Is Everything About Sex?

in #sex7 years ago

source

For one to answer this question they would have to be objective about reality. For most people, if not all, the search for love is at the core of their existence. Whether love comes from children, a lover, family or friends is irrelevant. The key part here is for one to recognize that whenever the concept of love is involved, sex will soon dominate either directly or indirectly.

I don't mean to be a cynic or a provocateur. There is something cruel but also profound when it comes to this basic realization about sex. We acknowledge our design, our flawed organs that are subject to disease and decay, but neglect to take into full account how the whole process of sex unravels meaning in our lives.

Any hopeless romantic will simply switch off at the thought of their lover's not having sexual organs. No matter how society has imprinted us with specific narratives, at heart, we are still bound by the same instinctive mechanisms. Let us not forget that love and romance was a rather recent invention. Before the era of Romanticism (where love flourished as a meme) choosing a partner based on romantic feelings was considered foolish and in most cases damaging.


source


Marriage, the pinnacle of today's love narrative, was valued to be up and foremost a business deal and nothing more. Romance was considered to be at best a delusion that was caused by physiological imbalances that lasted as much as a prolonged infection. Fast forward a couple of centuries and into the evolution of neurobiology and we realize that pre-romance societies had the right idea.

If one examines sex as a standalone act they will soon find out that it defines everything around them. Men compete with their counterparts about who has the biggest and strongest car — which functions more or less like an extension of one's dick. A wise old woman once told me "Women don't dress for men, they dress for other women" — which again demonstrates how individuals compete for sexual attention. Even the modest of all family men, bound by tradition and perhaps religion, will want to reproduce his genes as much as possible. They will just use a different narrative.

Whether ones motivations revolve around money, religion, power, fame, family, career or even friends, sex at the core of it all. Everyone has noticed how dear long life friends seem to disappear once they have found their special someone. The reason this occurs is simply because friendship circles are nothing more than the tier 1 phase for finding a potential partner. Once the task is complete then the group loses its meaning. Even if those friends who do choose to remain in the circle, they soon find out that they have rather interesting sexual drama with one another.



Philosophers and religious leaders alike always tried to explain the nature of sex through stories of symbolism and higher meaning. Whether nature takes the role of "mother" or a given God has sex with himself, every single story revolves around this very act of reproduction. Even sociologists and psychologists, socially glorified for taking the concept a bit further, soon find out that a society revolves around copulation and competition and nothing else. This is how societies are created and preserved after all and there is not much romanticism to add to this.

There are winners and there are losers in sex. Always. Eventually you either fuck or get fucked and this notion can be taken both allegorically and pragmatically.

Even the most humble of us never adopt one of the 16,000 children that die every day from hunger. We rather prefer to raise the random genetic conglomerate that will result from a given person that happened to be in proximity in our life. This is how and why we made up the narrative of love. Love is selfish and conditional for one's genetic preservation. If I ask you to love everybody the same would be identical to asking you to fuck everybody the same. The concept would have lost its meaning.

Rationality is immune to sex. This is how mother nature has us at her fingertips and we always seem to be helpless on the matter. We are here for a specific purpose; to preserve our genes. Even those who believe that they have escaped the biological game, will make sure to stay in the "gene code" somehow by striving to put their name on a book's spine or something similar. A meta-fuck if you like.



Whatever choices we think we make, whatever toys we invent, at the core of it all is sex. When life is examined from such a profound perspective, everything else seems to be shallow and pointless. In many societies sex is kept private and often treated as inappropriate for this very reason. We hide its true nature because its bitch-slapping realism scares us. We want to believe that we are something more than petty animals humping each other in an elaborate park of hamster wheels. But are we?




Sort:  

From an ego driven existence I think you are spot on. However if you move beyond the matrix paradigm, sex becomes a largely irrelevant motivator. Especially if you already have children and no longer have any aspirations for reproduction.

I'd counter that the fear of death(nothingness) is more powerful than the desire to reproduce, however between those 2 you can pretty much sum up the total motivation of humanity.

Great post and glad to see something that isn't about crypto or steem or pretty women getting more than $10 bucks on this platform. There may be hope that steemit doesn't devolve into another social network/fake news/ego showcase cesspool after all.

