Masturbation

[moonlite]

Originally Posted by Ilya

Moonlite, I actually agree with some of your ideas. The theory of splitting is interesting.
However it seems to me that using these arguments to condemn masturbation is an overkill and leads to a comic effect.

I think that you don't miss the pieces of irony in my posts

Originally Posted by Ilya

Bringing higher matters to sex, should happen after basic sexual problems are sorted out. And the most basic problem of sex for most men is its insufficiency.
You do not talk about high cuisine to a starving person. And after a couple of days, a relatively young man who hadn't have release is starving for it.

So if someone does not have a girlfriend, they should masturbate and then, when satisfied, they would be able to think about splitting themselves, about whether sex is about animalistic instincts or the connection with other soul.

I never wrote that you have to resign from sex - I think that for anyone who wants to have sex (especially if his 'starving') better is to find a girlfriend.
You know - the sex drive is only instinct which decreases when not satisfied, that's also the great difference from other human needs like food or water. Of course not after two days or two weeks of abstinence, maybe 3 months can bring substantial results. It does not mean that if for you guys is so difficult - it's utterly impossible.

Originally Posted by Ilya

Without partner, these thoughts would be theoretic, but so are your attempts at male view of the situation.

So go ahead and find some nice girl

Originally Posted by Ilya

The truth is - you start with making peace with your inner animal. The human in us is just a few thousands years old, and in sexual area we are still very close to animals. Being ashame of it is social conditioning and leads to disjointed and problems in sex area. Accepting the primal nature of sex frees the mind from upholding social dogmas. It allows to "be in the zone" during sex, to experience total immersion. Even the connection you are talking about becomes ultimate, when the chatter inside my head shuts up and suddenly, two souls merge into one, two breaths become the one, two minds and two hearts become the one and bodies seem to disappear altogether.

Then, when this becomes the usual, it is possible to become conscious of what's happening. Conscious in a very special, non-verbal way. Then it is possible to elevate the natural act to the level of art and transcendence.

To start with as I might say top down approach, seems unreasonable, at least from the male point of view.

I disagree with you. First - you, as a human have no faintest idea what does it mean to be an animal. You can only mimic them (or rather what you have seen on Discovery channel) and you do if you resign from exercising your free will. But still you are not animal but a man who behaves like his imagery of animal behaviour. It's a kind of cliche to think of a man as a very close to animals in sexual matters, it's only kind of theoretical frame which a not-good-at-all makeshift for even more disturbed Christian view. Let me give you one example. Think about rape. 'Animalistic behaviour' would be taking lonely woman when she's not guarded by other men and rape her. But it's relatively rare - the most of rape cases occurs among people who at least know each other. Not necessarily very well, but at least a bit of seduction had taken place. Sometimes they are already married. Why? IMHO because in sex of humans always involved is a symbolic layer. A rape never is a plain realization of an animal urge - unless you are retarded and have no idea of the rules of society - it involves a domination-submission game and so on.
You cannot turn back the time and be back on the trees. And I even don't want to.

[moonlite]

I want to add something to my previous post.

What really differs man experience of sex from animal one?

For me the most essential difference is that man can assign a meaning to it, an animal never does it. We can see in this thread how different and various meanings can be associated with sex and I'm pretty sure that there are plenty of them which were not mentioned.

Even assuming that sex has no deeper meaning at all and is purely physiological phenomenon useful in releasing some tension is also based on some (very selectively chosen) scientific knowledge and has nothing to do with the pure, so called 'natural' worldview.

Nowadays this kind of thinking gains status of common sense and becomes a part of social conditioning as well. Through advertisments, movies, tv we receive the message that sex is essential to our happiness, our well-being and not having sex for some time means that you are a kind of outcast, dork or oaf. Which is of course completely untrue.

For me if you prefer lower quality pleasures like masturbation, casual sex and so on you simply miss the oportunity of experiencing something more exciting and demanding like building healthy, strong relationship.

The choice is always yours. Maybe for many people it's too difficult, they are too strongly conditioned to not fear that if they will not masturbate the sperm stored will eventually blow up their brains.

[Erki]

Nah, it's not so much difficult, it just gets annoying after a while to walk around with an erection all the time.

