Sex is neither love nor an expression of love. It's a quasi-voluntary indulgence of animal nature. Give it a status higher than that and prepare to be miserable.
That love which depends on sexual act for its expression (e.g. romantic love) is but a sexual desire in disguise of love. Romantic love is a joke.
The strict definition of "love" in this regard is: Respect, empathy, compassion. Nothing else. Because in the end only those are the things that give us deepest satisfaction from inter-human relationships. Sex is an important element of man-woman relationship, but all along it is serving to our animal side, while the human side only craves love (strictly) as defined above.
That sex is an expression of love is a widely prevalent notion. Here's my explanation against it: Love is respect-empathy-compassion. Three cases: One feels love for one's 1) mother, 2) sister, and 3) girlfriend. Meaning, one feels respect-empathy-compassion towards one's mother, sister and girlfriend. In the first two cases this love is perfectly expressed without using the channel of sex. One hugs and kisses one's mother and sister, but it isn't accompanied by sexual arousal. Hence, hugging and kissing are not by themselves sexual acts. (We do that to babies too.) So, if we say that sex is an expression of love, aren't we saying that while one can express respect-empathy-compassion towards one's mother and sister through various other means without sex, but with girlfriend the same thing love, i.e. respect-empathy-compassion needs an additional channel of sex for its expression? That doesn't make sense as to why. That means in the girlfriend case there's something else, in addition to just love i.e. respect-empathy-compassion that is being transferred between the persons, which essentially requires the channel of sex. That something else, I would say, is "mating package", which contains romance plus sexual desire.
In the girlfriend case, in contrast to the other two cases, now we have two things. Love, which is respect-empathy-compassion, and "mating package". Now this is important: Interestingly, mating package creates in one's mind an illusion of love. Meaning, when the mating package is active, one feels respect-empathy-compassion for the person one is fixated on, but it is not genuine.
Proof: When one is in "romantic love" one feels respect-empathy-compassion for the person one is fixated on, but wouldn't feel the same respect-empathy-compassion for someone else carrying the same qualities. One becomes biased. And that bias is due to romance, or the active mating package. That's the reason one feels strongly even towards a person who doesn't carry similar ideology, or continually hurts one, and is always in conflict of one kind or another. Still love! That's actually an active mating package. Hadn't it been for mating package, one wouldn't be stuck on that person, much less feel any respect-empathy-compassion.
In an ideal case it might be that one genuinely has respect-empathy-compassion for one's partner, accompanying the active mating package. But if we look at the mating package in isolation, separately, it is clearly not a sign of genuine respect-empathy-compassion.
Reminding at this point that mating package is romance + sexual desire.
Now, mating package originates out of our animal side. Because one does not have control over it. In ordinary cases when one stops liking someone one can say to oneself: "Okay, that's enough. I can't respect, empathize, feel compassion for this person anymore for so and so reason". One is done. But in case where mating package is active, that is not possible. In the former, the love is originating out of the "autonomous" part of the person, while in the latter, the illusion-love is originating out of the heteronomous part of the person. Heteronomous part is the same in us as in other animals which are more-or-less fully heteronomous. Hence, anything happening due to mating package pertains to animal nature. The genuine love, which is respect-empathy-compassion comes out of the autonomous, human part of us.
I am not talking about disowning the animal part of us. It's as much a part of us as the human part, and has to be entertained for a wholesome experience. But since the animal part is heteronomous (hence quasi-voluntary) and is governed by the universe, and human part is autonomous, there are often conflicts of goals between the two. So, in the event of conflict, if one knows what belongs to which part, then only one can make a right decision of choosing one's human goals, instead of tilting towards the universe's goals and bruise the human within. Universe is barbarous. Autonomy is the hallmark of being human. That part of one's behavior on which one doesn't have autonomous control pertains to one's animal nature.
It should be clear that I am not against having a mature relationship with romantic love and sex. And no, I don't have romanticism attached to abstention! Here's what I am for: Enter into a relationship with perfect understanding of romantic love mechanism and the place and function of sex. Romantic love can't be bypassed, so it will develop. Enjoy it, but don't get carried away by it (as in don't develop unrealistic expectations following it). Also, of course, indulge in sex to the fullest, but be aware of what it is, so as to not give it undeserved status, which might cause tragedies. Example: If one thinks of sex as sacred union and things like that, then one can't bear it when one learns that one's partner sometimes fantasizes about others. Another example: if one considers sexual gratification as a sign of it being a "true love" then sexual dissatisfaction would induce one to break the relationship. I could give many tragic examples with different reasoning people hold with respect to sex and romance. The idea is to understand what is what, so that one knows what is really important. It is not sex and romance, but love i.e. respect-empathy-compassion that matters in the end.
