Why Work? Forum Index Why Work?
Creating Livable Alternatives to Wage Slavery
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Informative/funny debate/flame war on sexuality and std's
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Why Work? Forum Index -> Off Topic Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
xog



Joined: 26 Sep 2007
Posts: 413
Location: Hawaii

PostPosted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

erga: :-p= :-)

ygaj: Not I! NO WAY!! I was NOT a preacher's son! :-)

The only thing my old man preached was the hard right conservatism in the old pre-kennedy democratic style, looking possibly precognitively like Nixon, wagging jowls and all, all of which I wholeheartedly rebeled against. No. He was so un-preacher that due to his being a 3rd generation German emmegrant old country patriot, he thought Hitler was right. In short, a total follow the leader asshole. When hippiedom rolled around, in his head he equated us all with Jews. At a heated discussion on the subject over dinner one night in '68, he banged his fist on the table as he made his points to where plates were bouncing. When I didn't just agree and started talking peace, love and warlessness, he left the table, went to his den, came back, pointed his gun at my head, and said, "This is my house! While you are under my roof you will do as I say!" I agreed it was his house, and left, began my wanderings, and returned only for his funeral. For all that structured in stone immobility, he was into the more spiritual and arcane aspects of his 33rd degreed Mason membership, though not to any practical spiritual avail. He couldn't zap a damn thing up or down. I said "Fuck him" then, and I still say it now.

But at one point I did think about being a preacher. I was in the "would've been if..." genre. These days I'm an "I never would". One might ask "What inspired me back then to that thought?" I know noone asked, but, as you know by now, I like to run on about anything I can get or had my teeth into. :-) So................

Well,......it all began with Adam and Eve. Seriously. That damned apple echos through time, a cosmic reverberation. Mor specifically, my inspiration was a well endowed and pretty daughter of a fervently religious family, who sat next to me in my 9th grade math class. She inspired my first and manys the in class hard on, as well as many embarassing moments when standing up, dripping amorous poetry, etc. So, following my dripping pointer, and entering the metaphoric open doors she gave me, I began courting her. On a practical level that meant that, even though I was raised a once a week or less Methodist before it "Unitied" and I hear became somewhat evangelic (in other words it was arid as Arizona when I was there), I began attending her evangelistic Church of Christ church three times a week. We petted heavily in the pews during services, at mid-week brainwashing classes, in unused hallways en route to after services socials when we could manage it, and eventually on her livingroom couch. Ah, the stained trousers. Then the civics class teacher assigned a career report. In line with my still at and ultimately never-beyond-3rd-base-but-still-hopeful-efforts at scoring with her, I chose preacherhood to report on, you know, in hopes a stolen base home run would ensue, imaginary crowds in my head cheering, confetti in the air, and an All Start promotion to the "no-longer-virgin" league. I got an "A" on the report. But I had no experience at or courage for that home run. Or information to work with. Just youthful vitality pulsing through my midsection. Lo and woe, I was definitely no Babe Ruth. And the ways of women are eternally as Cindy Lauper sang, it seems. She just wanted to have fun. She chose to go back to her old boyfriend, who was himself in High School. Prior to my courting efforts, I had heard he had scored a few homeruns with her before. Small town, big gossip. I admit my courage at the time was limited to going where some man had gone before, taking any well worn path. My only excuse is a lame one; there was no Star Trek to expand my imagination. These days I say I take it she just wanted her ache satisfied. Back then it left me, who still fully believed in my delusions and was unaware of how disprespectful my attitudes about women were, heartbroken and dripping, a victim of love, howling like a country western song about a lost dog, with severe aches above and below my belt. It could have been worse; I could have had enough courage, got her pregnant and been stuck with her. As it was, I gave up my aspirations for preacherhood when my pointer pointed elsewhere, which was immediately, at someone else I had heard was also experienced, and, blessedly it turned out, was not religious, and was easy home run material. Anything to get past that dreaded label of virgin. (I don't know about kids these days, but we were a mess back then, we needed the sixties to get our heads out of our asses and our parent's asses) So it is that I tend to agree when women say we men are dogs who think with their pointers. Of course, in this ever Taoistically at balance chaotic universe, that means they are dogs who think with their dusted off home plates, yeah? :-)

