Did nihilism hinder or liborate sexual mutation?
What is the source of sexual mutation?
Dan’s theory:
Things are naturaly funner the first time around,
and also on a deeper note:
If extream craving naturaly caused extream frustration if un-satisfied,
it would tell me that sexual frustration IS sexual mutation.
Frustration realy does remind me of madness in how warped it can cause the thoughts, feelings and actions to become.
By nature (as time goes by) i notice my very own mind experiancing sexual mutation despite all of my self control and philosophies. I can drasticly limit the process, but im only human and only do what i can…
Hmmm…I’d thought I’d heard and seen everything…wow. What the hell does someone expect when they drug an animal with sharp teeth and pointy claws and aim it at their genitals…? Bizarre…I don’t think a cat can give consent…especially a cat under the influence. Why didn’t the women just have sex with each other…why involve some poor cat? Did they have neck problems,missing tongues,were they just too lazy?
Is sexual repression a cause or the cause of sexual deviances? Wanting to have sex is in our genes…it is one of our drives. Does the supression of this drive lead to inappropriate sexual behaviours? Displaced anger with but with lust.
I’ve always considered sexual deviation (deviation as it is defined by it deviating from sex’s intention and function as a procreation method) to be like a canary in the mine of human psychology. Tell me your sexual fantasies and I’ll tell you your deepest fears and most persistent insecurities. Tell me what you like to do in bed and I’ll tell you what you most covet and what you most hate.
I consider sexual dysfunction to be a sign of physical or mental developmental diversion (possibly a consequence of species interbreeding or genetic decline) and all sexual deviation signs of psychological malformations and mental deficiencies.
An individual’s sexual desires and fantasies expose much about the environmental forces that influenced and affected his early development and it is an easy way to discover their overall state of well-being – both physically and mentally.
The fundamental role sex plays in human psychology makes it a source of studying psychological deformity.
In many historical instances sexual divergence (homosexuality, bestiality, sadism etc.) were signals of cultural and social decay.
Ancient Rome comes to mind and ancient Greece as well, where pedophilia or ephevophilia were practiced by the elites during a period of decadence and decline.
Sodom and Gomorra comes to mind as well.
In fact sexual deviance increases in environments of plenty and of relative safety and comfort, where the mind, bored and seeking identity and diversion, experiments with anything to alleviate its existential ennui, or raised in comfort and abundance loses respect and appreciation for everything including self, and so seeks out identity and self in anything and everything.
(Respect defined as a form of intimidation. When one loses fear one loses all respect, appreciation and all sense of caution and measure.)
In more austere environments sexuality gets imbued with added seriousness and practicality. It becomes fundamental, along with everything else, in survival.
As a result one never questions ones own sexuality in such environments, nor does one tolerate experimentation which taxes physical energies and preoccupies mental processes with unessential thoughts and acts.
Homosexuality, for example, is not a choice but a genetic mutation. In our environment of plenty and of extravagance it is tolerated as a “lifestyleâ€, even if it is a genetic dead-end with no practical usefulness to procreation and which contradicts the purpose of sex in the first place.
In order to integrate it into our social norms we reinvent sexuality and make ourselves open to anything and everything, just as long as it does not threaten group harmony.
In our modern world, due to technological and cultural effects, sex has been robbed of its severity and importance. It has become a “lifestyle or an entertainment method or a source of personal identity.
Contraception has freed women from the repercussions of sexual promiscuity and made them more male-like in their sexual behavior, but it has also deprived men of their sexual role and significance.
As a consequence, gender identity have been clouded over and made into a mere external, superficial cosmetic difference, often reversed where sexual roles are made ambiguous and selective, and are constantly challenged as being exclusively social constructs with no natural/genetic roots.
We could say that in the debate between nurture over nature nurture wins out because it offers the illusion of choice and free-will.
Furthermore female sexual power has been enhanced due to her independence from male support during gestation and childrearing - this because the role of male has been taken over by institutions, making masculinity and male gender roles superfluous.
Current trends point to an acceptance of sexual diversion. This can be seen as a sure sign of a general cultural decline, just as it did in those past historical instances, or it can be seen as an evolutionary alteration where sex is becoming obsolete, because of technological breakthroughs which force a cultural alteration, and so gender roles are becoming remnants of past environmental condition quickly losing their significance and becoming trivial and diversionary.
