that death is BETTER than life? In that case, Adolph Hitler is more of a good person and "saint" than Mother Teresa of Calcutta. After all, he destroyed many evils (murdering many human beings, ending evil lives), while Mother Teresa not only committed many, many evils (saving human lives, which I suppose only for argument's sake, were evils), but she "perversely" went further, and sacrificed her time on earth (by being celibate, not having any sex at all - as I and others believe) and lived in poverty, putting up with all sorts of inconveniences, just so she could do these multiple evils (of saving thousands of human lives, which she, although dead, continues to do through the followers she inspired).
But you don't really think that life is a disease, hardly better than death, do you?
And you don't really believe that good and evil are the same, do you?
And you don't really believe that Adolph Hitler was good and Mother Teresa evil, do you?
Life is much more peaceful when we control our peckers and these members don't control us. At the very least, we don't tire ourselves with all these "mental calisthenics".
Chastity makes for clear thinking, but the virtue of chastity (of abstaining from sex outside of marriage and only employing it for the purpose of forming a family) is only achieved and maintained by much prayer to Jesus Christ. No other way! Chastity is a superhuman virtue and only the strong in Christ achieve it, and then, barely.
On the other hand, if we are not chaste, we let our libido go on "auto pilot", and the babies are eventually conceived. What's going to happen to them? Will they be aborted? Will they be born to a father and mother who loves them? (Every human being has the natural right to be born to a father and mother who loves, cares and provides for him/her. Who dares to deprive the person of this right? Does the pleasure of a one night stand justify depriving the child of this elementary right?) For the sake of our sexual release, is it right to let a child be born almost literally on the street, to become street urchins, raised by gangs and criminals, destined to delinquency from the womb? And what will our society become when filled with such delinquents? An inhuman jungle where life isn't valued as anything.
And what solution would you propose to resolve these problems consequent on unbridled, irresponsible parents enslaved to their lusts? Would you propose abortion as an easy elimination of the"problems"? Would you suggest birth control rather than self control? But that's like refusing to be toilet trained. We should control/discipline our bodies, they should not enslave us. I said it elsewhere in one of the replies: Am I to be a man with a pecker or a pecker with a man stuck to the back of it, dragged behind it as it pants like a rabid dog for pussy cat? That's an adequate picture of many a young male in our culture, and not a few women after due adjustments.
Lack of respect for the conception and the means of conception shows the lack of respect for its fruit: human life. John Paul II called our swinging culture, "the culture of death". How right he was.
Here's an interesting essay from Makow, a Jew, who as a young man lived a life of easy sex, and then started to get wise. Check it out if you like.
https://www.henrymakow.com/2016/09/a-return-to-manking.html
I appreciate your sincerity. I have many friends whom I love and cherish, who think like you. I shall pray for you and for them.
Evil is a symbolism. What evil for one is good for the other. So if God created evil then isn't him evil himself? We are going through sophisms here...no need.
any imaginary friend would do really. from any religion.
saying you will pray for me is condenscending. It means you feel like you have moral superiority. Dude, if he exists, killed more people than any other human being both by allowing it and directly as the bible sais.
I don't think you are allowed to speak about Hitler here when your God acted much like him.
Where have I cited God as an authority in the reasons I've proposed? This conversation has more to do with "toilet training" than about high Theology.
Are you trying to suppress my freedom of speech? Why can't I make reference to Hitler, or anyone else? Are you going to throw me in jail?
Oh, I'm condescending? If you lower yourself to the level of equating human life to the pleasure of a one night stand, then you have implicitly passed a judgement on the value of your own human life. Dear sir, I think much more of you than you do. I'm sorry that it is condescending for me to lower myself to what you are making of yourself, but my excuse is that I'm doing it only to raise you up.
About the problem of evil, that is, of an infinitely good and all powerful God creating a world full of evil, and how this apparently makes God either a collaborator in evil (hence not good) or not all powerful... that's old hat for me. I do eventually plan to address the difficult topic -- even apart from this conversation.
I think it is more urgent to convince you that you are good and have an "infinite" value as a human being, and should not for any reason be aborted or treated as no better than a one-night stand. I believe that! How can I make you believe it?
