Questions about Enlightenment, comments about Sex

[Trevor Salyzyn]

Disagree. The weakness of your own mind corrupts itself. I'll give you the notion that beauty makes it VERY hard for men keep their wits, but that is an internal issue that men need to take responsibility for at the very least. Whether or not they do something about it depends on their balls.

You must be a female to think that saying "the beauty of women corrupts" has anything to do with the female, otherwise you would not have taken offense whatsoever. When you disagree with me, be sure you actually are disagreeing with me, and not simply rephrasing what I said in more words.

[skipair]

So whose desire do you think these men are responding to?

Thats the best part - mutual desire to fuck.

What do you think of the following phrase: a man has sex and a woman forms sex?

Using has and forms in this context doesn't mean anything specific to me, but I'm curious to hear your thoughts.

True, some rare guys naturally possess many of the qualities women find so attractive and are mostly unconscious about them.

It's always a degree of being unconscious about it, otherwise it really doesn't work that well.

Agree about the degrees, but if a given series of events consistently achieves a particular effect, it really makes no difference whether the subject is conscious about it or not - in regards to its effectivness.

What you seem to be talking about is the making up of a story or myth around it so one can justify ('fortify') a variety of behaviors, no matter if it's being "in love" or "independence".

I assure you the dominant alpha male walks the planet with harems as we speak...it is no myth. These men, to the varying degrees they are conscious about it, skillfully avoid pair bonding in preference of spreading. The reward is sex and freedom. The price is lonliness and struggle.

The vast majority of guys do not have these natural reflexes, but by modeling the behavior of "naturals", similar skills can be acquired by intelligent men.

It proves engaging in unconscious behavior is really the simplest thing in the world. The only effort is to resist getting too conscious about it.

Not sure where you get that proof. The first step for aspiring "unnaturals" is a very self-conscious examination of beliefs, ideals, and the subsequent behaviorial causes and effects. "Do these things actually have merit in light of what ACTUALLY HAPPENS between males and females in nature?" This process usually involves unlearning all the poor social programming that modern society has installed.

"Women will like you if you buy them flowers"
"...if you treat them fairly and democratically like you would a man"
"...if you are always nice and the perfect gentleman"
"...if you commit yourself exclusively to them"
"...if you go for a 50/50 relationship"

This all bullshit social programming. Once beliefs about the social realm are matched closer to what actually happens in nature, you will be "out of the box" to a degree.

Next step is to stay conscious, but not self-conscious in the presence of women. You will naturally "see" things that were once hidden, and what you will find is that all women love a good player.

[keenobserver]

Skipair, to save time, you'll find my answers following your questions in the big grey box below. Ill try not to make a habit of it. Oh, expect a similar but more complete response forthcoming.(not from me though!)

Hi everyone, I have a few questions on the model of enlightenment posed here, and also a few comments about sex.

1) How do you reconcile cause and effect (that everything happens for specific, yet innumerable reasons) with taking personal responsibility by acts of will? A.At bottom one is not ultimately responsible since even his will has been given him.
However we do have rules and those able to understand the rules can be held to account for their transgressions, but if ultimately they dont improve, well it simply couldnt be helped, and merciful we should be. Nevertheless we must keep the peace and protect the world and its inhabitants, so lock up is sometimes necessary even for the determined (everyone).

2) In the flow of reality as it continually unfolds before us, change is ever-present, no?A. Do you mean is there anything that is not subject to change? Indeed. But with everything forever changing when is anything ever something? Think about that one for a while. (but not a month, pls)

3) How is it possible to "not have emotions"? I understand the idea of bypassing unpragmatic emotions that get in the way of objective decision making, but there are still chemicals flowing in the brain...something still must be felt. This is called emotion, but pragmatised, no?Aa.It IS possible. Isnt it possible for the sun to blow up tomorrow? Yes it IS possible, however unlikely. Ab.It comes down to attachments. No attachments no loss no gain. Easy right? Full consciousness=no attachments.
How do I know. I figured it out. And until YOU figure it out you're stuck with believing me. (or not)

4) I've seen it written here that sex and ultimate reality don't mix. First, what about Nietzsche? Second, despite very philosophically developed models of reality, there are still biological processes in the body that cannot be overridden. One of them is urinating, another is blinking, another is sex drive. Some people really don't have much of a sex drive...others are very large - and everywhere in between. Suppressing sex from a biologically high drive human, I believe, does harm to the spirit. Aa.N was a mad genius. So there was room for loneliness which more often than not leads to copulation.Ab.Somethings are so profound and common and approved of, that the mind is eventually tricked into believing that living without it is impossible. Sex is one such thing. Passion for the opposite sex CAN be expunged, noninvasively. It takes time, commitment, and comes automatically with increased levels of Enlightenment. However if you live with a member of the opposite sex your chances of overcuming are much reduced.

