< >
Hello, guest! Please log in or register.

The PokéCommunity

Go Back     The PokéCommunity Forums > Off-Topic Discussions > The Round Table Brave New Worlds (fully sexual society)

Notices

The Round Table Have a seat at the Round Table for in-depth discussions, extended or serious conversations, and current events. From world news to talks on life, growing up, relationships, and issues in society, this is the place to be. Come be a knight.

Reply Post Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1    
Old October 18th, 2013 (9:38 AM).
Rezilia's Avatar
Rezilia Rezilia is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Gender: Female
Nature: Sassy
Posts: 322
So, this'll be the first of a series of discussions posing theoretical societies which act very different from our own, but are not implausible and may even be considered possible futures.

If none of you are familiar with the idea of a society where sex is seen as a normal thing rather than glorified to a higher level, read this (the fourth paragraph of The Kingdom of Adornia Prospers). That society's structure was based solely on art and creativity, so it isn't a perfect example of what our world would be like with no sexual boundaries, but it is still a reference sheet.

In a fully sexual society, sex is seen as something equal to breathing and walking. It's so very natural and has no boundaries concerning age, gender, class, or race. Though this is not always the case, people in general would tend to see it as something which would not affect them or their livelihood negatively in any way. The majority of people in that society would be pansexual.

The discussion here is NOT about whether or not you would like this kind of society. Any flaming or opinions related to the disgust at this kind of society or even the glorification of it will be reported, since they could lead to bloody arguments on this thread. Let's keep it civilized, people.

The discussion will be your opinions on what this society would be like. How would it affect the way we see parenthood and raising the next generation? If all STDs were cured, which would be necessary for the full extent of this society, what borders would be broken? If they weren't cured, would those desiring this society try to eliminate everyone with STDs? What stylistic changes would occur - would the body become more sexualized, due to further glorification, or even more sexualized because it would be seen as much more casual? Perhaps people would focus LESS on their bodies, outside of being healthy, since they'd be less inclined to care about preferred types?

How would this affect the view on true love? What other cultural changes - art, music, architecture, etc - do you think would be affected and how? Would there be ups and downs in concerns to cultural shift due to this? Do you think it will last? If people ended up altering their bodies, like with cybernetics, in a way that caused them to be unable to have sex, how do you think they'd be seen by the rest of society?

Once again, do NOT discuss whether or not you'd like or hate this society. Just discuss what you think it would be like, as a possible future.


Reply With Quote

Relevant Advertising!

  #2    
Old October 18th, 2013 (10:46 AM).
Flushed's Avatar
Flushed Flushed is offline
never eat raspberries
Silver Tier
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 2,275
I'm surprised you did not mention Huxley's Brave New World. Unless the point was for the title to imply such a reference.

Assuming the mindset of such a society is how I think it would be, things like parenthood and love would be unaffected. If sex is a quotidian thing, it wouldn't essentially be major factors in things like relationships and love, rather these things would be consecrated in different ways. For parenthood, even today, I'm leaning towards saying sexual activity has relatively little to do with parenting. Obviously in this world parents would either encourage sex or encourage their children making their own decisions, but ultimately the approach to raising the next generation shouldn't change. I do think bodies would become less sexualized by today's standards because of the majority of pansexuals. I'm not trying to generalize that pansexuals aren't affected by the degree of sexuality, I'm just saying that image doesn't become a priority if sex is more common.

Ultimately, I think if a society like this existed cohesively, there would not be much difference in many other aspects of life. Society would simply evolve to expressing love and personal identity in other ways.
Reply With Quote
  #3    
Old October 18th, 2013 (11:23 AM).
Kanzler's Avatar
Kanzler Kanzler is offline
naughty biscotti
Crystal Tier
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Toronto
Gender: Male
Nature: Relaxed
Posts: 5,612
These threads make me feel increasingly like a Marxist. I think we have to come to terms with the fact that society to a certain extent comes out of our material world. Society is a dynamic process - it had to have come from somewhere, from some context. We can't just impose a hypothetical society upon ourselves and theorize how it would turn out, because human nature is involved, technology is involved - we'd just be fantasizing with no plausibility.

However, if sex is as normal a behaviour as eating or breathing, then I think sex will be less conscious, not more. If people think nothing of it, then it probably isn't a big deal. But what does "normal" mean? There are so many ways to interpret the question.

I don't know if there's much else to say.
Reply With Quote
  #4    
Old October 18th, 2013 (11:40 AM).
Rezilia's Avatar
Rezilia Rezilia is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Gender: Female
Nature: Sassy
Posts: 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flush'd View Post
I'm surprised you did not mention Huxley's Brave New World. Unless the point was for the title to imply such a reference.
^ This. Yes, I did have that as a reference. Unfortunately, it isn't so easy to link all the sections in the entire book that deal with this issue... But it's a great example, since sex is deemed a normal - even required - thing in that book.

Flush'd, so you think that things connected to sex in the modern day - like love and parenthood - would increase in importance, or be connected to something else other than sex, in that society? Interesting.