Sex though is not only about reproduction but also pleasure and social dominance. All these traits evolved synchronously to facilitate the overall function of sex.

Isn't the fear of death though rooted in sex and vice versa?

I only try to post original content if you check my blog. Don't worry. I am pretty controversial :)

This article is fascinating but particularly speaks to me because as of 2 years ago just about sex became unbearable painful for me due to a disease known as interstitial cystitis.

At first, my deep seated desire to continue seeking romance and dating was so strong I endured some painful encounters. I tried dating without giving the other person sex letting them know upfront this would need to be the case. That didn't work because most people are not asexual. I am not even asexual technically.

Well the thing is as more time went by the less I desired sex or romance and now I am far more productive and no longer waste such a large amount of my time worrying about finding a partner. I guess there is some part of me that feels lacking though if I am being honest.

So, it has me thinking a lot about the reasons I care in the first place and this article shines a lot of light on that for me.

Now that I don't desire to or have sex I definitely see the fact that it is everywhere. Something I really didn't much notice or think about before.

Also, obviously my objective stand-point could change if one day the pain was gone. I am sure I would relatively quickly revert back to a humping animal. XD

thank you for sharing this. i too had a girlfriend with this problem. she had surgery and went away. i can understand where you are coming from

Oh, and I must point out that since getting out of the sex game I have actually obsessively created art and published books and obsessed over creating a legacy.

It's either a fuck or a meta-fuck. Lol :D

Yeah, I got shamefully progressive with that one

Just musing:

Haven't there always been a few members in any group who are motivated in a different way and serve the group because they have their "minds free" from continuing their genetic line and the associated competition?

I refer to "holy men", homosexuals, some very dedicated and single-goal oriented scientists, etc, all those who can't or won't procreate and by not doing so, nor competing to do so, have the time and energy to focus on other things that help the group they are in.

And if there are, maybe we all have at least a bit of that in us.

Nop. I neglected to expand on these individuals but here it is here;

Holy men suppress their sexuality and/or sacrifice it for the greater good of their community that abides to the narrative of sex under a religious context.

Homosexuals seem "off" but they too are actually more obsessed with sex even though reproduction is not involved. Sex is not only for procreation but also for pleasure and dominance (see prisons for example). Also homosexuals before the nuclear family (recent invention) used to live with group families like the rest of us and helped in raising the kids.

Even single oriented scientists like Newton who was presumably "asexual" there was definitely a pathology to him. One cannot be simply asexual without being sick, dead or dying. It is my belief that Newton suffered from a severe form of autism.

If holy men suppress their sexuality for the greater good of the group, how then is everything in their behaviour motivated by sex?

Next you define being asexual as a pathology, that comes quite close to a "no true Scotsman" argument, or a circular argument. It exists, so why is it a pathology? And even if it were a pathology, it still exists as a counterexample.

I still think these examples make it a bit harder to see sex, or at least continuation of genes, as the sole and universal motivator for everyone.

It is, of course, very important, but a universal explanation for all everyone does, well, I'm unconvinced. But that doesn't matter, I wouldn't have thought about it if you had not posted this.

Holy men don't just advocate about all people. They advocate for their own group, own religion and at the core of it all is for them to grow in numbers. Also, let us not kid ourselves. "Holy men' that supposedly deny their sexuality do enjoy it, just behind close doors. Also they are often homosexuals (as it has been demonstrated many times). Even he denial of sex, and thus turning into a holy man, comes down to be about sex.

I believe at least that all healthy organisms have a healthy sexual function. This is why and how they come to exist. If one doesn't "have it" then they are most likely sick. If it is a choice (egg/chicken thing) then again, denial of sex makes one choices revolve around it. (e.g betterment of humanity).

Also, even if your speculation is correct the outliers you mention are to be expected in any species. Nothing is ever 100% is nature. That's the whole point.

While certainly not being one of them, I've definitely met people with massively differing sexual realities. I definitely know a couple of people that just don't give a shit about sex.