To continue the running on, in '96, 33 years after I somehow graduated from High School, I discovered Classmates.com. In HS I was less socially adept than I am now and didn't have many friends, so exploring Classmates.com's site was an empty experience for me, like walking down a mute ghost inhabited corridor, no one saying, "Boo". But for one.....once my name was on their list, the self same inspirer of my first in class hard on did contact me. Fortunately, at the time I was 11 years into my at present very happy and satisfying 23 year relationship, which means I wasn't so needy I fell for her hooks or lines out of some dreary rememberance of the smell of her bait. Her lines consisted of her talking about things like how the "boys at the bars think I'm much younger than I am" and how "I turn them down because they are so immature". Her hook was how lonely and available she was in her trailer. Her bait was letting it be known that her father had been abusing her when I was courting her, which she did in such a way it she seemed to think that would turn me on like...well...math class, and give me more courage than I had back then. I have an openly honest relationship with my wife. I had been sharing those and all other emails with my her, who at my request edited most of what I wrote back then because my spelling and grammer was atrocious,....and because, basically, she was nosy, yeah? What better way to quell a mate's insecurities. I had no hidden agendas, so I didn't care. I figured it gave me a smarter, stronger, more enduring partner on my side of the revenge match with my old heart breaker. As well, I used the experience to learn more about the psyche of our fair sisters. That's not something a man often gets the opportunity to do. My wife and I had quite a few laughs and groans about that woman's emails, at that woman's expense of course. I was on a mission and had dues to get paid. It was a sore ache that woman gave me back in the day. As she attempted to string me along, I strung her along for weeks using female tricks my wife inadvertantly let me in on, explaining the mechanics of them to me. A very illuminating experience. Then, when that woman thought she had her hook firmly set in my mouth, I let her know my aches were no longer existent because I was happily married and "my wife, who I love and am faithful to has been editing all of my emails to you." :-) I never heard from that biatch again. But, you know, I'm sure she slithered back to, if she wasn't already sitting with her laptop the whole time where "the boys at the bars", no matter how immature they were, were willing and happy to take care of her aches, after a few drinks if nothing else.

It seemed like you must have studied religion at an intellectual, higher ed level, well beyond my earthy and elementary efforts, or lack there of. That had to be a dry experience for you. Was it? I mean, it seems to me that thinking about god and ordering those thoughts according to a class room curriculum is like playing with an imaginary erector set without even the benefit of imaginary nuts and bolts included, a total mustard seed futility laced with huge hopes that the mind is all there is in life; a sure shriveler of pointing things. Something to be proud of though, I suppose. Watch out for their prognosticated fall.

Sitchen, Daniken, and Christian O'Brien. Probably lots of others out there I'm unaware of, too. Never heard of Daniken before. I'm not really that knowledgable about alien theories. But I have read Sitchen and O'Brien, both of which make so much sense to me personally that is was easy to comprehend, integrate, and translate into my own language, and thus easy to recount. In my own experience with practical magic, before I heard of or read them, I never used a god or goddess figure to pray through or to. It just didn't seem necessary to me, like adding a zero to an equation just for the hell of it, taking up space on a cast line with something so unreal it takes up no space; dead weight if it had in fact existed, but since it hasn't was a bit of the line out of control. Even if they did exist, making something from nothing works for me without the use of some self-negating and -disempowering supreme-other image involved to pull it off. I was and am in the habit of taking full responsibility and claiming complete authority over myself. So when I read those two guys' works, everything they said just rang like a bell that was already ringing inside of me. It gave everything I was doing an intellectual grounding in archeology and ancient linguistics, that even the least intellectual religious type could not deny the validity of. Of coure, dogma gives enables them to deny the most obvious things. Reading the works of those two also started making sense of what for me until then never had; what was going on in the world around me. Before that modern politics and world leadership seemed totally off the wall, a spin spun by professional political spinners to keep everyone dizzy from spinning, only to be caught up in the spun web of....what?...the alien social experiment? What else could it be? Alien sadism? Extraterestrial humor? Hell, I don't know. I just know I don't like or appreciate it. My sense of taking full responsibility and complete authority over myself become more obstinate at any thoughts about it. When and if they deem to make theirselves known to the masses and my survival is on the line, I will test my magic against their technology. I realize it's a very Obama thing; an audacious hope.

Speaking of which, Obama won. Do you believe it? Will Clinton concede? Will McCain not be just couped into office like his no press allowed closed door fund raising buddy Bush? Whatever. Who do you think Obama will choose for VP? I think if he chooses Gore and Gore accepts, they will be unstoppable, at least in quanitities of really compassionate rhetoric. I mean, I would think aliens entrenched for hundreds of thousands of years won't give up the ship, or the Apsu, or the gold easily, or the reins. Assuming of course that Obama and Gore aren't themselves walkins, Obama could get things on track, Gore could ably assist, both of those thinking men sitting around in the White House Oval Office having illuminative discussions of what to do to straighten things out, the press snapping pictures the whole time. They could even invite Monica to sit under the desk for old times sake, to spice things up. Eight years later Gore could get what he should have gotten in 2000, and carry the ball further. Unless.........rather grandfather clock-like, the Mayan Calander strikes 2012, going bong bong bong bong bong bong bong bong bong bong bong bong bong..., glass blower stoners everywhere striking it rich thanks to subliminal laterals. Oh what a buzz it could be, so much of a buzz pollen would drift on its own from plant to plant. Bees could retire on some bee-ch in the Bee-hamas, their stingers on permenant display in the Smithsonian, Cruiseship ads amping for discount prices Darwinites and the less-than-faithful-descendants-of-dinasaur-ridders the opportunity to see the Queen bee herself getting a tan on her private bee-ch, her stripes turning from black and yellow to blacker and burnt orange, as she is attended by her no longer wage(honey) slave worker bees. A bee-utiful experience.