There are too many men out there whose minds fall apart before a beautiful feminine woman. On the other hand, I have been in contact with many men who may or may not be called perfectly enlightened by the standards of this community, but are intelligent, focused, have considerable skill in wielding their emotions (ethically and pragmatically), and fuck A LOT of women. I'm talking hundreds and hundreds. They do not have attachment to them. They love them as beautiful toys and move on to the next. A.Yes, they have what the girl wants, so they have no need to worry or cling, no time to get too close and enamoured, just move along before attachment takes hold. They can afford to be playboys, but if suddenly they lost most of what made them appealing to women, suddenly they would become weaker men in your eyes, and probably marry the last good whore they screewed, before she changes her mind.

This requires a special skillset that I see has a lot of parallels to the enlightenment path -and more specifically, does not contradict it. Namely, it requires a VERY strong philosophy/consciousness/awareness to be able to stay independent of the feminine vortex. All guys with a brain know what its like to be sucked into a woman's world and only later figure it out and think "Shit! She OWNED me!". A.Yes sometimes skillset, sometimes gifts, some all combined with luck.If mom is around and he has always had strong good relation with her, he is much more secure and not concerned about loosing a girl.

I am here to tell you, in case you didn't already know, that you can have sex without it impairing reason and judgement - but one must be "unplugged" from the social matrix, so to speak - which is why we're here, right? There is a LOT that must be understood to make this concept a reality. As is the case with enlightenment, I'm not an expert seducer, but I do know enough through personal contemplation and direct experience that there are truths in this matter that are supremely dangerous, yet undeniable. Intelligent men can not only have lots of sex and be independent, but in fact the former requires the latter. A.Yeah, you got smartish guys like Mr Playboy Hefner and his friends Maher etall, yes they are more aware than probably the entire house of representatives combined, but still if they made a serious bid for enlightenment, then their time with the playmates would become less important and their usage of Viagra increased, then eventually lessened.

Also, I've seen it written that sex does not help the feminine become wise, which is true. However, some say the very feminine are incapable of such things anyway - and I agree. But besides, if guys trained themselves to be truly independent of feminine manipulation, they could easily ethically influence the world regardless - WITH the (albeit unconscious) help of well behaved women, I might add! A. Correct!

Nice to meet you bud. Whats your age?

Discussion please.

[Trevor Salyzyn]

The price is lonliness and struggle.

I'd gladly trade the loneliness and struggle of pair bonding for the freedom of an alpha male harem! :)

[ExpectantlyIronic]

skipair,

How do you reconcile cause and effect (that everything happens for specific, yet innumerable reasons) with taking personal responsibility by acts of will?

A man is not omniscient, and cannot see all that may conspire to guide his actions. It is actually incomprehensible to think that a thing like the human brain, which is a physical thing, can know every physical cause that leads to eventual action on the part of the body, as that which happens within it would have to be known as well. The brain cannot know all that goes on within it, as knowing is part of that which goes on within it, and that process must necessarily involve more information than what is contained. Essentially, it is our lack of knowing that leads us to talk of personal responsibility. Also, well we cannot do anything to the experiences or circumstances that guide an individuals actions, we can add experiences and more circumstances to that individual which may change their behavior in the future. It is simply useful to talk of men as having personal responsibility, and nothing metaphysical is really meant by it.

We often like to imagine that more is meant by a claim than what is. If I condemn a man for his actions, it may not be because I feel him to be a Cartesian soul which is directing his body independently of physical cause, but rather simply because my condemnation serves a useful function. That we can reject both determinism and mind/body dualism suggests that the former doesn't entail the negation of free will. It need not at the very least. I'm quite fond of Hume's compatibilism, though I recognize that even such a view is only true inside a particular set of language games. The way to best grasp matters of causality or free will is not to dogmatically accept a single way of looking at them, or speaking of them. It is not to commit to a manner of speaking. Rather, one should simply strive to understand the various language games which may call for the affirmation or denial of different uses of the same word. The picture then becomes so much more clear.

[Ryan Rudolph]

Cory wrote:

Yeah, that's why I'm open to exploring what caliber of prostitues we have around here. I'd like to get them talking about themselves. It's not hard to tell if someone is miserable or not. If she seems happy and contented with her life style, then these types of women would be the next step up from porn-aided masterbation, and porn is the next step up from closing your eyes and imagining all your ex girl friends (or girls you wish you could have had) screw you at once.

From what I researched, there seems to be three tiers of prostitution in our city. There are the late night street walkers who are the bottom rung hookers. These women usually have mental problems, drug problems, and they are usually not all that beautiful. Basically you wanna stay away from the first tier women. However, The second tier prostitution occurs in private gentleman massage parlors, where younger healthier women work under a boss and supply a small number of clients with sex. And the third tier of prostitution are the private escort girls that secretly run their service to a small number of clients, and sometimes all by themselves. These women seem to be the most independent, discrete, and masculine by my intuition.