[Ilya]

Originally Posted by moonlite

I think that you don't miss the pieces of irony in my posts

May be But you write with such zeal I take it serious, just in case.

I never wrote that you have to resign from sex

Neither do the people who accept masturbation.

- I think that for anyone who wants to have sex (especially if his 'starving') better is to find a girlfriend.

Yeah. Get a girlfriend. Just like that. Of course this is better. Unfortunately it is hardest for those who are "starving" the most - teens. So you really think that anyone actually chooses masturbation over getting a girlfriend? You know, getting a girlfriend requires some skill, and if I may remind you, these days it may take several years between being able to have a girlfriend to kiss and spend time together and being able to have sex. I think a lucky 10 year old can have a girlfriend. I'm not sure when kids start to have sex these days in the US.

You know - the sex drive is only instinct which decreases when not satisfied, that's also the great difference from other human needs like food or water. Of course not after two days or two weeks of abstinence, maybe 3 months can bring substantial results. It does not mean that if for you guys is so difficult - it's utterly impossible.

Right. 3 months. You know after a couple of weeks of fasting, you are not hungry anymore and can go on for several weeks more. Then there is this little thing called death happens, but the instinct is long gone.
Of course, nobody dies from abstinence, but there are major health problems associated with it. Fortunately there is no way to force it really beyond the point of wet dream. The body is protecting itself from the negative effects of abstinense. And the stress of abstinence is always there. Now if there is the easy and natural way to fight this stress, why not do it? Why take the long and unnatural way, when there is a straightforward one?

So go ahead and find some nice girl

I have a wife thank you very much. But, go tell this to desperate 16 year old, who happens to be smart in science, but not smart with girls. It would take him several months to get a girlfriend if he starts learning. And being sexually frustrated does not help - makes him doing stupid things.

I disagree with you. First - you, as a human have no faintest idea what does it mean to be an animal. You can only mimic them (or rather what you have seen on Discovery channel) and you do if you resign from exercising your free will. But still you are not animal but a man who behaves like his imagery of animal behavior.

Actually I have no faintest idea what does it mean to be human, for that matter. I hope to figure the bits and pieces of it during my lifetime.

Having said that, it is not that hard to get to the animal level of behavior. I've owned a dog, and had a lot of time to watch it and to study from it. I know how it feeds, I know it breathes, I know it doesn't think.
There are techniques that let you enter the "animal state" and go way beyond what can be seen on a Discovery channel.

It's a kind of cliche to think of a man as a very close to animals in sexual matters, it's only kind of theoretical frame which a not-good-at-all makeshift for even more disturbed Christian view. Let me give you one example. Think about rape. 'Animalistic behaviour' would be taking lonely woman when she's not guarded by other men and rape her. But it's relatively rare - the most of rape cases occurs among people who at least know each other. Not necessarily very well, but at least a bit of seduction had taken place. Sometimes they are already married.

Wrong. Or at least bad example. Even in animal kingdom rape is not common. This is one bit that can clearly be seen on the Discovery channel. Females choose the males who compete for the females attention. This is the fundamental property of gender reproduction.

Why? IMHO because in sex of humans always involved is a symbolic layer.

Now, "always" is a very big word. And I'm not quite sure what symbolic layer are you talking about. I'm pretty sure, I can feel sexual arousal at a glance of a nice and absolutely unfamiliar female... let me say... body, usually seen from behind. I have no idea, what symbolic layers involved there.

A rape never is a plain realization of an animal urge - unless you are retarded and have no idea of the rules of society - it involves a domination-submission game and so on.

Exactly. Rape is built on top of the animal instincts. Animal females do not go
to the lair of a male, who they don't see as a sexual partner. They do not let males make their advances if they do not like them. They hit the male with claws and bite him till he bleeds. It is in human society, females are forced to be nice to an unworthy partner instead of clawing his face at a mere hint of inappropriate advances.

You cannot turn back the time and be back on the trees. And I even don't want to.

This is what I call human arrogance . It is not even our ancestors living on trees, it was our own species. There is nothing to turn back, really. No significant time has passed. What we call "morale" is just 2007 years old. Protecting the different versions of this morale has lead to atrocities unspeakable in the nature kingdom.
And there is no contradiction between acknowledging our nature and advancing our civilization. Roman Empire was one of the pinnacles of human civilization, however it was devoid of hypocrisy we are dealing with these days.