Okay, I'm done running on.......for now.
_________________
effectus nihil est profundus sub pensus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ergasiophobic



Joined: 10 Jan 2007
Posts: 349

PostPosted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 8:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As matter of fact though, my greatgrandfather was a primitive southern baptist preacher. Hell-fire, Damnation and all that. I attended every other sunday for several years in my preteens. The singing was good and the food was even better. Smile

My stepgrandfather took up some preaching and bible studying about a year or two before he died, also. I didn't even know he was a believer, myself. He once told me, "December 25th isn't even Jesus' birthday. Christmas is just a time that corporations made up to get you to buy stuff." Smile

Maybe he was just in a foxhole? looking for salvation before he left this world. That's the plausible theory. He had health problems due to smoking and had open heart surgery from which he went into a coma and never returned.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yougetajob



Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Posts: 672

PostPosted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 9:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:

ygaj: Not I! NO WAY!! I was NOT a preacher's son! Smile


Who am I thinking of then? I thought it was you even before I misinterpreted that comment of yours. I dunno. Maybe it's someone from a different forum. Anyway...

Lol, you were quite the horndog back then eh? Smile It seems like all your stories work back to that. Not that I'm saying there's anything wrong that. I'd probably trade my often non-existant love life for yours on most days.


Quote:

It seemed like you must have studied religion at an intellectual, higher ed level, well beyond my earthy and elementary efforts, or lack there of. That had to be a dry experience for you. Was it? I mean, it seems to me that thinking about god and ordering those thoughts according to a class room curriculum is like playing with an imaginary erector set without even the benefit of imaginary nuts and bolts included, a total mustard seed futility laced with huge hopes that the mind is all there is in life; a sure shriveler of pointing things. Something to be proud of though, I suppose. Watch out for their prognosticated fall.


Lol, ya. You'd think that would've been what it was like, but it wasn't. That's what fundamentalism does to you. That God existed and was everything basic Christian doctrine says he is was as certain to me as the sky being blue. My entire basis of reality was built on this. Whenever any kind of problems arose in my life I always went back to this. Every few months I'd sort of "reset" myself, getting down to the "unquestionable truths" that I "knew". Ever since I was a kid it was like this. Back then it was usually a Billy Graham crusade on TV. That guilt inducing bastard. Always pre-empting baseball playoffs and what not. Ya, so whenever trouble arose, and I didn't know how to handle it, I'd say to myself, "I must not love Jesus enough, or I must not be praying enough. If I put all of that first, everything else has to work out.

As far as formal education in stuff like this goes, yeah, you'd think that it'd very difficult considering the fact that the subject is all intangible and what not. But everyone there believed to their core that "the bible was it". God's instruction manual. If something didn't make sense, or was hard to understand, it was because we (the oh so low, apple eating fuckups that we are) didn't have enough faith to see it, or "God was withholding it from us", or it wasn't important that we be able to grasp it now (maybe someday if we're lucky and God has mercy on us...Yay! As Rod and Todd Flanders would say Smile)

That was at a evangelical/baptist leaning school (even though they touted themselves as inter-denominational). At a catholic school I'd imagine they'd put more emphasis on certain dogmas and church and pope declarations, creeds and what have you. Any kind of questioning spirit dissapears when you've convinced yourself that the Bible is inerrant and all authoritative, or the pope is God's messenger or whatever it may be. When stuff comes along that seems to butt up against one of these truths, it's just sort like "Well, that's a noodle scratcher (as Ned Flanders would say Smile), I wonder where all these million year old fossils came from? I guess God must have planted them here to test our faith. Because we all know that the earth is 6000 years old."

Quote:

Speaking of which, Obama won. Do you believe it? Will Clinton concede? Will McCain not be just couped into office like his no press allowed closed door fund raising buddy Bush? Whatever. Who do you think Obama will choose for VP? I think if he chooses Gore and Gore accepts, they will be unstoppable, at least in quanitities of really compassionate rhetoric


Yeah, that it is kinda surprising that he won. Six months ago I would've said that I'd think that there was a bullet with his name on it. Now I've kinda taken a slow step back from "conspiracy mode". I like Canadian politics. Most shady business at least seems to not stay secret for too long. Everything is much more open. That's probably in part because our journalists seem to actually care about what's actually going on. The other part probably has to do with how we don't have our fingers in everybody else's pie.