However, the two factors that prevent me from exploring the possible masculinity of these women are as followss – STDs and the fact that you need to pay money, and a large sum of money usually.

Sex should be effortless, carefree, without emotion and attachment, forgotten afterwards, and totally free of cost.

That is the ideal anyway.

[Trevor Salyzyn]

Sex should be effortless, carefree, without emotion and attachment, forgotten afterwards, and totally free of cost.

And hence Diogenes' claim: "a beautiful whore is like poisoned honey."

Then he walks into a low-class brothel. :)

[Ryan Rudolph]

Trevor wrote:

a beautiful whore is like poisoned honey”

I agree, any of the really beautiful girls I had sex with, I had a difficult time not getting attached to the sexual experience, it is definitely more powerful, and more difficult to forget than if the woman is just average.

From my experience, Diogenes has a point, incredibly beautiful woman are torturers of souls.

It is much more difficult to let go of the sexual experience from a beautiful woman.

In many native tribes, and probably in many early human communities, they simply shared the women, and there was less attachment. However, part of the reason why this was so easy is perhaps the women were a bit more masculine looking in the past. The men probably had an easier time giving them up if they didn’t look like Pamela Anderson.

It seems to me that at least in western culture, that beautiful feminine women are becoming more frequent because those are the ones that are reproducing the most.

Natural Selection is working counterintuitive to the goal, which is to have more masculine looking women.

I bet thousands of years ago, a really feminine beautiful woman was probably much rarer than the type of sexual beauty we see now.

This makes it much more difficult to serve the cause of wisdom/masculinity when evolution in unconscious humans is working to counter your efforts.

Even the hip hop artists have started rapping about this stuff - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lt6o8NlrbHg

[Carl G]

Hi everyone, I have a few questions on the model of enlightenment posed here, and also a few comments about sex.

Sounds like you have an agenda. What is it? Sounds like it might be to defend or make a case for multiple partners and using women for sex, for whatever the reason. What is the reason? Is it to perfect yourself? How? Does it leave them better off, or worse?

1) How do you reconcile cause and effect (that everything happens for specific, yet innumerable reasons) with taking personal responsibility by acts of will?

Free will exists, in practical terms. In ultimate terms it does not.

2) In the flow of reality as it continually unfolds before us, change is ever-present, no?

Yes and no. Phenomena/appearances change, the core or essence is unchanging.

3) How is it possible to "not have emotions"? I understand the idea of bypassing unpragmatic emotions that get in the way of objective decision making, but there are still chemicals flowing in the brain...something still must be felt. This is called emotion, but pragmatised, no?

Emotions will rise and fall. Attachment to them is variable.

4) I've seen it written here that sex and ultimate reality don't mix. First, what about Nietzsche?

What about Nietzsche?

Second, despite very philosophically developed models of reality, there are still biological processes in the body that cannot be overridden. One of them is urinating, another is blinking, another is sex drive. Some people really don't have much of a sex drive...others are very large - and everywhere in between. Suppressing sex from a biologically high drive human, I believe, does harm to the spirit.

Here you cease questioning and begin making your case.

Urinating and blinking are biological imperatives. Sex drive is instinctive but is variable and controllable. The issue is not suppression, but transmutation. Transmutation may be highly beneficial to "the spirit."

There are too many men out there whose minds fall apart before a beautiful feminine woman.

Slaves are a dime a dozen. So what.

On the other hand, I have been in contact with many men who may or may not be called perfectly enlightened by the standards of this community, but are intelligent, focused, have considerable skill in wielding their emotions (ethically and pragmatically), and fuck A LOT of women. I'm talking hundreds and hundreds. They do not have attachment to them. They love them as beautiful toys and move on to the next.

I would call them operators, not enlightened. Do any of them have higher matters in mind while doing so? It may be possible, but not in most cases.

This requires a special skillset that I see has a lot of parallels to the enlightenment path -and more specifically, does not contradict it. Namely, it requires a VERY strong philosophy/consciousness/awareness to be able to stay independent of the feminine vortex.

Focus in and of itself does not constitute a viable parallel, though it may seem so. These men are more akin to artists, in the way a General may be versed in the art of war. Or a salesman in the art of the sale. The art of manipulation. Not saying art cannot be used for the higher purpose of spiritual self-development. Just that cleverness and wisdom may look alike but are actually very different.

All guys with a brain know what its like to be sucked into a woman's world and only later figure it out and think "Shit! She OWNED me!".

Yep, easy to be a pig with a ring in his nose.

I am here to tell you, in case you didn't already know, that you can have sex without it impairing reason and judgement - but one must be "unplugged" from the social matrix,

False, because that by itself is not enough.

so to speak - which is why we're here, right? There is a LOT that must be understood to make this concept a reality. As is the case with enlightenment, I'm not an expert seducer, but I do know enough through personal contemplation and direct experience that there are truths in this matter that are supremely dangerous, yet undeniable.