On a personal note:
I once knew a woman/girl who appeared to be strong willed, independent and very smart.
She was masculine in many ways, including the way she sat, ate and walked - nothing prissy about her.
I later discovered that she liked to be treated as a sex slave, beaten and controlled in private – masochistic tendencies as well. She loved Sascher-Masoche, from whence the term masochism is derived.
My experience with her told me that her external pretence and constructed persona was but a defensive tactic hiding a vulnerable and very feminine psychological genetic disposition - a feminine disposition that had been repressed and denied for so long, for various reasons, that it expressed itself in extremity.
As you can tell, Satyr, has convined himself of sooo much, with fancy thinking, but in reality Nature and Human Beings have been around far more than his supposed insight.
What a lot of half-baked psychological babel! Really.
Following your “line-o-reasoning†what you say isn’t “what it seems†either.
Aren’t we here to figure out what is closest to “what it seems�
Isn’t everything about “self help�
A man asks questions and seeks solutions to problems that confront him. He seeks to help himself out of a dilemma or seeks to better his life or make his awareness deeper so as to find value and a purpose
Is my “psycho-babble†different than yours?
"…all this ‘psychology’ is little more than self-help rhetoric! "
Perhaps what remains to be discerned is who’s done more thinking and who’s cowered behind his fears and need for help.
I can’t count the times I’ve faced personal attacks – off-topic direct assaults on me personally – when I dared speak my mind in sensitive topics as these.
Many have no problem discussing absurdities like “God†or the validity of the Da Vinci code. Most never even think to make personal attacks on those proposing alien abductions or when their analysis remains politically correct and within socially acceptable “rhetoricâ€.
Yet, dare to question their cultural and personal belief systems, confront their safety and psychological security and you’ll be challenged as a sicko or one trying to excuse personal failings.
Truth is any opinion can be used to insinuate anything about the opinion maker or opinion holder.
We usually don’t insinuate things about those we agree with because we are really insinuating things about ourselves.
When one chooses to engage the personality behind an opinion without ever even attempting to answer some of his premises, this exposes an ulterior motive - a vile, deceptive, cowardly ulterior motive.
Back on Topic
My hypothesis about sexual expression being a sign of psychosis doesn’t come as a whim.
I have discovered, and many agree, that life itself is fraught with anxieties and fears. In its essence it is fear and anxiety concerning ones own demise. We can say existence is a psychosis obsessed with its self - this from an existential perspective.
As such we can see all of sexuality as a practice governed by an unconscious anxiety about ones own death. We attempt to lose ourselves in love and the momentary release of energies that cloud our brains with sensations and distractions, and we attempt to redeem our existence by joining with another, by creating something eternal, by giving meaning to the meaningless.
We need others and we attempt to join with them not because we are complete and stable but because we are not. It is our weakness that makes the other necessary.
Sex, being hardwired into our biological being, becomes the focus of all this existential angst and any divergence in it, due to cultural, social or other environmental factors, speaks to our overall mental and physical stability and well-being.
Let’s take homosexuality for instance:
Not a matter of choice, that is for sure.
But it is a biological dead end.
It follows to reason that what has no natural function is but a mutation that would perish under normal natural circumstances but that is perpetuated and nurtured in modern social environments due to memetic doctrine or when it finds an alternative function. (Such as in some species where it serves as a power display or serves as a social lubricant that diminishes group stresses and maintains order)
The same can be said for crippling diseases and many other mental disorders.
Under natural systems those unfortunate enough to be born with a physical or mental disorder/difference/mutation, that does not enhance survivability, would be condemned to a slow and certain end. Those born with a survival enhancing disorder/difference/mutation would breed more and evolve the species.
In some cases a mutation can serve as a display of worth (peacock tails) where its purposelessness and the absence of functionality becomes a beacon of the individual’s ability to cope with the added burden and survive despite it. Here excess becomes a sing of ones ability to deal with it. But even in this case the peacock’s tail enhances the breeding process and does not divert from it. The peacock does not, for instance, engage in oral sex, with no procreative function, if it is not used only as a preparatory stage to intercourse.
The fact that these mutations escape natural selection reveals how much man has confronted and diverted natural law. As a consequence man faces the results of his meddling and is forced to find alternative methods of maintaining health and survivability in the tribe, through technology.
