_
When my parents sat me down to have ‘the-birds-and-the bees’ talk when I hit puberty, and I told them that I’d already learnt all that in Biology class, I heard the loudest sigh-of-relief I’ve ever heard. lol
I -personally- do not think that children need to learn about that until puberty, but if they do start asking questions before then, then parents can answer them as-and-when… so breaking the process down into less-embarrassing smaller conversations, in-line with the child’s inquiries.
I think it more important to tell them not to talk to strangers or go off with anyone, pre-puberty… the ‘sex talk’ can wait till then/till necessary… why rush it… it ain’t a race.
Being sexual beings, it’s foolish to look down upon those who exercise their ‘needs’ more than others… we simply all have our own pace regarding matters-of-sex and relationships etc.
I guess I expect more from kings and judges, but I suppose they are all just (with exception of Deborah) men (in this day: human). But… then they shouldn’t be leading, in my opinion. But I’ve been wrong before.
Anyway… what do you think about the fact that most sex abuse doesn’t happen from strangers? I don’t think “stranger danger” is enough.
“Just men”?
Ha!!!
Can’t blame the woman folk.
They have no experience with a Satyr.
All they know are the mediocre, cucks, and emasculated brainwashed imbeciles in their immediate environment.
Of course, such females - even if themselves mediocre - would lose respect for males…because respect is baded on anxiety…intimidation…it excites them.
Americanized males don’t excite them; their sex drive goes through their minds…
They need to be inspired to become aroused.
AS to the former, I would say that obsessive desire is pure and total lust.
Can we actually love that person in all of the good ways that count? I would say yes depending on the individuals and the dynamics of their relationship.
Do they communicate, are they respectful with one another, are they faithful, do they want the best for one another, are they protective of one another, do they share the same values, do they want to help one another grow, et cetera?
I would say that when these above things exist in a relationship, that so-called obsessive desire can be a result of them, especially when the physical attraction between them are way off the charts. Of course, there will be times when they will have to find balance between their sexual needs for one another and the other realities of their lives. [-o<
Who would not want the best of both worlds - though it is actually just one world flowing divinely. lol
Love and lust are not the same…other than in female brains.
Women confuse lust for love, because they need one to enjoy and abandon themselves to the other.
Love = bonding - identifying self with other.
Women need to feel safe to abandon themselves to the masculine intrusions of lust - a form of hormonal intoxication.
A woman is attracted to what is superior - stronger, smarter…more capable…and she feels intimidated by it…and this is seductive to her.
She, simultaneously, want to give herself to what is worthy and feel safe - appreciated - while doing it.
It is why sex is more complicated for females - their reproductive role necessitates a repression of their automatic, primal, defensive reactions.
This follows through into fertilization and gestation when the female autoimmune system must be tricked to tolerate a foreign element within herself.
Morning sickness is the gag reflex trying to rid itself of a alien body within itself.
That was aaaall me bae, all me… never heard of Weininger or know of his philosophies, but I do know of Maths and my own philosophy of it in relation to the world. #MathsXPoetics
Most things can be defined by maths, but not necessarily be mathematical… so not looking for maths where there is none, so conceptualising them in terms of mathematical-prose instead.
I dunno. Feels like jumping over a bonfire, orbiting too close to the event horizon, or sampling the drug you’re pushing. Maybe the divine structure is the “formula” for avoiding implosion/explosion. ‘Course… for Jesus… that’d be zero sex. Sounds like a plan (God laughs).
He came up with a mathematical formula for attraction - simple but effective - general:
Based on masculine/feminine psychosomatic traits.
An individual with 40% masculine energies and 60% feminine ill be attracted to an individual with a corresponding 60%/40% split.
I’ve adjusted this formula to include an individual’s self-acceptance and self-love.
Those who like themselves - and do not only claim to, loudly and repeatedly, compensating for a secret self-hatrd - will be attracted to those most like them; those that secretly, unconsciously, resent themselves and what and who they are, will be attracted to their opposite.
Masculine/Feminine is a product of specialization, sacrificing independence for efficiency and effectiveness.
So, codependence is unavoidable. We are attracted to our sexual opposite because we are incapable to reproduce independently.
So Weininger’s psychosomatic formula of attraction can be adjusted by the ego’s self-awareness and consequent self-accetance and self-appreciation.
Individual’s sometimes override their impulses with an over- under-estimation of themselves.
Know Thyself.
Also part of the gene/meme dynamic.
This is what the average call ‘man’s complexity’ …turning to “experts” - icons, idols, astrology etc. - to simplify what they cannot fully understand.