That love which depends on sexual act for its expression (e.g. romantic love) is but a sexual desire in disguise of love. Romantic love is a joke.
The strict definition of "love" in this regard is: Respect, empathy, compassion. Nothing else. Because in the end only those are the things that give us deepest satisfaction from inter-human relationships. Sex is an important element of man-woman relationship, but all along it is serving to our animal side, while the human side only craves love (strictly) as defined above.
That sex is an expression of love is a widely prevalent notion. Here's my explanation against it: Love is respect-empathy-compassion. Three cases: One feels love for one's 1) mother, 2) sister, and 3) girlfriend. Meaning, one feels respect-empathy-compassion towards one's mother, sister and girlfriend. In the first two cases this love is perfectly expressed without using the channel of sex. One hugs and kisses one's mother and sister, but it isn't accompanied by sexual arousal. Hence, hugging and kissing are not by themselves sexual acts. (We do that to babies too.) So, if we say that sex is an expression of love, aren't we saying that while one can express respect-empathy-compassion towards one's mother and sister through various other means without sex, but with girlfriend the same thing love, i.e. respect-empathy-compassion needs an additional channel of sex for its expression? That doesn't make sense as to why. That means in the girlfriend case there's something else, in addition to just love i.e. respect-empathy-compassion that is being transferred between the persons, which essentially requires the channel of sex. That something else, I would say, is "mating package", which contains romance plus sexual desire.
In the girlfriend case, in contrast to the other two cases, now we have two things. Love, which is respect-empathy-compassion, and "mating package". Now this is important: Interestingly, mating package creates in one's mind an illusion of love. Meaning, when the mating package is active, one feels respect-empathy-compassion for the person one is fixated on, but it is not genuine.
Proof: When one is in "romantic love" one feels respect-empathy-compassion for the person one is fixated on, but wouldn't feel the same respect-empathy-compassion for someone else carrying the same qualities. One becomes biased. And that bias is due to romance, or the active mating package. That's the reason one feels strongly even towards a person who doesn't carry similar ideology, or continually hurts one, and is always in conflict of one kind or another. Still love! That's actually an active mating package. Hadn't it been for mating package, one wouldn't be stuck on that person, much less feel any respect-empathy-compassion.
In an ideal case it might be that one genuinely has respect-empathy-compassion for one's partner, accompanying the active mating package. But if we look at the mating package in isolation, separately, it is clearly not a sign of genuine respect-empathy-compassion.
Reminding at this point that mating package is romance + sexual desire.
Now, mating package originates out of our animal side. Because one does not have control over it. In ordinary cases when one stops liking someone one can say to oneself: "Okay, that's enough. I can't respect, empathize, feel compassion for this person anymore for so and so reason". One is done. But in case where mating package is active, that is not possible. In the former, the love is originating out of the "autonomous" part of the person, while in the latter, the illusion-love is originating out of the heteronomous part of the person. Heteronomous part is the same in us as in other animals which are more-or-less fully heteronomous. Hence, anything happening due to mating package pertains to animal nature. The genuine love, which is respect-empathy-compassion comes out of the autonomous, human part of us.
I am not talking about disowning the animal part of us. It's as much a part of us as the human part, and has to be entertained for a wholesome experience. But since the animal part is heteronomous (hence quasi-voluntary) and is governed by the universe, and human part is autonomous, there are often conflicts of goals between the two. So, in the event of conflict, if one knows what belongs to which part, then only one can make a right decision of choosing one's human goals, instead of tilting towards the universe's goals and bruise the human within. Universe is barbarous. Autonomy is the hallmark of being human. That part of one's behavior on which one doesn't have autonomous control pertains to one's animal nature.
It should be clear that I am not against having a mature relationship with romantic love and sex. And no, I don't have romanticism attached to abstention! Here's what I am for: Enter into a relationship with perfect understanding of romantic love mechanism and the place and function of sex. Romantic love can't be bypassed, so it will develop. Enjoy it, but don't get carried away by it (as in don't develop unrealistic expectations following it). Also, of course, indulge in sex to the fullest, but be aware of what it is, so as to not give it undeserved status, which might cause tragedies. Example: If one thinks of sex as sacred union and things like that, then one can't bear it when one learns that one's partner sometimes fantasizes about others. Another example: if one considers sexual gratification as a sign of it being a "true love" then sexual dissatisfaction would induce one to break the relationship. I could give many tragic examples with different reasoning people hold with respect to sex and romance. The idea is to understand what is what, so that one knows what is really important. It is not sex and romance, but love i.e. respect-empathy-compassion that matters in the end.
0 Comment(s):
Post a Comment
Please preview and double-check your comment before posting. Use proper formatting, i.e. do not use all caps or all small letters, no short forms like cud, dnt, lyk, b4 etc., use right punctuation,.. or the comment won't be approved. View full comment policy.