Love, and goodnight, sir.
Because it is irrelevant and by being intellectually dishonest you are trying to shower the audience with sensationalism it is a cheap political move.
You can't. This is why people are fleeting the churches by the thousands. There is no "evil" and if there is your god plant it there so he can have some fun. If h didn't and just allows it to exist then he is prick that enjoys watching his subjects suffer much like a child enjoys burning ants with their magnifying glass. either way. you are wrong.
Too many words. little to no meaning.
Very thought provoking article @kyriacos one that I will revisit and be thinking about. Thanks for the time and thought you've invested in it.
Glad you liked it. Indeed I have been thinking about this for a while
LOL, a bit bitter but truth!! Still waiting to fuck someone!!
Haha!
Excellent Post!! Upvoted and Followed :)
glad you liked it
Well this is something worth pondering over, it does all come down to sex more often than one can imagine. Loved the post!
glad you enjoyed it. thank you .
Just think about someone living alone in the woods for all his life. What's his motivation to get up each day? Sex? I don't think so. And yet he'll create things, shape the world around him. Calling "leaving a mark" meta-sex is silly. It has nothing to do with sex. 'Sorry, "meta-fuck".
That would be the outlier. The exception to the rule. Most likely you would ask them why they have withdrawn from the world and at some point you will see a total rejection of everything, including the entire culture of sex which I am talking about.
Nothing is 100% around us. What I am talking about is the rule, not the rare exception that might occur every now and then.
This is orgasmic! Thank you @kyriacos
chikoupaouaou welcome
Have you ever hurd of the theory about how our brains evolved? It states that our brains have evolved for reproduction. What I mean by that is, most animals display strength or brite vibrant colours or dances of some sort or something liek that. Where as humans dont have those feats of strength and so on, so the theory is our brains have evolved for reproduction. We have to seduce our mates with our version of the "mating dance" seducing women with our verbal intellect.
either way its kind of a cool theory I think, but who knows
No I have't but I think there is some truth to your idea. Many animals use dancing for attracting mates. We use different mechanisms like blond hair, muscles and height. I don't see how we are any different or why our brains would have to develop especially for that. Every single species exhibits at least some form of traits for sexual attraction.
this is great post and very funny and real... i have often felt sex directs all things,,,or even an abstinance from sex can steer you annoyingly just as bad... your last question reminds me of both the sheer natural relief and horror i experienced during my first sexual experiences
Sex is one of the few things that can make one realize basic truths about their identity. Not many have the courage to fully go through the process.
upvote and RS for u
thank you!
Once we had a discussion in the dormitory on whether if Hitler's an extremely sexually frustrated person.
He was. Did you know that he made his girlfriends squat on his face and poop on him? There are many accounts but I am not sure if is reliable.
http://www.complex.com/life/2016/03/adolf-hitler-poop-fetish-sex-life
This is deep philosophical shit. I like that.
Whilst I agree with many things you say throughout your piece, I think the overarching point you are attempting to make is flawed.
You claim that sex can be about either reproduction, pleasure or social dominance. I am in agreement with you here, though I would say there are far more reasons that one would seek out sex.
The problem is, if for some people sex is about pleasure or social dominance, there are many other ways of achieving these goals. So, for their life choices to be rooted in sex is a rather selective conclusion.
A man who's drive is conceived through a quest to attain social dominance could potentially have no interest in sex at all. His motivations may stem from a desire to be the CEO of a huge company, a police officer or any other leader or position of authority.
I will not argue that many such types may also supplement their desires through sexual endeavors, but I don't believe that this is the same for everyone.
It certainly sounds as though you have thought this through in great depth, and perhaps it is true that self-reflection has led you to understand your own choices to be ultimately rooted in sex, but to say what you have said, with the level of assurance that you exhibit, is somewhat arrogant.
I mean not to offend, but we cannot simply project our own characteristics onto the rest of the world in order to make us feel less out of place.
I know that I personally am not motivated by sex. I may have been for along time, like many others. But in recent years, I view sex and relationships as nothing more than a distraction that keeps me from doing what I want to do.
I know I am not entirely alone in this philosophy, and I fail to see how thinking of sex as an obstacle to achieving your goals, can really be about getting sex.