But yeah, Gore would be good I think. All the greenies would vote for them. But then again, they probably wouldn't have voted for Mcain anyway. Also, and maybe this is a bit racist, but I think they'd probably get a lot more of the black vote too. Gore, being the white v.p. and working for the "man" Barack. Maybe that's silly. I dunno. But I hear Obama doesn't go over with well with many blacks. Hillary had much more support from that segment I hear.

People are so fickle and small minded that things like that seem to have a fairly big effect. Policy? Bah. "Did she cry! OMG". "His pastor said what!?".

I don't really know enough about it to guess who he'll pick. I don't think they're going to win anyway. I can't believe how it's even a contest. How can people even think of voting republican after all the shit G.W. pulled?

Quote:

As matter of fact though, my greatgrandfather was a primitive southern baptist preacher. Hell-fire, Damnation and all that. I attended every other sunday for several years in my preteens. The singing was good and the food was even better.


Maybe it was you I thinking about as having a preacher connection.

I'll always remember sunday mornings growing up. Every single time (from about 14 on, before that I liked going), my mom would politely ask me to wake up. I'd say "in a minute, in a minute", hoping that'd I could put it off long enough so that the rest of the family would be put in a spot where they'd be late if they waited for me any longer. But it never worked. After usually the third attempt by mom, I'd hear dad stomping aggressively down the hall to my room. At this point, church suddenly seemed like a totally fine way to spend a sunday morning Smile. I think this little drama played out till my last year of high school. At some point I remeber making a deal and only having to go every other week.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
xog



Joined: 26 Sep 2007
Posts: 413
Location: Hawaii

PostPosted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 4:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wry deal, that ever other week thing. :-) Which half of you is saved? :-)

Nobody in the public knows who the O-man will choose for VP. If McCain wins, it will for sure mean it was another vote manipulation, like the last two times. Hillary and Bill have been making so many faux pas, talking with two forked tongues out of both sides of their mouths throughout this campagne, they've been steadily losing anything that had started out as sewed up because of relativity to Bush. I wonder what the media outside of the US is saying. I'm sure it isn't the same as what we hear here. It looks to me like it's being set up for O to win. I don't really trust any of them.

Who isn't a horndog in their teens? A little ketchup and mustard, please. :-) I'm not one now. :-/ You know, my stories may seem to always go back to that, but, if so, it's more because I didn't get it that much than it is I got it alot. Those times stand out in my mind because I could feel and explore myself easier when in the act. PTSD numbs. Plus those were times someone actually expressed love for me, which was not happening for me in my formative years at all, so it seemed to give me validity to myself. And it's a pleasurabe detail to be describing. No real strutting going on. It was me reaching out for me. I have to look at that some more. Thanks for bringing that up.

Maybe it was Erga. Maybe it was Blackmoss. I don't know. It wasn't me. When it's realtive to that particular stick, it's been me and the devil for a long time. The Old Boy gets a bad rap IMO.
_________________
effectus nihil est profundus sub pensus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yougetajob



Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Posts: 672

PostPosted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 1:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sorry if I sounded critical xog. I didn't mean to, and I wasn't trying to be. It was just an observation.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
xog



Joined: 26 Sep 2007
Posts: 413
Location: Hawaii

PostPosted: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I didn't feel you were being critical, ygaj. Thanks for being sorry though. You can stop that now. :-) No, I thought it was just an observation, and in a comradely manner. It made me smile first thing. Then I thought about it. My own changes are my responsibility there. But I have contacted my lawyer about bringing a suit for emotional distress. :-)
He said he had a three piece and he'd do that if I found someone wearing a to the navel, no back, low cut mini dress, matching Prado heels, some viagra and ribbed Trojans. :-) Oh, and a battery powered dildo. I guess he's into multiple orface plunging.

You know, man. Paid nuts are all fucked up all on their own. No problem. Age makes a person more cautious, but it doesn't stop them from being like the rest of the human race--going through changes, no matter how comfortable feel they are. To think is to go through a change. If you miss a thought, throw an I Ching on it. Confucius never lies. A fortune cookie told me so after some great buffet chow mein. :-)
_________________
effectus nihil est profundus sub pensus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Broken Spirit



Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 1117
Location: xhentric.wordpress.com; whybother.freeboards.org

PostPosted: Sun Jun 08, 2008 8:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Off on a tangent in another thread,
YGAJ wrote:
I find it unlikely that a white kid looking to score is going to be any less or any more secretive of having an std than a black kid.


I may not have have made the point clear: There are those who suspect it is older adult males (who make advances towards younger adult (teen) females) who are most likely responsible for infecting young women, and therefor, her possible teenage partner as well.

It was fully mature African-American women who were talking about their communities. These women were suggesting that men council one another and develop an unwritten code to "leave young females alone" ---

More disturbing than daughters being hit-on by older men is the reality of the trafficking of young women as sex workers. Imagine when such a nightmare existence leads to pregnancy and the girl has to experience the abortion process.