It all comes down to what we believe, but having a part of yourself and clearly marking it as bad... Well, I believe it is bad for whoever does it. Knowing yourself, both animal and human traits is essential for growth. Shutting some parts away is harmful for growth. Then everyone decides for themselves.

[Ilya]

Originally Posted by moonlite

I want to add something to my previous post.

What really differs man experience of sex from animal one?
For me the most essential difference is that man can assign a meaning to it, an animal never does it.

That is true. But it is not always an advantage of human intelligence. Most of the time we are attaching false meanings to things.

Even assuming that sex has no deeper meaning at all and is purely physiological phenomenon useful in releasing some tension is also based on some (very selectively chosen) scientific knowledge and has nothing to do with the pure, so called 'natural' worldview.

Err. I'm sorry, where did this come from? The so called "natural" worldview states that sex has not deeper meaning other then making babies. This is called proliferation instinct. Are you going to argue with this? You can attach any meaning to it, if you want it, but this one is given.

Humans indeed are abstraction machines. Take hunger. It has no meaning other then to make us get food. But humans abstracted the pleasure associated with eating and created a whole culinary art out of it.
Is it good? Can't say. This is a whole avenue of personal growth to pursue the good taste. But when it comes to a situation when people wouldn't eat something if is does not have a pleasant taste, this is an illusion of growth, it is actually a form of degradation.

Coming back to sex. It's purpose is to breed. The rest is attached meanings.
Some of them are benefitial, some of them harmful. And our strength should be in being free from these attachments and being able to choose what meanings we attach to sex or any other activity.
Currently the huge layer of meaning attached to sex is the layer of social conditioning. Debates on monogamy-polygamy, homosexuality, masturbation, age of consent are part of it. And we've started tackling these issues mere hundred years ago at most. Speak about turning the time back.

Nowadays this kind of thinking gains status of common sense and becomes a part of social conditioning as well.

In a version that I wrote above it is freeing from social conditioning.

Through advertisments, movies, tv we receive the message that sex is essential to our happiness, our well-being and not having sex for some time means that you are a kind of outcast, dork or oaf. Which is of course completely untrue.

Here I completely agree with you. But then you take step further and say:

For me if you prefer lower quality pleasures like masturbation, casual sex and so on

This is the same kind of social conditioning. You are implying that only sex inside long relationship is essential to our happiness and masturbating and having casual sex means that you are a kind of outcast, dork or oaf, at least in a personal development area, which is of course completely untrue.

I should note that these days most long relationships are starting with casual sex.

you simply miss the oportunity of experiencing something more exciting and demanding like building healthy, strong relationship.

Why do you make solo practices and casual sex mutually exclusive with building a relationship?! Why do you substitute word sex with word relationship? Sex is not just about relationships, and relationships are not just about sex, although sex and relationships do contribute to each other.
And talking just about the quality of sex I have a strong feeling that both male masturbation and having multiple partners before entering long relationship helps. Not necessary, but helps.

The choice is always yours. Maybe for many people it's too difficult, they are too strongly conditioned to not fear that if they will not masturbate the sperm stored will eventually blow up their brains.

Oh, come on! Nobody masturbates because they fear that sperm will blow up their brain. As nobody eats because they are afraid to die from hunger.
People do it when they feel the need to do it. This need can be controlled, of course, but there is a point when controlling it becomes the waste of time and willpower and the returns diminish below any reasonable levels.

[Erock]

Originally Posted by wolfgang

Nature wants us to be addicted to sex to preserve the species.

I'm excited that this thread got so big. As an 18 year old male, this is an issue for me, and this quote I think sums it up. The question we have to ask ourselves as aware human beings is, should we be addicted to it or not??

Whenever we say "addiction" everyone shutters, but in reality, I don't think being addicted to masturbating or sex is that bad of a thing. A man who masturbates once a day is shunned by society, but a man who has sex once a day is a pimp, player, mack, exc... Physically speaking, and putting all of the ego boosts from real sex aside, it is the same thing.

Based on personal experience, I'm not sure how sexual energy works. I don't think it's as simple as, you release -> you lose energy. I think I said this in another thread, but people who are highly sexed, and those who abstain from sex both seem to have more of an energy boost that regular people.