What truths?

Intelligent men can not only have lots of sex and be independent, but in fact the former requires the latter.

Intelligence requires sex and independence? Or, lots of sex requires independence? Either way doesn't sound too smart.

Also, I've seen it written that sex does not help the feminine become wise, which is true.

In rare cases it can.

However, some say the very feminine are incapable of such things anyway - and I agree. But besides, if guys trained themselves to be truly independent of feminine manipulation, they could easily ethically influence the world regardless - WITH the (albeit unconscious) help of well behaved women, I might add!

Here is more of your case-making for sleeping around. You sound like a macho Lothario with a philosophical streak (perhaps vision of grandeur) who sees his conquests counting towards enlightenment. How is it working so far?

[Diebert van Rhijn]

What do you think of the following phrase: a man has sex and a woman forms sex?

Using has and forms in this context doesn't mean anything specific to me, but I'm curious to hear your thoughts.

It has to do with how they cannot help but desire different things, essentially. Nietzsche would agree :) Their agreement is only superficial, a temporary alliance to let nature work better.

if a given series of events consistently achieves a particular effect, it really makes no difference whether the subject is conscious about it or not - in regards to its effectivness.

Nobody doubts the effectiveness of nature, at least part of the time. But does that make it wise?

I assure you the dominant alpha male walks the planet with harems as we speak...it is no myth. These men, to the varying degrees they are conscious about it, skillfully avoid pair bonding in preference of spreading. The reward is sex and freedom. The price is lonliness and struggle.

What I meant was that the myth is not as much false but serving to make you think it's more freedom compared to pair bonding. That belief is what makes one engage in the behavior, that belief is what rises with the behavior perhaps, or when dreaming of it. But freedom it ain't, one just falls for the same thing in a different style or form. A brothel might be the most honest option, at least it's not trying to look too much like what it's certainly not. It's perhaps why Jesus as well as Diogenes were known to hang out at these places; at least some honesty was met.

[Cory Duchesne]

What, not treating her like some object to be exploited and neglected and actually trying to get a sense for her inner state?

Are you saying you don't already have a sense of a prostitute's inner state? Look, she sells sex for money: it's not hard to understand her inner state.

I think there are two main types of prostitutes. Those who were beaten down by life and bullied into the profession, and 2) Those who are just naturally inclined to like sex and have approached the profession enthusiastically without coercion. The later is very rare I'm sure, and the former I just don't want anything to do with.

Overall, it's really just dirty business, a waste of money.

There should be no reason that you, as a philosopher, should have any interest in knowing anything about her

The outer causal conditions which influenced her to become who she is, I think are significant to acknowledge. As a psychologist, I'm always interested in hearing about how the environment shapes an individuals personality.

[Cory Duchesne]

I think the best way to get no strings attached sex, is probably through something like this passion.com dating site or some other dating site. Without too much effort, you will find an unattractive girl in your area who has no problem settling for a sexual encounter, for free.

[Cory Duchesne]

Sex should be effortless, carefree, without emotion and attachment, forgotten afterwards, and totally free of cost.

If our brains were so matured that we could have sex without emotion, attachment and memory of the event - we probably wouldn't have a need for sex.

[Trevor Salyzyn]

...consequently, there is a clear a reason we find sex both emotional and memorable.

[David Quinn]

skipair,

Hi everyone, I have a few questions on the model of enlightenment posed here, and also a few comments about sex.

1) How do you reconcile cause and effect (that everything happens for specific, yet innumerable reasons) with taking personal responsibility by acts of will?

By taking an active interest in shaping the future. If you take an interest in the future, then you will naturally work with causal consequences in the present.

If a person is still ignorant and egotistical, he is still vulnerable to suffering and will naturally take an interest in the future. If he is an enlightened Buddha, he will be fully conscious of causal consequences and will naturally want the world to be wiser in the future.

I suppose what I'm really struggling with is that I can't convince myself of the idea that free will doesn't exist. I can move my body EXACTLY how I tell it to. The more conscious I am about the particulars of any given movement, the more responsible I am for its repercussions. Someone prove me wrong.

The instructions given to your body in any given moment have themselves been caused. The fact that you feel you are the author of these instructions is an illusion. It's a very useful illusion, as far as practical matters are concerned, but still an illusion nonetheless.

2) In the flow of reality as it continually unfolds before us, change is ever-present, no?

Yes. Change is the one constant.

3) How is it possible to "not have emotions"? I understand the idea of bypassing unpragmatic emotions that get in the way of objective decision making, but there are still chemicals flowing in the brain...something still must be felt. This is called emotion, but pragmatised, no?