On a lighter note, in The Man Who Died, D.H. Lawrence tells a story where Jesus of Nazareth has sex with a priestess of Isis in an Egyptian temple in the wilderness. This restores his contact with life and turns him into a mystical worshiper of the life-force.

He turned his back on 'heaven' and embraced the phenomenal world.

“The teacher and the savior are dead in me; now I can go about my own business, into my own single life”

"I wrote a story of the Resurrection, where Jesus gets up and feels very sick bout everything, and can't stand the old crowd any more - so cuts out - and as he heals up, he begins to find what an astonishing place the phenomenal world is, far more marvelous than any salvation or heaven - and thanks his stars he needn't have a mission any more." - Lawrence

Wow, excuse me. Speaking of the phenomenal world, this machine I am using must be over-heating as it is freezing up a bit. It seems that my body is better able to handle the heat than it is. I better turn it off and let it cool down. I'll be damned if I'm going to get an air-conditioner just for the computer!

Vulnerable to heat, vulnerable to water ... the earth is not electronic-gadget-friendly ...

Before giving my electronic friend a deserved rest, I will place some tid-bits here to try to reach some kind of balance when discussing sexuality. I found an article about a book called Sex Without Guilt In The 21st Century by Dr. Albert Ellis

Susan Levine wrote:
In reading the chapter "Why Americans Are So Fearful Of Sex" I found a few things that could easily explain the prevailing anti-sex reasoning, although these are entirely my perceptions. Ellis makes the following points about sex, with which I completely agree:

1. Americans are specifically taught to be fearful of sex.

2. Americans are raised to be overly-competitive about sex.

3. Americans are brought up to fear tenderness and love.

4. Americans are often generally fearful and neurotic.

The following quote really gave me some insight as to why these fears about sex persist today: "Innumerable specific examples can be found of American (as well as world-wide) puritanism, and is resulting in helping to make us, despite our recent increase in sexual liberalism, much more fearful of sex and guilty about various kinds of accepting it fully."

It is the word "puritanism" that explains a lot of things for me. Since the Puritans made up the majority of the Pilgrims who first landed from England onto Americas shores, we need to take a very close look at the Puritan philosophy about pleasure and sex. The Puritans, by all accounts, were rather grim, dour folks to begin with. They heavily frowned on the most innocent and non-sexual pleasures, considering them either a sinful or foolish waste of time, time which they believed was better spent in prayer. Im just glad I was not a young person raised in that time period. Had I been, I would probably have found myself praying for a little happiness in an otherwise miserable existence. Considering their harsh and unyielding views of non-sexual pleasures, one can only imagine what they felt about pleasure when it came to sex. My guess is that they felt sex and pleasure must never be mixed. Given that mindset, sex was only tolerated or just barely provided it was within marriage, and for a specific purpose, which of course was procreation. Any other purpose of sex was no doubt discouraged at best and forbidden at worst.

Lets fast forward to the 21st Century now. When you read the doctrines of the more orthodox religions, including traditional Catholicism, orthodox/conservative Christianity and Mormonism, to name just three, you can see that very little, if anything, has changed regarding the issue of sex. They appear to have the same attitudes toward sex solely for pleasure that the Puritans did in centuries long past. Procreation is still the main purpose of sex, with pleasure given almost no mention at all. Sexual acts that avoid the pregnancy risk altogether, such as masturbation, petting to orgasm and gay/lesbian sex are specifically labeled as "sins," not to be indulged in, PERIOD. Why? Because none of them result in the "responsibilities" or "consequences" of pregnancy, childbirth and parenthood, thats why! And given the attitudes of more than a few of the 21st Century religious groups towards sexual pleasure for its own sake, it is hardly surprising that Dr. Elliss books have gotten such a bad rap over the years. The reason is quite simple in my opinion: They dont WANT anyone enjoying sex without guilt, no matter how its done. In their minds, sex should be indulged in only with their permission, and only for the reasons they decide are acceptable.

But despite what I believe is a strong and persistent anti-sex feeling in America today that results in the prevailing censorship of Ellis's work, we are very fortunate that he hasn't given up on us. He wants us to know that enjoying Sex without Guilt is within easy reach. His first three chapters, which cover the topics of masturbation, petting, and premarital sex relations in detail, are invaluable to teens and young adults who want to learn how to enjoy true "safe sex" without the risks of unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. His chapter on premarital sex explains the advantages of knowing ourselves and our partners sexually before taking on the commitment and responsibility of marriage. This alone can save hundreds, even thousands of couples from making the mistake of marrying for the wrong reasons.


I guess the only responsible thing a sexually active person can do is to go get tested. I'm sure I don't have to inform anyone about masturbation, but this looks like a good place to post an essay I wrote about masturbation called "Warming the Heart":

WARMING THE HEART

In solitude one slithers into a private nook to stimulate oneself until one’s body shudders in orgasmic delight. Native Americans referred to this act as “warming the heart”. There was no shame attached to the act.

