The Problem With Women Today

[Trevor Salyzyn]

So is your main point that we colour our experiences of the world a lot?

Yes. I believe I was trying to make a secondary point about seduction as well, but I never spelled it out and I seem to have forgotten what it was. As far as I can remember, I was trying to form some kind of contrast. Oh well. It'll come to me later, and if it still seems interesting I'll say it then.

[Shahrazad]

David,

When you're not sure about how you want to lead your life, as was the case for me back then, your future becomes a lottery.

IIRC, your son was born in 1991 (or 92). I'm curious about when you became sure what you wanted to do with your life.

[Leyla Shen]

Oh, Nick. :)

I never said [sex and defecating] were equivalent, I just said they had some basic similarities. Which is suffering, desire to end suffering, and relief from suffering (which causes the good feelings).

OK.

I used taking a shit as an example because I asked some people which bodily function they would eliminate if they had a choice, and I thought for sure most, if not all would say taking a shit because of the mess, smell, and overall grossness. I was surprised to hear them say they would not want to stop being able to take a shit because it feels too good. I explained it only felt good because it feels so bad before hand, but they seemed to think the pain was worth the pleasure. I also explained to people that love only feels so good because one feels so terrible without it, but again they seemed to think the pain was worth the pleasure.

Well, to be honest, I don’t think that I’d describe what happens before I take a shit as pain and suffering. You don’t have hemorrhoids – or a really bad diet with insufficient fibre – do you? :)

Frankly, the only time I do experience pain and suffering before a crap is if I have food poisoning. Sometimes it's annoying for me because I have to tear myself away from other things - but apart from that, [shrug].

You’re aware that there are quite stimulating nerves, as well as the prostate gland (extremely sensitive to stimulation), in the anal canal, yeah – if you can get over thinking yourself homosexual for the pleasure of it . . . :)

[Leyla Shen]

It might be legit, but I get the sense they really just wanted to prove their hypothesis and say what they said.

Unlike you, right? :)

Digit ratio moderates the impact of sexual cues on men's decisions in ultimatum games

[Nick]

Well, to be honest, I don’t think that I’d describe what happens before I take a shit as pain and suffering. You don’t have hemorrhoids – or a really bad diet with insufficient fibre – do you? :)

Frankly, the only time I do experience pain and suffering before a crap is if I have food poisoning. Sometimes it's annoying for me because I have to tear myself away from other things - but apart from that, [shrug].

No, I generally don't experience pain and suffering before taking a shit, but it does get uncomfortable having a rectum full of shit, and the relief from that can be experienced as pleasure, i.e. suffering/escape from suffering.

You’re aware that there are quite stimulating nerves, as well as the prostate gland (extremely sensitive to stimulation), in the anal canal, yeah – if you can get over thinking yourself homosexual for the pleasure of it . . . :)

I am, but I haven't really read into it too much. Although I have noticed that when I concentrate on the actual feeling of an orgasm, I've found that it is a similar sensation to taking a shit, only much more intense. Kind of like taking a giant shit out of your dick.

Aside from that, does getting pleasure from anal stimulation automatically make one homosexual? I thought for one to have homo tendencies one needed to actually be attracted to those of the same sex. Is it gay if a guy has his girlfriend fuck him with a dildo or strap-on?

[rebecca702]

Whoa. We're not in Kansas anymore, Toto.

[Nick]

Oh come on, you know this wasn't Kansas the moment you got here. It's not called the forum for dangerous thinkers for nothing. :D

[BMcGilly07]

Aside from that, does getting pleasure from anal stimulation automatically make one homosexual? I thought for one to have homo tendencies one needed to actually be attracted to those of the same sex. Is it gay if a guy has his girlfriend fuck him with a dildo or strap-on?

I think, just as evidenced in Otto Weininger's Sex and Character, sexual identity is never that cut and dry. We apply these labels and hold them dear because they support the ego.

[Jason]

I am, but I haven't really read into it too much. Although I have noticed that when I concentrate on the actual feeling of an orgasm, I've found that it is a similar sensation to taking a shit, only much more intense. Kind of like taking a giant shit out of your dick.

Ever heard of a blumpkin?

Aside from that, does getting pleasure from anal stimulation automatically make one homosexual? I thought for one to have homo tendencies one needed to actually be attracted to those of the same sex. Is it gay if a guy has his girlfriend fuck him with a dildo or strap-on?