Although emotions are chemically-based, their generation is triggered by perception. For example, fear is generated by the perception of being threatened. If a person is so enlightened that he no longer believes in the illusion of his own self-existence, then all possibility of threat disappears, along with the possibility of experiencing fear. The same principle applies to the other emotions.

In other words, while the chemistry for the emotions is still there in an enlightened Buddha, the perceptual triggers have vanished.

I assure you the dominant alpha male walks the planet with harems as we speak...it is no myth. These men, to the varying degrees they are conscious about it, skillfully avoid pair bonding in preference of spreading. The reward is sex and freedom. The price is lonliness and struggle.

You are basically describing the "seducer" outlook here. The seducer believes himself to be above ordinary men in that he can enjoy the fruits of women without ever being trapped by them. He can seduce them, enjoy them for a time, and then move on.

I suppose you could say there is a freedom of sorts there. Certainly, when he compares himself to the average docile husband who is firmly trapped with kids and a hefty mortgage - which I'm sure he does constantly, as part of his thrill of being a seducer - it would be easy for him to consider himself free. But I wonder just how real that freedom is.

At the very least, there is a lot of sacrifice and work involved. For example, he will have to make himself attractive to women. This means paying countless hours on his appearance - shaving, trimming hairs, eliminating offensive body odours, shopping for quality clothing, picking out nice shoes etc. He will need a car and lots of money to wine and dine his women, so he will need a good-paying job. He will need to work constantly on his personality, steadily develop his wit and charm, learn to read body-language, read up on celebrity gossip columns, eliminate offensive views from his mind, etc - in other words, he will have to work on becoming a performing monkey for women's entertainment and pleasure.

Already, it is sounding like a lot of effort, involving a whole host of degrading changes. It is beginning to look more like slavery, than freedom, to me. The seducer is essentially in the same boat as the slave who is lucky enough to have a generous master. He might receive a few more benefits and thrills than the ordinary slave-husband, but he is still a slave nonetheless. He is a slave because the benefits and thrills he craves depend on his ability to please other people.

Cory mentioned that he preferred sex to be free. But sex is never free. There is always a cost involved, in one form or another, and usually the cost far outweighs the pleasures to be had.

There is also the long-term future to consider. It is all very well behaving like a seducer when you are young, but what happens when you get older and your body starts to sage as you hit middle age? The seducer will invariably start going through the same traumatic process that almost every woman has to go through, especially once he reaches his mid-thirties. The body starts to lose its youthful beauty with every passing day. Wrinkles begin to appear, muscles start to sag, hairs start growing in the wrong places, the glowing complexion fades, the body begins to lose its shape. Each day, he becomes a little uglier, a little more repulsive to women.

To compensate, to maintain the illusion that he is still a great seducer, he will probably have to lower his standards. He will have to start sleeping with less attractive women, ones that he wouldn't have given a second glance when he was younger. He will start becoming more desperate, as you often see with women when they hit middle age. The suits will become flashier, the perfumes stronger, more contrived attempts will be made to hide the growing flaws. He will become a figure of ridicule, the kind of pathetic, hollow man whom everyone instinctively sneers at.

Or alternatively, he will cave in to his increasing sense of vulnerability and allow himself to be coerced into the security of marriage. And so he becomes just another docile husband, just as overwhelmed and as trapped and as pathetic as the men he used to laugh at, every moment now a mockery of what he used to be.

-

[Cory Duchesne]

Cory mentioned that he preferred sex to be free. But sex is never free.

No I didn't. My point was in context to an exchange with Trevor about Diogenes visiting Brothels. I was saying that if you fancy bottom of the barrel, unattractive prostitutes, then you might as well just sign up for your local online dating sites, as there are plenty of unattractives who would assent to a no strings sexual encounter, for free (financially speaking).

But I understand your writing technique in terms of getting your point about freedom and sex across, showing how freedom is deeper then financial notions, and agree with your post wholeheartedly. That was a great read.

[Shardrol]

I think there are two main types of prostitutes. Those who were beaten down by life and bullied into the profession, and 2) Those who are just naturally inclined to like sex and have approached the profession enthusiastically without coercion. The later is very rare I'm sure, and the former I just don't want anything to do with.

This makes me wonder if you've ever actually known any sex workers. I have, & none of them have fit into either of your categories. I'm sure Category 1 exists, especially among teenage runaways or drug addicts; but Category 2 would be quite rare.

Most prostitutes do it because it pays well - much better than any other job you can get with no particular qualifications. Even if they are enthusiastic about sex it would be unusual for them to enjoy sex with their clients, who are quite likely to be men they would not ordinarily choose to have sex with & possibly even find repulsive. There's an element of degradation involved in renting out one's body to people who mostly hold one in contempt that is not lost on these women.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Cory mentioned that he preferred sex to be free. But sex is never free.