What are the roots of the shame associated with bringing oneself to orgasm? Recognizing the sexual impulse as the focus of the biological core of the human organism, one finds a hint as to why taboos against masturbation exist in certain cultures. Whether done spontaneously or methodically, satisfying the sexual impulse by stimulating oneself to orgasm has been interpreted as “outsmarting” a biological mechanism which functions ultimately as a method of reproduction. Orgasmic pleasure functions as a motivational force compelling the organism to copulate. Were we to quantify the intense pleasure experienced in orgasm, this quantity would be of the same magnitude as the importance biological reproduction is in the process of evolution. The species’ survival depends upon coitus. Therefore, orgasm is so indescribably satisfying for reasons transcending the individual.

The fact that masturbation is taboo suggests that bringing oneself to orgasm is or was considered deviant on grounds of morality or as constituting a risk. At the root of the taboo against masturbation is the fear of the consequences of interfering with the primal processes of evolution. This is the ultimate reason for the taboo, and yet the fact that masturbation remains a primary source of sexual pleasure for many people makes one wonder if pleasuring oneself serves an unaccounted for purpose in the larger scheme of human evolution. One also wonders if the shame and guilt associated with solitary masturbation is a cultural phenomenon. In 1994 Dr. Jocelyn Elders, the first woman appointed to the position of U.S. Surgeon General lost her job as Surgeon General because she proposed that masturbation should be taught in schools. This suggests that the masturbation taboo is enforced, not by the wisest elders of the culture, but simply by the dominant culture.

When one reads the writings of John Harvey Kellogg, M.D. from 1891 on “self-abuse”, one suspects he was ignorant of the universal power of the sexual impulse, and that he repressed or lied to himself about his own sexual needs. This short excerpt is from Plain facts for old and young: embracing the natural history and hygiene of organic life.

Kellogg writes:
The worse cases among young women are those in which the disease has advanced so far that erotic thoughts are attended by the same voluptuous sensations that accompany the practice. The author has met many cases of this sort in young women, who acknowledged that the sexual orgasm was thus produced, often several times daily. The author has found the application of pure carbolic acid to the clitoris an excellent means of allaying the abnormal excitement, and preventing the recurrence of the practice in those whose will-power has become so weakened that the patient is unable to exercise entire self-control.

In The People’s Common Sense Medical Advisor from 1895, in a section called Spermatorrhea, Dr. R. V. Pierce defines spermatorrhea as the emission of semen without copulation, induced by the habit of masturbation. Ridiculous as the following excerpt may be, against the backdrop of the work done by psychologists such as Carl Jung and Wilhelm Reich, this Dr. Pierce seems to be an example of an individual in the throes of repressing what he is unable to acknowledge about himself. This is how “the dark side of human nature” becomes infused with hidden power. Pierce demonizes the body:

[Spermatorrhea] is one of the evidences that passion, instead of prudence, has held sway. Passion may aptly be termed the voice of the body, by which, if we listen, we are enchanted and led astray. Conscience is the voice of the soul, which remonstrates, and if we obey, we shall be guided aright. We cannot reconcile these conflicting voices, and if we indulge the passions when conscience forbids gratification, the remembrance of the wrong remains forever, and constant fear is an everlasting punishment.


Since one can only experience the body (as passion from within) subjectively, one can infer that Dr. Pierce has experienced the voice of the body first hand in his own sexuality. Here we behold the classic mind-body dichotomy in full force. The conflict is not between the body and the mind, but between conscience mind and unconscious mind. The conscience represents the ego, the part most directly influenced by taboos, the part we project as our identity. The denied life of the body represents the dark side, the unconscious, the shadow (Conger 1988).

Wilhelm Reich wrote, in The Mass Psychology of Fascism (1933):

Mysticism is nothing other than unconscious longing for orgasm. Clinical experience shows incontestably that religious sentiments result from inhibited sexuality, that the source of mystical excitation is to be sought in inhibited sexual excitation.


Self-sacrifice is an integral part of most major organized religions. Orthodox religions deliberately instill guilt and shame in their adherents, and then perform rituals designed to soothe the sense of damnation. Dr. Albert Ellis believed that if emotional health depends upon acceptance of ambiguity and uncertainty, then religiosity may be the unhealthiest state imaginable.

Albert Ellis, currently associated with Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy, was one of the first prominent psychologists to point out that masturbation is not harmful, not shameful, and that it is actually beneficial to most people. His first major professional contributions as a psychologist were in the fields of sexology and sex therapy in the 1940’s through the 1960’s. Ellis was also among the first psychologists to challenge the Freudian notion that clitoral orgasm in women was an inferior experience than the so-called vaginal orgasm. Many of his most radical views (in the 1950’s) have now become common sense in the twenty first century. In the Forward to Human Autoerotic Practices, edited by Manfred F. DeMartino, there is a list of about fifty advantages of masturbation that serve as proof that autoeroticism is a major and important part of human behavior. The advantages are divided into four groups: sexual, emotional, healthful, and relationship.