What about futanari? Where does an enlarged clitoris end and a penis begin?

[Nick]

I think, just as evidenced in Otto Weininger's Sex and Character, sexual identity is never that cut and dry. We apply these labels and hold them dear because they support the ego.

I think the main dynamic in sex is the masculine and feminine components found in the people engaging in intercourse. Sex is an expression of the the masculine tendency to dominate, and the feminine tendency to submit. For two partners to be sexually attracted to each other, one needs to be more on the masculine side, and the other more on the feminine side.

The physical form (male or female) is secondary. Differences such as clothing, jewelry, bodily manipulation, make-up, and body shape evolved as an extension of our masculine/feminine character. This unconscious tendency probably evolved as a means to polarize the sexes, and being the visual creatures we are, it makes us less likely to make the evolutionary mistake of attempting to mate with someone of the same sex.

This process works quite well due to the fact that women tend to embody the feminine and men tend to embody the masculine, but of course you have the occasional male who embodies enough of the feminine, or the woman who embodies enough of the masculine and you can end up with the evolutionary mismatch of same sex coupling.

[Shahrazad]

David or Dan,

I'd like to ask a question about sex. Our bodies have evolved to have sex with regularity, and this has affected our brain chemistry. How do you deal with the chemical imbalance that comes from not having sex?

I have noticed that women who are abstaining from sex do not function well. They are bitter and cranky. They go into fits at the slightest provocation. Their thinking is chaotic. I suspect that it is due to the lack of oxytocin in their brain, but other chemicals such as neurotransmitters could be involved.

Men who abstain from sex also seem to be unable to handle stress properly.

I think that romantic relationships create more problems than they solve, but complete sexual abstinence seems to go against our biology -- similar to abstaining from consuming food, water or air.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

complete sexual abstinence seems to go against our biology -- similar to abstaining from consuming food, water or air.

As I see it, one of the most important functions of sex is maintenance of the energy balance. Just having an orgasm is hardly enough as it might need involving a temporary explicit hierarchy affirmation, gaining or releasing control, relaxation through caress and closeness and all kinds of pheromone exchanges that influence our biochemistry.

If one can say it goes against our biology is a big question. With primate sexuality it's all deeply connected to the exchanges within a group. So the lack of sexual opportunity might create a reflex of dissatisfaction: we doubt increasingly our status, our exchange abilities and self-containment. A lack is created in our minds but does it reflect a real lack in biological sense?

On a more slippery level one could speculate about what exactly happens during the build-up of tension and semen in males. The lack of any other alternative for transformation or sublimation might be the cause of the many emotional and physical problems some research suggests. Although the whole prostate cancer story seems fishy to me as there are so many wildly variant hormonal and environmental factors involved.

I'm not aware of any research that takes any spiritual or philosophical dimension into account, meaning that there's no systematic data on what happens on a biochemical level if one lives outside the normal patterns of internal stress building and release or the degree one is attached to social structures. That these factors could influence aggression, heart diseases and much other stuff seems rather obvious to me.

[Alex Jacob]

In the school of yoga, they say that you can indeed stop having sex and internalize sexual energy, and there is nothing harmful in doing that, and indeed a great deal that is beneficial (the retention of semen in men), but you have to be willing to do it, meaning you have to want to do it, and you can't then tantalize yourself with sexual images, thoughts, desires. Also, you have to change your diet, avoiding certain foods like meat, oils, butter, wine, hot foods, onions and garlic, etc. There are pranayama excersizes and visualization excersizes to move the energy into different channels and up and away from the sexual center. In short, you have to change your whole life-style.
__________________________________________________

David, I understand all that you write. I think you flatter yourself that you are saying something I haven't heard a thousand times. What you don't get is why I resist your trip. You completely do not understand that, so it is really me that has to ask you what you have managed to understand or not.

You are a very complete and even a 'gifted' religious Philistine. The best you have been able to do in your reading is to reduce it to information and construct an edifice of dogma that you inhabit. Your understanding of religious processes, what it means, what its purposes are, and all the possible relatioships there are to spiritual life, is so basic and childish that it is appaling. Your education in the widest sense possible is lopsided.