No I didn't. My point was in context to an exchange with Trevor about Diogenes visiting Brothels. I was saying that if you fancy bottom of the barrel, unattractive prostitutes, then you might as well just sign up for your local online dating sites, as there are plenty of unattractives who would assent to a no strings sexual encounter, for free (financially speaking).

I believe the Diogenes character was pointing out the cost, the coinage involved in every sexual deal. The brothel is just a place where this exchange is best visible, therefore educational. And when entering himself in the story, he might as well say that you never really escape the basic exchange that is part of life (he had to live too, by receiving gifts). One can only become more conscious of it and of the poisons being sold as perfume.

[Ryan Rudolph]

Cory wrote:

If our brains were so matured that we could have sex without emotion, attachment and memory of the event - we probably wouldn't have a need for sex.

You assume that the future of the brain is will change and mature to the degree that sexual desire is no longer needed or possible. However, I’m not certain whether or not this is the destiny of the human brain. Moreover, as I said before, I’m not positive, but I suspect that the steady production of testosterone is intimacy linked to the male sex drive, and if so, then such a loss could be quite harmful to the stability of the male psyche.

Cory wrote:

That was a great read.

Yeah, I think that tale of Quinns’ would make a great kid’s bedtime story, he could turn it into a children’s novel with pictures, but it needs a captivating title, I’m thinking something like, “The seducer who lost his way” or how about this, “The seducer who thought he could”

I like children’s stories that have a good moral at the end.

However, there are ways around compromising to women to that degree. Adult arrangement internet sites are popular, and women in open marriages are good scores because they are usually just looking for some no-strings attached sex, but there is still some degree of compromise, but not to the extent of the typical woman looking for a committed husband.

Although, the problem is that there is always some degree of work and effort that is involved, so it really comes down to how much energy you want to put into it just for the sexual experience. Internet pornography is definitely the easiest route for guys that have a high libido.

Although, I can definitely sympathize with someone who craves an actual female body to experiment with, especially once you have it experienced it a few times. There is no other experience in the human realm that compares to it, but it usually comes at a price spiritually, and after it’s over, it over. It is only a limited human experience, like all experiences.

The universe is designed in such a way that most human pursuits are not really worth the effort in the end, if you weigh it all out.

Sharol wrote:

Most prostitutes do it because it pays well - much better than any other job you can get with no particular qualifications. Even if they are enthusiastic about sex it would be unusual for them to enjoy sex with their clients, who are quite likely to be men they would not ordinarily choose to have sex with & possibly even find repulsive. There's an element of degradation involved in renting out one's body to people who mostly hold one in contempt that is not lost on these women.

Pornstars have better working conditions as they actually have some say over who they work with, and there is disease testing, and what not.

Actually, the psychology of hardcore pornstars is quite interesting. I read quite a few articles to try to understand how their psyches work. And based on my research I have concluded that many of these women are genetically geared towards enjoying sex with no emotional attachment. They gain pleasure off of having sex with many men with no sort of commitment. The psychology of the female nymphomaniac is interesting. They don’t seem to be miserable, most seem quite stable and content with themselves. Obviously the money is definitely a motivator, but I remember one interview with a pornstar who said, “when I learned that I could make tons of money for something that I do for free on the weekends with all the dorm guys in college, I dropped out of the program I was in immediately”

It would be interesting to see the genetic difference between a woman like the one above and your typical conservative woman who wants that special guy to please and entertain her, and only have sex with her, and make lots of money.

The major difference is that the hardcore pornstars genes do not seem to be linked to the raising of her future offspring, she merely does it for own enjoyment, whereas with your typical conservative woman, all her sexual values are intimately linked with the raising of her future offspring, so she needs the commitment, the emotional connection, financial stability in a partner, and so on.

Actually, the hardcore pornstar’s biology seems to be at a higher order than the conservative woman.

[Cory Duchesne]

I think there are two main types of prostitutes. Those who were beaten down by life and bullied into the profession, and 2) Those who are just naturally inclined to like sex and have approached the profession enthusiastically without coercion. The later is very rare I'm sure, and the former I just don't want anything to do with.

This makes me wonder if you've ever actually known any sex workers.

I haven't.

I have, & none of them have fit into either of your categories. I'm sure Category 1 exists, especially among teenage runaways or drug addicts; but Category 2 would be quite rare.

Most prostitutes do it because it pays well - much better than any other job you can get with no particular qualifications. Even if they are enthusiastic about sex it would be unusual for them to enjoy sex with their clients, who are quite likely to be men they would not ordinarily choose to have sex with & possibly even find repulsive. There's an element of degradation involved in renting out one's body to people who mostly hold one in contempt that is not lost on these women.

Right, well, I'm just wondering if there are some prostitutes who are as happy and contented as, say, your successful business women, etc. Or if they prostitutes are generally just trapped, miserable people.

[Cory Duchesne]

Cory wrote:

If our brains were so matured that we could have sex without emotion, attachment and memory of the event - we probably wouldn't have a need for sex.