Who knows?? Hopefully someday we'll figure it out, but in the meantime, I'm gonna go meet some beautiful babies.

Erock

[Truefire]

I too, jerk to gherkin. I'm totally against repressing sexuality, but I have noticed a drop in energetic "fullness" after a one hander.

I'm past the "right or wrong" stage that most guys face.

When you really strip it down past all the cultures and dogmas that have plagued masturbation there really is nothing wrong with the practice. When you really think about it there is nothing right about it either. Nature (or God) created animals and human animals, both have gay sex and pleasure themselves, regardless of human cultural ideals. Masturbation is just there. You can do it or not, it is your choice.

You should figure out why YOU choose to masturbate. Find out just why its such a need for you. How does it serve you? It is for sexual release? Or is it to space yourself out in a subtle way? I think they both boil down to the same thing. (Don't tell me you do it for the quoted health benefits or I'm going to have to smack you through your screen)

Does it make you a better person? If so, then wank away son.

If you find yourself more motivated to be all you can be when you don't slap the one-eyed snake, then you shouldn't. I'm one of the latter case, so I'm joining the 30day challenge here a little late. I think in the last few years the longest I've ever gone without jerking off is 20 days. I didn't succumb to sexual desire(read: I couldn't find a girlfriend), I caved and numbed myself through self gratification.

Wet dreams and unconscious lusting don't count unless you are a lucid dreamer

[Truefire]

And now, my take on sexual energy, at least from the masculine perspective.

There is a polarity between masculine and feminine energy. Like Yin and Yang. They are both opposite and complementary. They are also naturally attracted to one another. Masculine men are attracted to feminine women and vice versa. Also, feminine men are attracted to masculine women and vice versa.
For example, the well put together business women (masculine) is more attracted to the starry eyed sensitive artist guy (feminine) than her male boss(masculine). In a more conventional (and general) sense, women in general are more attracted to older men who have their life in order(masculine traits), and those men are more attracted to younger, full women in the flow of feminine energy.

This masculine feminine polarity can be extended to the masculine relationship with the world in general. Pure Consciousness being the masculine, everything else being the feminine. Masculine emptiness, feminine fullness. Feminine women are just extremely concentrated forms of feminine energy, so in actuality there is little difference between your sexual tension with your woman, and your passion for the world. As Napoleon Hill mentioned, successful people are usually highly sexed as well.

Imagine a very successful, self directed man in charge of his life. The kind of guy that knows what he wants and goes after it, without hesitation or regret. He stands tall, is immediately respected, and commands the world with his conscious presence. You know, that guy every feminine girl wants and who other guys wish they could be. There is a reason women find that kind of guy sexy.

The natural masculine desire is the release of tension. All our lives are dedicated to creating and releasing this tension. We create hurdles and challenges to overcome. We need more money, so we make a plan and stick to it until it comes to fruition. Then we think that we will be able to finally relax being financially secure, but of course there is something else to conquer after that. Tony Robbin's calls those "quality problems." With each greater task to accomplish or goal to conquer, a greater tension between the masculine and feminine must be withstood. Greater goals require greater passion, and a greater ability to handle that tension between the masculine and feminine as the stakes grow ever greater.

People both fear and desire that heightened sexual tension. Sure, you would love to be with a supermodel, but do you think you could handle her for even a day? Sure, you would love to be the CEO of a multi-million dollar company, but could you take that stress? On one hand you enjoy a greater quality of life, on the other you have to face that responsibility to maintain that tension and pressure and not give in to the vices of life.

Masturbation is a subtle way to distract yourself from living life the way you want to deep down. The orgasm of masturbation is usually quick and to the point. Build up that tension using whatever lame fantasy you choose. lube up and stroke the shaft until you can't take it anymore and the dam breaks, you squirt your load in some lame excuse of an orgasm and you are finally freed of tension. Congratulations, you've mollified yourself. You have undercut your ability to handle sexual tension, and you have further ingrained a habit of breaking tension prematurely.

Do you seriously imagine yourself in the future, successful, mutually sexually fulfilled by a wonderful woman, and still undertaking such a selfish and pointless ritual?

Masculine/feminine theory borrowed in mostly from David Deida. Opinions my own.