What happens in a person who comes into contact with 'God', the mystery, the 'spirit', the innards of his own soul, the processes that religious and spiritual people describe, is always unique and very personal. There are many, many different ways to respond to this in one's life, and not just one dull model that you present. You profess---again it is stuff you weild---to have some special understanding of the mystics (say, Ramakrishna) and to all appearances you 'defend' this zone within the human possibility, you 'own' it or think you do. You think you have the right to explain it. But really you cheapen it, you vulgarize it. There is no beauty or wonder in what you write, and no love. There are no relationships and no relatedness in your living. There is little humility in the face of life and its magnificence. Your like a toad down in the bottom of some well, croaking endlessly.

So much completely escapes you. 'What is this Moloch that ate up your brains & your imagination?' (Ginsberg) I have asked the question many times. Ramakrishna allowed all sorts of different people into his sanga, and he seemed to understand the magnificence of the possibilities in each life, even in one consumed in pleasures. Sometimes, it is those processes (the 'Dionysian' as you say with little comprehension) that is the vehicle in which 'God' is working. How people come to terms with that, and what that means, is something you don't seem to grasp.

You're going to open a church soon. Save souls and such.

In the end, you and Sue have only converted yourselves into cheap moralizers. You completely misunderstand the greater portion of what I write as antidote and analog to your vulgarisms, and in your latest note you are trying to work some age angle. (I will certainly get to 50 by and by). You are making yourself into Cub Scout Captain and your 'wife' into Den Mother. It is just a hair short of ridiculous.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

In the school of yoga, they say that you can indeed stop having sex and internalize sexual energy, and there is nothing harmful in doing that, and indeed a great deal that is beneficial (the retention of semen in men), but you have to be willing to do it, meaning you have to want to do it, and you can't then tantalize yourself with sexual images, thoughts, desires. Also, you have to change your diet, avoiding certain foods like meat, oils, butter, wine, hot foods, onions and garlic, etc. There are pranayama excersizes and visualization excersizes to move the energy into different channels and up and away from the sexual center. In short, you have to change your whole life-style.

Alex, what you write about the 'school of yoga' is easy to copy from books and websites. But what is your experience with it? Did you ever want to do it that way and did you manage the change in life-style?

The things is, it's not really about avoiding foods or sexual images and thoughts. Perhaps it once was. Actually both of those tactics could easily worsen the situation. Following a Sattvic diet, even partially easily unleashes more energy and increases sensitivity for desires or fantasies that one is still holding dear. Participation in busy social settings and exposure to common non-sexual imagery already can trigger anything what can be triggered. Sex is the language that is used for a lot of exchanges these days. When our thinking, our being is still attached to illusion, still longing, still deeply seperated - everything eventually will function as sexual image as long the core of the illusion is not shattered. So purification only can easily lead to the opposite of the desired state. Same with suppression or immense efforts for self-control.

There is no beauty or wonder in what you write, and no love.

And that's exactly the beauty of it, naturally.

[Shahrazad]

Diebert,

When our thinking, our being is still attached to illusion, still longing, still deeply seperated - everything eventually will function as sexual image as long the core of the illusion is not shattered. So purification only can easily lead to the opposite of the desired state. Same with suppression or immense efforts for self-control.

This does not address my concern. If I get rid of the illusion that food tastes great, and with great work I manage to get rid of my hunger pains, and I don't eat for a week, I will not be free from the physical reactions and damage my body will endure. It is very similar with sex.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

I will not be free from the physical reactions and damage my body will endure. It is very similar with sex.

Could you try to make that case? That it damages the body or the physical abstinence itself creates chemical imbalances? So far you're just asserting it as fact. What for benefit an animal would have if it becomes weaker when there's no mate available, destroying chances for later encounters. It doesn't make evolutionary sense either when seen from that perspective.

[BMcGilly07]

I will not be free from the physical reactions and damage my body will endure. It is very similar with sex.

Could you try to make that case? That it damages the body or the physical abstinence itself creates chemical imbalances? So far you're just asserting it as fact. What for benefit an animal would have if it becomes weaker when there's no mate available, destroying chances for later encounters. It doesn't make evolutionary sense either when seen from that perspective.

Indeed. The only detriment there could be would be psychological, and if one is abstinent without having resolved the psychological hang-ups associated with Woman he's approaching the solution backwards. That being said, the psychological detriment is certainly not a given, in fact the damage is only done if the hang-ups exist in the first place, in either case if the hang-ups exist the damage is already existent.