Ellis claims that people can often achieve better sex through resorting to autoerotic practices than they would achieve if they only resorted to interpersonal sexual contacts. People can explore various kinds of self-stimulation and discover which ones are most satisfying for themselves. They can manage to repeat enjoyable arousal and orgasm almost at will, without any restrictions from a sex partner. They can thereby participate in sex more frequently than they are likely to do with other individuals.

Especially if they are females, masturbators may experience more intense and more satisfying arousal and orgasm than is likely with a partner. Males can engage in longer periods of arousal and near-orgasm than they would with partners; hence, they may be able to develop the ability to prolong the duration of their orgasms. For shy individuals with inhibitions about having sex with partners, masturbation may allow them to have a very active sex life despite their inhibitions.

Dr. Ellis also lists emotional advantages of masturbation. Masturbation can help individuals develop a hedonistic philosophy in order to see the value of giving to themselves, and not merely to others. People can use masturbation to gain confidence in their own ability to arouse themselves and bring themselves to orgasm. When people's lives are filled with few enjoyments and many frustrations, masturbation serves as a frequent pleasure and distraction. It may enhance their lives and make them feel much happier and less depressed. People can use masturbation as a form of self-exploration, to discover exactly what they like or do not like sexually.

A few of the health related advantages listed include the fact that undesirable pregnancy and abortion are avoided, the possibility of acquiring venereal diseases is minimized, and masturbation often leads to relaxed sleeping conditions that aid people's physical health.

Even though masturbation is a solitary pursuit, there are, paradoxically, even relationship advantages to masturbation. Both partners attain a large degree of freedom and self-satisfaction, which, in turn, helps them tolerate the restrictions of a relationship and have a more loving relationship.

One of the last advantages Ellis lists is interesting with respect to Jungian psychology and the concept of the shadow. People can keep themselves out of trouble by resorting to masturbation. If they could not masturbate, they might be tempted to resort to unethical or criminal behavior. Qualities of the raw human organism that do not fit into the self-image we project get buried in the biological shadow based in our cells. The beast we inherited from our animal ancestors is alive, albeit often beyond the threshold of the conscious mind, beneath the skin, outside the boundaries of our self-image. Embracing masturbation as an act of warming the heart keeps our sexuality out of the shadows. The enthusiastic enjoyment of this very accessible pleasure need not be demonized.

Witnessing a culture go from The Great Masturbation Scare to an enlightened encouragement of autoerotic practices as beneficial to health leads one to question psychiatric authority’s treatments for current mental disorders. Thomas Szasz, M.D., a professor of psychiatry at SUNY Health Science Center in Syracuse, New York, is a bold thinker who claimed that masturbation was the ideal mental illness since it is a form of behavior - something people do, not something that happens to them. It is also a form of behavior universal to mankind. Just as we can be fairly certain that priests masturbate (because we know our own subjective experiences of being a body), the authorities knew the subject was masturbating. Not having any clues as to what caused many diseases, that masturbation caused blindness, acne, impotence, insanity, melancholia, and suicide was medical dogma. Physicians knew and people believed that masturbation caused these problems the same way that physicians know and people believe that chemical imbalances cause mental diseases. A representative of the dominant culture diagnoses and treats the patient to cure the disease.

Szasz does not think the diagnosis that masturbation is a disease was a medical mistake. Nocturnal emissions were turned into symptoms of spermatorrhea. Today youthful male rambunctiousness is turned into the symptoms of attention deficit disorder. A hundred years ago, there was a lot of money made treating masturbation-as-disease with a spike-lined ring around the penis. Today, diagnosing attention deficit disorder and prescribing Ritalin are big business. Is it just a coincidence that the “diseases” being “treated” involve pleasure deprivation? After all, while playfulness may not be appropriate in certain social settings, it can hardly be considered an authentic disease any more than masturbation can. In Ideas On Liberty Dr. Szasz claims that arrogance, not error, is to blame:

Belief in masturbatory insanity and its treatment with castration and clitoridectomy was not an innocent error. This belief - like beliefs in other popular delusions - enhanced the identity and self-concept of the believers. Ostensibly, such beliefs assert facts; actually, they credential believers.

None of psychiatry's classic mistakes - from masturbatory insanity and its cures, to the attribution of the cause of schizophrenia to reverberating circuits in the frontal lobes and its cure with lobotomy (rewarded with a Nobel Prize in Medicine) - are "innocent" errors. Invariably, the false belief and the medical interventions it appears to justify serves the needs of the believers, especially the relatives of "patients" who seek control over the misbehavior of their "loved ones," and the physicians who gain prestige and power by "diagnosing" and "treating" misbehavior as if it were disease.