[moonlite]

Truefire I agree with you.

I was unable to put it so clearly.

Why do the most spiritual disciplines forbid masturbation?

Because the sexual drive is so strong it creates an excellent opportunity to train your will.

[moonlite]

Originally Posted by Ilya

Right. 3 months. You know after a couple of weeks of fasting, you are not hungry anymore and can go on for several weeks more. Then there is this little thing called death happens, but the instinct is long gone.
Of course, nobody dies from abstinence, but there are major health problems associated with it. Fortunately there is no way to force it really beyond the point of wet dream. The body is protecting itself from the negative effects of abstinense. And the stress of abstinence is always there. Now if there is the easy and natural way to fight this stress, why not do it? Why take the long and unnatural way, when there is a straightforward one?

Can you name one, just one health problem which comes from let's say one year abstinence from sex? I do not consider wet dreams as a health problem, it's rather an issue for washer.

Actually I have no faintest idea what does it mean to be human, for that matter. I hope to figure the bits and pieces of it during my lifetime.

what can I say? I feel sorry for you

Having said that, it is not that hard to get to the animal level of behavior. I've owned a dog, and had a lot of time to watch it and to study from it. I know how it feeds, I know it breathes, I know it doesn't think.
There are techniques that let you enter the "animal state" and go way beyond what can be seen on a Discovery channel.

I'm very interested in these techniques, can you give me a link?
Unless they involve removing a huge part of my neocortex...

Wrong. Or at least bad example. Even in animal kingdom rape is not common. This is one bit that can clearly be seen on the Discovery channel. Females choose the males who compete for the females attention. This is the fundamental property of gender reproduction.

You are right this is a bad example. Actually after I wrote this I started to think that in animal kingdom the main purpose of sex is what you have written.

This is what I call human arrogance . It is not even our ancestors living on trees, it was our own species. There is nothing to turn back, really. No significant time has passed. What we call "morale" is just 2007 years old. Protecting the different versions of this morale has lead to atrocities unspeakable in the nature kingdom.
And there is no contradiction between acknowledging our nature and advancing our civilization. Roman Empire was one of the pinnacles of human civilization, however it was devoid of hypocrisy we are dealing with these days.

I disagree, the morale is much more older and it does not condemn sexuality in itself

[Truefire]

Originally Posted by moonlite

Why do the most spiritual disciplines forbid masturbation?

Because it distracts you from prayer. Because it clouds the mind. Because it causes you to lose qi from your tanden, whatever.

Most western spiritual disciplines originated in cultures where people could not grasp the concept of sexuality properly, they had no basis for it. Historically, sex is a taboo subject, speaking too liberally could get you killed.

However, in eastern religions/philosophies sexuality is discussed in depth. (ie. tantric hinduism/buddhism, taoism, but not all sects of those) Masturbation is included in certain practices, however ejaculation is usually avoided.

Don't quote me, this is second(third?)hand knowledge and I have never seen a monk bragging about his sexual prowess...

You can quote me on this: I believe that we should all have more sex. If we all could get some, the world would be a happier place. Thats a fact.

[moonlite]

Originally Posted by Ilya

That is true. But it is not always an advantage of human intelligence. Most of the time we are attaching false meanings to things.

Yes, you're right.

Err. I'm sorry, where did this come from? The so called "natural" worldview states that sex has not deeper meaning other then making babies. This is called proliferation instinct. Are you going to argue with this? You can attach any meaning to it, if you want it, but this one is given.

Now, I'm lost - can you be more specific? I'm not sure what you name 'natural' in this case.
Anyway, in my worldview sex means much more than making babies, afterall I'm not an animal.

Humans indeed are abstraction machines. Take hunger. It has no meaning other then to make us get food. But humans abstracted the pleasure associated with eating and created a whole culinary art out of it.
Is it good? Can't say. This is a whole avenue of personal growth to pursue the good taste. But when it comes to a situation when people wouldn't eat something if is does not have a pleasant taste, this is an illusion of growth, it is actually a form of degradation.

I think that this is a wrong comparison. I deem comparing food to sex very misleading. These are very different needs. A one year abstinence won't kill you, but 30 days without food probably will.

Coming back to sex. It's purpose is to breed. The rest is attached meanings.
Some of them are benefitial, some of them harmful. And our strength should be in being free from these attachments and being able to choose what meanings we attach to sex or any other activity.