Medicine is the technology most often used to correct man’s meddling in natural selection.
The uncomfortable fact is that the vast majority of humans would not even be alive today under nature’s authority. Our meddling in nature has some physical and mental ramifications which need addressing.
Sexual dysfunction is a sign of our own meddling with natural environments and so is all sexual divergence.
Nature doesn’t care about our pleasure; she uses pleasure to ensure a behavior.
Pleasure in sexual activity is a natural method of ensuring that an individual would risk life and limb and expend energy towards procreation. The peacock’s tail is such a risk.
Here the individual interests are sacrificed to species interests.
Now, what could account for all these sexual fetishes and diversities in modern human sexual practices?
For me the answer is quite obvious.
Sex has lost its severity and importance.
Where in nature it was burdened with the responsibility of tribal/species existence and also with added personal costs, such as competing with other’s for the privilege of mating or caring for its products afterwards, in modern environment we are sheltered from all such costs or from their extreme severity.
So sex becomes trivial, a plaything, a diversion from life’s ennui ( Ennui technology itself produces though this sheltering, making the whole thing ironic) and a way of finding identity in a world that enforces conformity and uniformity.
But what of these other sexual practices of Masochism, Sadism, Pedophilia, Necrophilia, or the myriads of other sexual diversions ranging from Transexuality to Spanking to Coprophilia?
Here, like I said, due to sex’s central role in human nature we can witness the many environmental effects on human psychology, as they affect individual development.
Each sexual act which does not serve procreation, the original purpose for sex in the first place, exposes an ulterior motive behind it.
If it does not serve procreation then it must serve some psychological need, connected or not to sexuality or finding release through sexuality.
Are you suggesting that ‘homosexuality’ is a mutation and an increasing degeneration of the human race due to our ‘highly developed man-made envrionment’?
Yet, homosexuality, has existed since time immemorial. Surely, it’s existence is supar-natural. It goes beyond the natural. It is ‘natural improvisation’.
By the way, my comments were not exactly a personal attack, but an attakc against psychology and the fact that we live in a time were ‘everything and everyone’ is interpreted through the weak lense of freudian psychoanalysis, femminism, and all the entire anthpocentric world view.
“Yet, homosexuality, has existed since time immemorial.”
I don’t think that we really know that.
What we do know is that “technology” has and does support a non-procreative lifestyle, and has taken the focus of sex away from importance to that of a sport.
Evolution has certainly taken on a different meaning thanks to technology.
We don’t even really need to breed anymore…
Someday, the artificial womb (which is basically an incubator) will be in widespread use in the first world. Couples of the future will order a child online from a lab that is holding onto some of their baby eggs n’ batter…, then nine months later, they pick up (or have delivered) a perfectly healthy and well-adjusted infant.
I hope for a world where sex takes on far less importance in our lives…like in “Demolition Man” where Sandra Bullock has sex with Stallone by wearing VR helmets. Now, I prefer the old-fashioned approach, because I’m a big on cuddling…but that kind of attitude would be better for everyone.
People who have sex on a regular basis are less anxious than those who never get laid. I mean, look at POR… Poor bastard probably thinks he’s sinned every time he has a wet dream…how psychologically healthy is that?
Sex is like food…of course you’ll enjoy a 12 course meal that has been painstakingly prepared by a team of Chefs more than a hot dog bought from a streetside vendor…but sometimes you’ve just left the pub and you’re hungry.
Sex can be an expression of deep love and emotion or it can just be sexual release.
If you’re shaking hands with the Bishop 15+ times a day and/or are developing carpal tunnel syndrome from playing with your naughty bits so often…maybe you need help. If you’re living the life of Theresa in “Looking for Mr.Goodbar” or Casanova…some introspection would probably be a good idea.
Sex and food…perfectly healthy in moderation. Compulsive behaviour is compulsive behaviour.
I’m suggesting that homosexuality is one of those mutations that crops up every so often in every genetic line and which either vanishes, due to natural selection, or is propogated due to environmental conditions that shelter it from natural selection.
Why it crops up every so often is mostly due to maleness being itself a mutation of femaleness that became “normal†because it offered genetic variety and survival enhancements. We are all female and then some of us become male because of a genetic code that alters our development and establishes our character, appearance, and role, to varying degrees, because of hormonal effects.