We fool ourselves if we believe that psychiatry's current popular delusions - such as the chemical causes and cures of depression, schizophrenia, suicide, and so forth - do not fit the same mold.


- just my 2 or 3 cents
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
xog



Joined: 26 Sep 2007
Posts: 413
Location: Hawaii

PostPosted: Sun Jun 08, 2008 3:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Your machine didn't overheat with all that?! L0L.

I've got to say, as I am unfortunately a member of the older male population, that I felt inapropriately lumped in with a bunch of older men you are probably right about. I think my older sister's husband was one of those, who cared little for the youth other than to have sex with them, and would gladly pass on an STD out of spite about his own aging and a deranged sense of sexual suicide for the human race.

However, considering the normal abundant sex drives of the young in any time period, that thing I so fondly remember, and the quantities of STDs in the world these days, it seems to me the young would need to get checks more than the older folk, who likely haven't had any reason to need a check in a while. But that is definitely not here, and maybe not there. So, I'll drop my humble opinion.

Personally, I wish some young beauty would shine her light on me, just to remember what it's like to be shined on, if nothing else, with or without any action ensuing. I could use shined on. Not that it matters, but I don't need tested. Except maybe for sanity for even thinking about playing outside of an existing two decade plus very happy monigomous relationship. My cop out is it's the fire of my Sag. moon, fulled by the air of my Gemini rising, and Leo sun. An otherwise very accurate astrologer predicted I would never settle down, and would always filander. :-/ Mentallly, maybe. But, like I said, for the past two decades, not physically. I give what I expect, fidelity.

Anyway, one can get too intellectual about the subject, man. Especially since the subject has such an organic physical gonadal base. For sure religions and their followers have messed everything up, not just that zone of life. It was a major feat in the sixties to get past all the inherent inhibitions programmed in the American psyche by puritanism. It took a lot of work, and play, and an abundance of willing wiser-than-me partners to get past mine, which, once achieved, was a definite alleluia moment for me. Then it was just a matter of dealing with the heartaches resulting from my own clingy attachments, which, once accomplished felt like a Star Trek lift off.

Anyway, one's hand or some inanimate implement of orgasm, as a means of avoiding the actual work with someone can only so satisfying, and will never get spiritual. The blend of energy that occurs between two people is what it is all about, as far as I am concerned, really knowing them and really knowing oneself by reflection. Within that blend there are real spiritual doors the just swing open all by themselves, affording access to whole new otherwise undreamed of realms which operate with completely different perspectives on everything, places that are healing and revitalizing just by passing through there, giving the power to re-order and even reshape the up and coming events that are already crystalized and coming down the pike, and the power to fend off negative energy from others by doing nothing but blending. This I know, in the Crowleyan sense of having done it. I thought then and still think that is more the good reason for indulgence than just being momentarily satisfied. To swim in the sea of the other is a wonderful undulating thing.

It is also another good reason not to work.

Man, I've got to get off of this subject.
_________________
effectus nihil est profundus sub pensus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yougetajob



Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Posts: 672

PostPosted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 7:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That was quite the post B.S. A lot to digest there.

A while ago I was trying to find some info on the sexual practices of the few remaining "uncivilized" tribes that are still around. I wasn't able to find much info. I did come across some really interesting stuff about a tribe in Brazil that apparently have no concept of "numbers" or counting. And what's even stranger was that they weren't even able to learn these things. But I digress.

Are you at all familiar with the sexuality of hunter-gatherer tribes Mike?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
antiant



Joined: 05 Dec 2005
Posts: 293

PostPosted: Tue Jun 10, 2008 12:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

YGAJ: check out the Maori...there is another group that were from the celtic/ireland area can't remember the name of the tribe, they were more repressed with their sexuality though while the Maori were more open to sexuality
_________________
...the description is not the described; I can describe the mountain, but the description is not the mountain and if you are caught up in the description, as most people are, then you will never see the mountain...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Broken Spirit



Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 1117
Location: xhentric.wordpress.com; whybother.freeboards.org

PostPosted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 8:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It is much to digest, yes - my apologies to the disinterested. It seems there are lurkers putting in up to 12 hours a day of reading here at whywork, and yet there never seems to be that many people reading at once, as was the case at - I-don't-wan't-to-talk-about-it.org - I mean, i get some messages on myspace from lurkers of whywork ... and they are vocal and long-winded rants ...

And then i get frustrated with the admin situation here ... but I enjoy spurring people to think even if they might dislike me in the process.

I have taken my freedom. i don't ask for freedom.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
yougetajob



Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Posts: 672

PostPosted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 9:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I mean, i get some messages on myspace from lurkers of whywork ... and they are vocal and long-winded rants ...


Are they people trying to get authorized for the forum?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Why Work? Forum Index -> Off Topic Discussion All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group