I'm glad that you wrote it. If that is the case what's the point of masturbation? It does not lead to proliferation of species. The more so - if compulsive it can be even harmful to it.

Currently the huge layer of meaning attached to sex is the layer of social conditioning. Debates on monogamy-polygamy, homosexuality, masturbation, age of consent are part of it. And we've started tackling these issues mere hundred years ago at most. Speak about turning the time back.

Maybe now this debate is louder, but I'm sure that it lasts far more longer, about 3-4 thousand of years.

In a version that I wrote above it is freeing from social conditioning.

I'm not sure if you can truly free yourself from social conditioning. I don't consider it something wrong, it depends what kind of society it is. What I can see now is that although Western culture is free from many ancient taboos it does not mean that people are more free in connecting with each other, they tend rather to withdraw. Masturbation as I wrote is a kind of withdrawal, an instance of disability in coping with real world, strengthening the separation.

This is the same kind of social conditioning. You are implying that only sex inside long relationship is essential to our happiness and masturbating and having casual sex means that you are a kind of outcast, dork or oaf, at least in a personal development area, which is of course completely untrue.

You wrote it not me I don't think that someone cannot be happy with casual sex. He can, especially if his it not aware that he's missing something.
And that's the reason why it's so easy to do some sexploitation. If everybody was unhappy with masturbation and casual sex there would be no point in our discussion.

Why do you make solo practices and casual sex mutually exclusive with building a relationship?! Why do you substitute word sex with word relationship? Sex is not just about relationships, and relationships are not just about sex, although sex and relationships do contribute to each other.
And talking just about the quality of sex I have a strong feeling that both male masturbation and having multiple partners before entering long relationship helps. Not necessary, but helps.

For me sex is about relationship. The two are inseparable. Of course I know that people are eager to deny it because sex is fun and relationship are difficult. But it does not change the situation. When someone masturbates a lot he/she can't see it so clearly. Then he/she tends to separate the two, denigrating sex to mere release... Tell me please how can it help?

Oh, come on! Nobody masturbates because they fear that sperm will blow up their brain. As nobody eats because they are afraid to die from hunger.
People do it when they feel the need to do it. This need can be controlled, of course, but there is a point when controlling it becomes the waste of time and willpower and the returns diminish below any reasonable levels.

[/quote]

That was my irony... And the wrong analogy once more.
Now I don't understand. How controlling any need can be the waste of time, and how could it be waste of willpower???

I don't think of sex as a bad thing which has to be painfully restricted or better eradicated. I deem it powerful tool, a beautiful gift from G-d. A kind of power supply, wellspring of energy and joy to be used wisely. This is the way in which His light travels through worlds. And I could not imagine greater pleasure than being His light transmitter.

[Erki]

Originally Posted by moonlite

Now I don't understand. How controlling any need can be the waste of time, and how could it be waste of willpower???

You answered it yourself:

Originally Posted by moonlite

I don't think of sex as a bad thing which has to be painfully restricted or better eradicated. I deem it powerful tool, a beautiful gift from G-d. A kind of power supply, wellspring of energy and joy to be used wisely. This is the way in which His light travels through worlds. And I could not imagine greater pleasure than being His light transmitter.

Originally Posted by moonlite

I'm not sure if you can truly free yourself from social conditioning. I don't consider it something wrong, it depends what kind of society it is. What I can see now is that although Western culture is free from many ancient taboos it does not mean that people are more free in connecting with each other, they tend rather to withdraw. Masturbation as I wrote is a kind of withdrawal, an instance of disability in coping with real world, strengthening the separation.

I think the reason why masturbating seems to disconnect people from each other is the stigma attached to it. If people didn't resist masturbating and their sexuality in overall, it wouldn't be such a big deal and people would be more open about it. More openness = more closeness. Or what do you think?

I have to add here though that crass oversexualization that mass media seems to do, doesn't mean openness though.

Originally Posted by moonlite

For me sex is about relationship. The two are inseparable. Of course I know that people are eager to deny it because sex is fun and relationship are difficult. But it does not change the situation. When someone masturbates a lot he/she can't see it so clearly. Then he/she tends to separate the two, denigrating sex to mere release... Tell me please how can it help?