Yes, or so it has been until very recently. By very recently, I mean 4,280,000,000 BC to 1950 AD. It's up to us to make it (or not) more.

I don't see artificial wombs and immorality booths coming to the scene anytime soon.

In my opinion, yes sex means a lot in life. But it's not the main goal in life or the purpose of life directly. When you're getting old sex start to mean less. You start looking at your life and see if you had lived a good life. Have you been a good man. Have you done everything you wanted/could. And do you have people around you, that you can share you thoughts, memories, feelings with.

This is the whole point. It is never the direct goal. It's transcendence into everything that gives meaning is.

Rather, everything that we perceive as meaningful has stemmed from functions that promoted reproduction and gene preservation.

it goes full circle.

to say romance is a recent invention,seems you are going through life with blinkers, romance is what keeps people together and has done for centuries,today's generation don't have as much imagination or passion.

But it is. Romance did not exist 900 years ago. It might be the norm today but it wasn't in the past. People had sex. They understood only lust. Romance more or less is a form of manipulation and hypocrisy. You choose to act a certain way that you know the other will appreciate. It is more or less like theater.

history is a lie ,so i wouldn't believe what is said to be the norm 300 years ago.

well, you chose to believe romance much the same way. its just you don't realize that you have been indoctrinated by it and came to believe that is real.

i just go by my feelings ,been in a relationship for a while ,but the romance goes out the window after a few years,but i don't do anything to please anybody,they earn my respect not demand it,the whole idea of doing something to please someone sends shivers up my spine.

Well, now you start getting my point and admitting what I explain in the post.

I've always wondered how humans would act sexually totally unconditioned by any kind of authority....I see so much confusion regarding sex and sexuality...so I now go by this law ...DO NO HARM...

Can you imagine that?

Not really. Part of the reason is because sex and violence are intertwined in human culture. There is a reason most women get wet watching men fight for them. There is a reason men strive to appear masculine and socially dominant.

Violence and Sex go hand in hand. Before the introduction of nuclear families (brought by religions) only a handful got to have sex and copulate. Most kings and lords had almost all of the women as concubines.

Other species function much the same way. A few males copulate with the most females. If one wants a share, one has to fight. In our society it might not happen today with direct violence but rather economic, social and political means.

what are we then?

"But are we?". I answered this question. No, I think we are nothing more than "petty animals humping each other in an elaborate park of hamster wheels". But I guess it's all about perspective. I'm a bit nihilist, so I see it that way. I bet Science would agree.

OMG, Freud lives! And, I believe, in a reincarnated and higher evolved form in one steemer poster in our midst!

Sigmund Shlomo Freud, inventor/creator of psychoanalysis, also saw the universe and humankind all turning on the one fulcrum of SEX! He could see the bright white belfry of a country church, but not understand its symbolism of purity, of Heaven and of God; he'd understand only a phallus pricking the sky in a fertility rite to pagan gods. Or he could see a pristine lake teeming with life surrounded by immaculate white mountain peaks, and not understand anything but that these innocent things were quivering with desire to get royally laid!

If "beauty is in the eye of the beholder", might not lust be in the...whatever of the lascivious? Now there's a philosophical conundrum for all of us; both the less excitable and continent (more or less) among us, and also those among us endowed with a pyrotechnical libido, always charged and ready to go.

For one not trying to be provocative, our poster has provoked quite well. I can't wait for his next post. But first he would be wise to have a long run and an ice cold shower before all his world catches fire!

For such provocativeness, I've given an upvote.

For those interested, here are some unflattering takes on Freud's psychoanalysis and its occult connections.

https://www.henrymakow.com/freud_sabbatean.html
http://www.whale.to/b/mullins49.html

But is is revolved about sex. Being condescending about it doesn't change the facts of evolution (which I know you are in denial).

Who really can understand fully fables that turned into religion. Why would one base their entire philosophy around an alleged supreme being that created everything for their pleasure, putting as around so it can be entertained?

The entire world operates on sex. I am stating an observable fact. You are the one posting fables that were written by goat herders 2000 years ago.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.29
TRX 0.12
JST 0.033
BTC 63096.55
ETH 3032.40
USDT 1.00
SBD 3.69