One other thing I would add, is that I have said for a long time that if I were ever to raise a child, it would be an orphan who needs a family. I care not about continuing on my bloodline, and many ex's I have discussed this with have felt similarly. Why conceive a child into a world it may not want to be a part of, when there are already children in the world, who need help?
I think it is beyond narcissistic to bring a child into this world simply because you want more of you in it.
It is clear that you are intelligent, and you could be using that intelligence to help others. Instead, you seem to have opted to use it to skew lesser-minded people's understandings of themselves, to better accept your own.
You should not presume to be entitled to speak for everyone. If this was more of a theory or a thought experiment, then I apologise for what I have said. But, it does not read like an opinion, and your comments on this thread seem to support my feelings that you truly believe what you're saying, or at least hope that others will.
We can not confuse sex with love, since they are two different things. Sex has to do with passion, that is to say with the satisfaction of the instinctive part, while love goes beyond the attraction and union of bodies.
In the case of sex by trade, they act only instinctively, that is, the animal part.
When two beings love each other our feelings act and when they unite their bodies is something very sublime and beautiful that goes beyond the passion.
If we left a bunch of babies fend for themselves in the wild with no supervision or guidance, I'm sure the surviving ones would act no different than a pack of wild animals. I think the current society we live in and our upbringing actually make us go against our nature and limit our sexual urges.
Perhaps, but consider this next time you see every woman with make-up, every man obsessed with money and power or every industry that tried to sell you a better version of yourself. All because of what? To ultimate reproduce much more efficient than your counterparts.
Yup, sex sells. That's exactly what i was referring to by society limiting us. There's a duality worth mentioning here. We are being told what's not sexy (being poor, unkempt and unattractive) and also what is (money, perfect figure, makeup).
yeap. we are being played either way.
So... hmm. I don't know how to say this, or where to start, or if I should start...but let's just say that this article is not universally applicable. It is possible to for the sex-switch in the brain to be switched to off and to be a living, breathing organism that cannot relate to a word you just said, even if you points are understood conceptually.
Whether this switch is moved to the "off" position through genetics, trauma, or psychological abuse (we don't know), there are people who walk through life never once making a choice designed to sexually attract anyone...in fact, quite the opposite. If they learn that people are stimulated by an act or a look or an article of clothing, they will remove it from their life on all fronts.
These are not people who have been raped or molested. They're not even people who hate sex. They just don't have brains that register sexual touch as arousing, no matter who does it or how. And watching other people have sex is as stimulating as watching a pair of ants do it. Give them a vibrator for an hour, and they'll just read a book. Try to jack them off any which way and they won't get hard...no matter who does it or how attractive they are.
Certainly this is the minority of people. But, to them? No. Everything is not about sex. Even sex is not about sex. All that is certain is that we all came from people who had some sort of sex, and only the people who have sex will pass on their genetic memory to future generations. And the people who opt out will take their secrets with them...along with what they found so interesting that sex never made it to their Top 100 lists of enjoyable things to do?
What did they find infinitely more stimulating, and why? That's a question I'd like answered...hmm. So maybe I should find out and write an article. There's an idea...
Man, I love this site.
Not everything is directly related to sex. It revolves though around it. Even if people who have been abused like you say, have the rest of their lives defines by the lack of it.
I would love to see this debated. The next question, I'm fairly certain, would be how one can claim a life can be defined by the lack of something unessential to personal survival? Can one's life be defined by a lack of Spam?
I'm going to try to have this conversation by proxy, but I'm certain you would do it better.
Also, this person would be adamant that they were not abused. Also, all their siblings are sexually active. They are considered attractive by many and could have sex any day of the week with a male or a female, but they are not interested. They do like touch, cuddling, and massage. They have no repulsion to signs of arousal in others. They just have no desire to do anything beyond what two cats would do in a sunbeam. The person I am thinking of currently is 40, is a virgin (yes, they exist), and is fine with any kind of body contact, but has no desire to get naked about it. Ever. Even under the influence of drugs that promote this kind of sensation. They've tried all the things with the promise that if they want to say yes, they will. They never do.
nice stuff and informational. great keep it up. thank you
Sex is a necessary GOOD.
always