1) Why do you presume that relationships are difficult? Do they have to be difficult? Are they more valuable if they are difficult?
2) For me too, sex is about relationship. Masturbation can be about relationship as well - with yourself then. In that case, I feel that masturbation for release doesn't really count(and it very rarely feels good either).
And if you say that sex is fun, relationship is difficult, and sex is about relationship, do you mean that sex is about difficulty?

Originally Posted by moonlite

Now, I'm lost - can you be more specific? I'm not sure what you name 'natural' in this case.
Anyway, in my worldview sex means much more than making babies, afterall I'm not an animal.

Wasn't it dolphins who also make love just for the enjoyment of it? No wonder they are deemed to be so intelligent animals then.

Why do you repulse animality(is that a word?) so much? Where did cure furry animals go? Or should I use the word "naturalness" instead? Why do people resist being natural? You mentioned higher pleasures earlier - why are natural pleasures so bad then? What if instead leaving out natural pleasures and going for higher pleasures, embrace our animalness and naturalness and take these with us and make these also "high"? Animals and nature doesn't always have to be crude, dirty and brutish. Why not go back to the trees - trees are higher than us after all.

[Ilya]

Can you name one, just one health problem which comes from let's say one year abstinence from sex? I do not consider wet dreams as a health problem, it's rather an issue for washer.

Circulation problems of pelvic area, increased risk of prostatitis and prostate cancer in later years. Fertility problems. I won't even count stress.

You know, you can expect some to abstain from ejaculation, but you can't seriously expect boys not to get aroused. And once the arousal has started, the blood was drawn to pelvic area, the most healthy release is through orgasm or ejaculation. Otherwise you start having the problems mentioned above.

I'm very interested in these techniques, can you give me a link?
Unless they involve removing a huge part of my neocortex...

I can't give you the link. I've learned these techniques first-hand from direct descendant (i mean teacher-apprentice relationship here) of what can be called a Russian version of shamans. These are techniques that at their highest power are used to turn into animals (and you can understand it as literally as your beliefs allow you). This is stuff that's behind the folklore on lycanthropy and werewolfs. I've only seen a glimpse of it really but it's a strong stuff. Helped me a lot, later, when I've met a Grizzly bear in the wild.
I've tried to find something on Google, but I just don't know where to start looking. Sorry, that I start sounding like a sect member, but I just can't find a ready links. My guess is it would deal with shamans, native americans, etc.
There is also a very simple, but unhealthy practice of drinking strong alcohol, but I won't recommend it.

Well, this is really off-topic in this thread, and I brought it up as a counterexample to the claim that we can learn about animals only on Discovery Channel level.

I disagree, the morale is much more older and it does not condemn sexuality in itself

You mean other norms existed in pre-christian world that could be considered an analogue to morale? I don't argue. But it's the christian morale that causes problems with the topic we are discussing it. Also the older morales, actually, no. We can't say they are older. There are morals that are co-existing with the Christian one right now. And they treat many sensitive matters differently. So, I'd say it is another proof that we as human civilization are not as detached from our roots as it might seem to a European.

[Ilya]

I agree with Erki almost on every point he makes, but I'll give my version as well.

Originally Posted by moonlite

Now, I'm lost - can you be more specific? I'm not sure what you name 'natural' in this case.
Anyway, in my worldview sex means much more than making babies, afterall I'm not an animal.

Nutural means, I don't know, "from the biological" point of view. Biology does not make a huge distinction between humans and other animals. Doing so would be inconvenient and would contradict Okham's Razor principle. That's scientific point of view. Humans are animals that share most of their traits with animals plus have this thing called consciousness. It does separate us from all other animals, but the last I checked we still belonged to the animal kingdom, mammals class, Primates order, Hominides family, Homo genus and Homo sapience species.

I think that this is a wrong comparison. I deem comparing food to sex very misleading. These are very different needs. A one year abstinence won't kill you, but 30 days without food probably will.

Yes, proliferation instinct is different from feeding instinct.
Abstinence will not kill an individual, it is much more dangerous. If allowed it will lead the species to the extinction. Therefore proliferation instinct is at least as powerful as feeding instinct. According to Maslow's hierarchy of needs, food takes precedence over foo