And as TheAdlerian said:
That homosexuality functions as a form of dominance or as a residual consequence of male effeminate behavior due to social balances is another issue. We can go into it if you want.
Suffice it to say that when the traditional ‘alpha male’ position is being taken over by institutions, all males are forced to play subordinate social roles and so exhibit more feminine dispositions.
The female, easily indoctrinated within any social group for various reasons, takes on the role of genetic filter. She chooses males according to how she was brought up and how she was taught to value individuals and, in particular males. Here is where her sexual power becomes beneficial to the group. This, of course, confronts her natural sexual appetites which have been formed through millennia of evolution and which sometimes contradict her social indoctrinations.
Memes versus Genes.
I can explain why this occurs and how natural evolution lags behind social evolution and can explain many human psychological ailments and social phenomena, if you wish.
The female then chooses according to social values and cultural ideals and so the male is forced to live up to her expectations and preferences.
Her indecisiveness and contradictory messages, when genetic and memetic values collide, explains male confusion concerning their role and what women want. We can go into this of you wish.
Thusly we get the feminine filtering effect where if a male wishes to have access to procreation or to sex, he must behave in socially acceptable and memetically “normal†ways or else face exclusion.
This would account for various social phenomena. Each one is interesting on its own and I would gladly discuss any one of them, since it is a topic that fascinates me to no end.
And yes it fascinates me for self-serving and self-herlping reasons.
Tell me what interests you and I’ll tell you why.
It is obvious that in any group only one or a few dominate males can be acceptable or dominant. A group cannot tolerate more, as many social species expose to us through their natural social interactions.
We can talk about lions and their social balances, as an example, or chimpanzees.
Social groups are better suited for female dispositions and this for various reasons which I will gladly explain to you if you want.
Female does not always equal WOMAN, no more than male equals Man.
Both sexes have male/female leanings to varying degree and according to individual genetic pasts.
But females are more prone to feminine dispositions just as males are more prone to masculine dispositions.
If you wish you can also read my essay called: “The Feminization of Manâ€.
I think I’ve posted it here. If not, you can find it on my Blog (A link can be found in my signature), if it interests you.
I admit that some of my views expressed there have been somewhat changed or further enhanced, but the basic premises of my positions, concerning sexual relations are there.
Are you suggesting there is anything beyond natural?
What is “supra-natural� God?
You know, it’s so easy to come to psychological conclusions concerning any opinion-maker. So easy that I’m forced to believe that behind your disagreement lies a feeling of discomfort concerning my views since there must be some fetish you feel ashamed of or reluctant to acknowledge because it might reveal something about you that you deny to yourself.
I stand by my position that any sexual divergence or fetish of fantasy exposes the individual’s early developmental history and his/her present psychological/physical state, like nothing else can.
Every sexual fantasy says something about what you feel you lack or what you covet or wish to repress.
It is truly like the canary in the mine.
How is this “Freudian†and how do you propose to challenge it?
Simply stating that you disagree, without stating why, is easy.
Now, perhaps and if you are interested in a discussion, you can explain why you disagree.
If your modern sensibilities and sense of political-correctness is insulted by the word “feminine†then substitute it with “domesticated”, because it amounts to the same thing.
Then perhaps you can contemplate why females create the most stable and harmonious groups in nature, such as in termites, ants, bees, wasps, elephants, lions and so on, with a few exceptions.
Then, perhaps, you can also contemplate why nature found it necessary to differentiate between sexual types when they were both “equal†and indistinguishable in any other way but physically.
Shyster
Then you must contemplate the ramifications of your hoped for world.
Things aren’t as clear-cut and simple as you make them appear.
What you are in essence hoping for is the demise of the male gender.
Now, before you cheer, you must think about the consequences.
Thing is: How many judge themselves and their value due to what meal they’ve had?
Not many.
But many value themselves according to how many they’ve fucked or who they have fucked or how they have fucked them?
Most…no?
Why?
Why is pornography so popular in an age where promiscuity is rampant and sex sold in the corner?
In a similar fashion: What types of food you crave says something about your body’s needs and deficiencies just as what sexual fetishes you have or what divergent sexual practices arouse you say something about your psychological framework and what you lack or dream about being.
Poor bastard probably thinks he’s sinned every time he has a wet dream…how psychologically healthy is that?