You assume that the future of the brain is will change and mature to the degree that sexual desire is no longer needed or possible. However, I’m not certain whether or not this is the destiny of the human brain.

I don't assume anything. It's you who put forth the ideal of sex (human interaction) without emotion. Have you achieved this?

Moreover, as I said before, I’m not positive, but I suspect that the steady production of testosterone is intimacy linked to the male sex drive, and if so, then such a loss could be quite harmful to the stability of the male psyche.

There are different components to the brain, the mating centers being one. Testosterone acts upon more than just these mating centers.

there are ways around compromising to women to the degree [quinn speaks of in his seducer bedtime story]. Adult arrangement internet sites are popular

Good luck finding an arrangement with a woman who doesn't care if you look good.

and women in open marriages are good scores because they are usually just looking for some no-strings attached sex

With guys who look good.

but there is still some degree of compromise, but not to the extent of the typical woman looking for a committed husband.

No, she's looking for a lover who excites her.

Although, the problem is that there is always some degree of work and effort that is involved, so it really comes down to how much energy you want to put into it just for the sexual experience.

The degree to which you put energy into getting sex, is the degree to which you are a fool.

Internet pornography is definitely the easiest route for guys that have a high libido.

It doesn't make much sense to go beyond that. If you do, it's because you want to appease loneliness, or you want the extraneous thrills of feeling flattered that a girl likes you, that you can give her an orgasm, etc.

Pornstars have better working conditions as they actually have some say over who they work with, and there is disease testing, and what not.

Actually, the psychology of hardcore pornstars is quite interesting. I read quite a few articles to try to understand how their psyches work. And based on my research I have concluded that many of these women are genetically geared towards enjoying sex with no emotional attachment.

Might this have anything to do with the sort of guys they are having sex with? What type of guys are these?

They gain pleasure off of having sex with many men with no sort of commitment. The psychology of the female nymphomaniac is interesting. They don’t seem to be miserable, most seem quite stable and content with themselves. Obviously the money is definitely a motivator, but I remember one interview with a pornstar who said, “when I learned that I could make tons of money for something that I do for free on the weekends with all the dorm guys in college, I dropped out of the program I was in immediately”

I guess, when it came to the highest tier of prostitute, this is what I had in mind.

It would be interesting to see the genetic difference between a woman like the one above and your typical conservative woman who wants that special guy to please and entertain her, and only have sex with her, and make lots of money.

The major difference is that the hardcore pornstars genes do not seem to be linked to the raising of her future offspring, she merely does it for own enjoyment, whereas with your typical conservative woman, all her sexual values are intimately linked with the raising of her future offspring, so she needs the commitment, the emotional connection, financial stability in a partner, and so on.

Women who withhold sex to secure protection for their offspring, actually seem to be more conscious. What great intellectual had a mother who was a porn star? At least conservative or intellectual women produce valuable off spring. I'd like to see an example of a pornstar who has.

Ordinary women know they are not bomb-shells, and that a life prioritized around having sex with lots of people, isn't going to bring them happiness. Instead they work on being good mothers, or they might even become intellectuals to the order of a professor, Cecila Green, Camilla Paige, Sue Blackmore, Sue Hindmarsh, etc.

Actually, the hardcore pornstar’s biology seems to be at a higher order than the conservative woman.

I don't think this is very useful. These two types serve totally different functions, and I don't see how one is more valuable than the other. In fact, I'd say that an intellectual woman who is capable of raising a child interested in wisdom or truth, is of more value than a porn star who I doubt can raise a very conscious kids, due to her very unconscious hedonistic lifestyle.

[Ryan Rudolph]

Cory wrote:

Right, well, I'm just wondering if there are some prostitutes who are as happy and contented as, say, your successful business women, etc. Or if they prostitutes are generally just trapped, miserable people.

Conservative woman and feminists tend to paint an ugly picture of prostitution, but it really isn’t that bad in many cases. It’s all relative. In Germany for example, where prostitution is legal and regulated, sex workers treat their job like any other job, and they have the freedom to choose a small number of clients that they are attracted to, and that they get along with. So they have the ability to refuse clients if they are too strange or repulsive.

Feminists and conservatives are funny in this regard. They get all indignant over women sex workers, but they don’t care that millions of women are working in call centers, or factories in the west everyday. Hmmm, what would I rather do? Work in a call center for eight hours a day, or have sex with a few steady clients a couple times a day?

With every job you’re whoring yourself to a certain degree, you just need to ask the question, is which way do I want to be a whore for society? Some sages choose not to be a whore at all.

It is interesting how these types of people have an ingrained immoral response to promiscuous behavior in women, but they ignore the inhumane nature of most other human occupations.