The analogy of food to sex does not hold water, one could die without food, and become immortal if he understands the latter.

Note: Edited word choice

[Shahrazad]

Diebert,

Could you try to make that case? That it damages the body or the physical abstinence itself creates chemical imbalances? So far you're just asserting it as fact.

My conclusion is based on decades of observation. I can't show you proof, but I have a chemical imbalance myself (caused by ADHD), and I recognize the symptoms of a chemically imbalanced brain.

The only case I'm willing to make right now is that I have gone through long periods of time both without sex and without missing or desiring sex (two years, for example), and once I break the "fast", my brain chemistry changes noticeably, in a positive way. Why would my brain start functioning better if the abstinence had no physical consequence?

I have female friends and relatives, and I can tell when they are not having sex. They get very irritable. Would you claim that you have never noticed this yourself?

You and all others here seem to believe the reactions from lack of sex are purely psychological and caused by desires. I don't buy that.

What for benefit an animal would have if it becomes weaker when there's no mate available, destroying chances for later encounters. It doesn't make evolutionary sense either when seen from that perspective.

Doesn't an animal weaken when he spends too much time without finding food? Does the drive to eat not make evolutionary sense either?

[Cory Duchesne]

David or Dan,

I have noticed that women who are abstaining from sex do not function well. They are bitter and cranky. They go into fits at the slightest provocation. Their thinking is chaotic.

Perhaps you have it backwards.

Being bitter, cranky and irrational is a sure way to ensure you don't get laid.

The former might be causing the later, rather than vice versa.

[Alex Jacob]

I verified it for myself, Diebert. I used pranayama techniques, mantras ('affirmations') and some visualization excercizes to reroute energy from the genitals up to the stomach, to the heart, and to the head, etc. You seem to be aware of it but you can find that information in Scientific Healing Affirmations (Yogananda) and Ramacharaka's book on Pranayama, The Science of Breath. There are other sources too I'm sure. The principal is very simple, and it certainly works.

Sure, a 'sattvic' diet will have those effect, but it doesn't matter with the sexual excercizes: it is not the stimulation that is bad in itself, in fact it is recognized as a source of tremendous power. The object is to move the enrgy, displace it, to an area where it can be used and not dissipated.

"When our thinking, our being is still attached to illusion, still longing, still deeply seperated - everything eventually will function as sexual image as long the core of the illusion is not shattered. So purification only can easily lead to the opposite of the desired state. Same with suppression or immense efforts for self-control."

Now you're talking out of the yoga books, home-boy. Talk about your process of illusion---what is this illusion you are talking about? What are you going to 'shatter'? Separated from what, Diebert? Bring the person Diebert into this exercize...I'd like to get to know him.

"And that's exactly the beauty of it, naturally." (David's writing)

Ramakrishna's writing (quotes) has that simple beauty, or the writing of Tagore. But neither of these two men ever lost sight of the world. Also, they understood very wide dimensions in human experience, in human spirituality. Never, ever did they come acorss like uptight school teachers.

It is unbeckoming when you interpose yourself between David and myself, Diebert. You do this often. It is predictable. You are not really being truthful about what you REALLY think. But, there is always 4/5ths of you that holds back anyway. I guess it's your modus operandi...

[Shahrazad]

Cory,

Being bitter, cranky and irrational is a sure way to ensure you don't get laid.

The former might be causing the later, rather than vice versa.

I don't think this is it, because when they go back to happy and rational is after they have sex, not before. I bother to verify this by asking them (when is last time you had sex?).

It just occurred to me that there also seems to be a correlation with crankiness and having a huge workload. When this happens, people don't have time to have sex. So then I would not be able to tell whether the lack of sex or excess of work is the culprit, or both. We'd have to separate these possible causes.

I wouldn't be surprised if studies have already been done to establish how moods correlate to sexual activity.

[Cory Duchesne]

Don't these people (who you say are bereft of sex) just masturbate?

[Shahrazad]

Don't these people (who you say are bereft of sex) just masturbate?

Are you saying the effects are the same?

[Cory Duchesne]

Physiologically, I don't necessarily see much difference. What about you?

[Shahrazad]

I see a lot of differences, especially for women. Masturbation is boring. Sex with the right person is not.

Edit: Oh, you said physiologically. Sorry. Technically there should not be.