It is such a bizarre system in my opinion. On the one hand, we think it is perfectly moral for someone to stand on their feet for eight hours a day, for five days a week, but absolutely immoral for a woman to spread her legs, and give a man an orgasm as a public service…

[Cory Duchesne]

To take sex from a woman without any intention of fulfilling her other hidden drives, is to suck her vitality, and allow her to suck yours

This is pretty vague. Not sure where you're coming from here.

I just think that in most cases, a female 'puts out' expecting that the relationship is going to go somewhere more intimate and long lasting. When it doesn't, she feels like a slut, and as she gets older she feels increasingly ashamed. Of course, there are some exceptions to this rule, but these women are very rare, and very unconscious.

Devote yourself to a conventional life, or renounce femininity entirely

This is too black and white. The spectrum for lifestyles with and without women is probably limitless.

All of these lifestyles are examples of merely swimming in the shallows, where fears are left unfaced, and where death is not directly confronted.

With me, my motivation to stay away from women comes from being conscious that involvement with them is a dead end

If you're expecting emotional fullfillment, or an honorable friend, I 100% agree. But it depends on what you are expecting.

From them, nothing. I see women as cowardly, irrational creatures - involvement with them can't go anywhere very deep.

They drain the best qualities from you, and what remains is the worst.

[Ryan Rudolph]

Cory wrote:

Women who withhold sex to secure protection for their offspring, actually seem to be more conscious. What great intellectual had a mother who was a porn star? At least conservative or intellectual women produce valuable off spring. I'd like to see an example of a pornstar who has.

The future of humanity may not involve women as mothers. Each sex maybe evolving to be very individualistic, and self-centered. A masculine women wouldn’t be capable of raising a child, its too much work, sacrifice and effort. And their genes would more resemble a man’s. A Mother’s genes are inferior in every way, she is designed to sacrifice her freedom for the sake of the offspring. So I’m considering the possibility of whether or not future women will be more like men sexually, and just engage in the act for leisure and nothing more.

Cory wrote:

And I don't see how one is more valuable than the other. In fact, I'd say that an intellectual woman who is capable of raising a child interested in wisdom or truth, is of more value than a porn star who I doubt can raise a very conscious kids, due to her very unconscious hedonistic lifestyle.

I think robots will eventually raise and interact with young silly children until they are of an age when they can actually learn something useful. You romanticize the family unit as if it is something sacred that is going to be preserved. I suspect that the traditional family is going out the window…

The real radical feminists should be concerned with how to prevent women from being mothers in the first place. The occupation of ‘mother’ is exploitative, and crippling to ones freedom.

There is nothing wrong with hedonism, as long as one is conscious. For instance: when you enjoy a good meal, you are being hedonistic, when you hear a nice piece of music, you are being hedonistic, when you have a hot shower, you are being hedonistic, and having an orgasm is no different, it is all the same as far as the brain is concerned.

[Cory Duchesne]

Cory wrote:

Right, well, I'm just wondering if there are some prostitutes who are as happy and contented as, say, your successful business women, etc. Or if they prostitutes are generally just trapped, miserable people.

Conservative woman and feminists tend to paint an ugly picture of prostitution, but it really isn’t that bad in many cases. It’s all relative. In Germany for example, where prostitution is legal and regulated, sex workers treat their job like any other job, and they have the freedom to choose a small number of clients that they are attracted to, and that they get along with. So they have the ability to refuse clients if they are too strange or repulsive.

I agree that prostitution should be legal.

Feminists and conservatives are funny in this regard. They get all indignant over women sex workers, but they don’t care that millions of women are working in call centers, or factories in the west everyday. Hmmm, what would I rather do? Work in a call center for eight hours a day, or have sex with a few steady clients a couple times a day?

Well, look who is asking the question :)

If women demanded sex the way men do, male prostitution (that revolved around female clientel) would be a lucrative enterprise.

With every job you’re whoring yourself to a certain degree,

Well, keep in mind, there are some people who really like their job and find meaning in it. The highest example being guys like Steve Jobs, Noam Chomsky, MIT robot engineers, some scientists, writers, artists, sages, etc.

you just need to ask the question, is which way do I want to be a whore for society? Some sages choose not to be a whore at all.

Right, sages, as well as some professors, scientists, artists, filmmakers, even some very creative businessmen.

It is interesting how these types of people have an ingrained immoral response to promiscuous behavior in women, but they ignore the inhumane nature of most other human occupations.

I just think an instinct was selected over time, an instinct which despised too much promiscuousness. It would be interesting to talk about why this instinct was selected.

It is such a bizarre system in my opinion. On the one hand, we think it is perfectly moral for someone to stand on their feet for eight hours a day, for five days a week, but absolutely immoral for a woman to spread her legs, and give a man an orgasm as a public service…

It's a pleasure/pain thing. Humanity evolved based on notions that pain and hard work produced noble results, and that unconscious hedonism and indulgence produced degrading ones. This is not necessarily a ridiculous notion.