Blah, good point. What would be "normal", under those terms? I said this could be a possible future simply because society today, and with the internet - technology and culture combined - sex is becoming far more present and less judged, though it isn't too close to being at the level of breathing. Nonetheless, many people are deeming it "normal" now. However, there are still many boundaries. This thread does not consider the exact details connecting now and that future, only that society specifically, but that WOULD be a good discussion - just posted elsewhere.


Reply With Quote
  #5    
Old October 18th, 2013 (3:54 PM).
Cerberus87's Avatar
Cerberus87 Cerberus87 is offline
Mega Houndoom, baby!
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Dream World
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Nature: Lonely
Posts: 1,662
I think seeing it as a matter of sex only is short-sighted. The way I'm seeing it is that sex would possibly be acceptable behavior on the streets, for example? Then the scope is much bigger, it involves a society in which people are ready to accept their naked bodies and live without fear of being ridiculed for walking around naked. Because I figure that a society where sex is commonplace must be a place where people can dress the way they want, including not dressing up at all.

I'd imagine people would still want to be monogamous, however, purely because of instinct. Parenthood would be much more determined by instinct than before, and in a society where everyone can have sex with everyone, I'd be inclined to think that cultural bonds between human beings like dating and marriage would disappear (marriage definitely would), and opposing males would be less inclined to respect a male who has a female with him, because they would want to pass down their genes.

Another thing of note is that I believe any rules on age of consent would become meaningless. Sex became commonplace, it's something that's no longer hidden and not something that should be taught to someone before they reach a certain age. I'd imagine puberty would become the drawing line for when sexual relations are permitted, like in less advanced but still existent cultures in the world. Virginity would lose its meaning, since people would be more willing to engage in sexual activities and the sentimental value of sex would be lessened.


Omega Ruby & Alpha Sapphire, the day Pokémon pulled a Dallas and jumped the shark.
Reply With Quote
  #6    
Old October 18th, 2013 (4:26 PM).
Kanzler's Avatar
Kanzler Kanzler is offline
naughty biscotti
Crystal Tier
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Toronto
Gender: Male
Nature: Relaxed
Posts: 5,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cerberus87 View Post
I'd imagine people would still want to be monogamous, however, purely because of instinct. Parenthood would be much more determined by instinct than before, and in a society where everyone can have sex with everyone, I'd be inclined to think that cultural bonds between human beings like dating and marriage would disappear (marriage definitely would), and opposing males would be less inclined to respect a male who has a female with him, because they would want to pass down their genes.
^This. Even in sexually permissive societies, like some native tribes in the Pacific islands where sexual activity at a young age is tolerated, teenagers do end up pairing up. Interestingly enough even though children are sexually experimenting, pedophilia isn't a problem. Apparently it just doesn't happen. Perhaps things like anti-pedophilia and monogamy, like Cerberus has pointed out, are instinctual.

And yeah, there are more variables - like public nudity - that I don't think would correlate with a sexually liberal society. It's up to our imagination.
Reply With Quote
  #7    
Old October 18th, 2013 (4:54 PM).
Esper's Avatar
Esper Esper is offline
my user title got ate :(
Silver Tier
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: California
Posts: 8,597
I suppose we'd have to find other ways to show intimacy with people. I think we'd still want to pair up to some degree, to have some kind of privacy with people who matter more to us. Marriage, I think, would still exist in some form if for no other reason.

team rowlet もふう!
Reply With Quote
  #8    
Old October 18th, 2013 (5:08 PM).
Rezilia's Avatar
Rezilia Rezilia is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Gender: Female
Nature: Sassy
Posts: 322
Great answers! Hopefully I can get some ideas from more "conservative" people on here, as long as they keep it calm. And also much MUCH less conservative people... It would be interesting to see the difference in opinion concerning the outcome.

--

I actually created this thread, in part, due to my curiosity about sexual normalcy. I am asexual (physical). This means that I'm normally not physically attracted to other people. Though this doesn't mean I never have sex (I'll do it if my partner wants it), it REALLY isn't on the top of my list. So, I'm curious about what I'd be like if I was born and raised in a fully sexual society. To the end that sex is like breathing, I still won't think much of it - but would I count it as a normal routine?

How would this affect natural asexuals like me? I'm hoping to find that answer in this thread by posing this theoretical society. You all can also give your theories on what it would be like for natural asexuals, like me, in this society's context, but only as an addendum.


Reply With Quote
  #9    
Old October 18th, 2013 (5:13 PM).
Esper's Avatar
Esper Esper is offline
my user title got ate :(
Silver Tier
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: California
Posts: 8,597
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rezilia View Post
So, I'm curious about what I'd be like if I was born and raised in a fully sexual society. To the end that sex is like breathing, I still won't think much of it - but would I count it as a normal routine?

How would this affect natural asexuals like me? I'm hoping to find that answer in this thread by posing this theoretical society. You all can also give your theories on what it would be like for natural asexuals, like me, in this society's context, but only as an addendum.
I would guess it would be like being a vegetarian in most societies. People expect you to do something because everyone else does it. No one will even notice until someone presents you with the offer and you refuse. There would be some stigma, probably, just because it would be something different and "unusual" but probably most people would just ignore it. You'd have to inform people who don't know you on a regular basis, but you probably wouldn't have much of a different life.

team rowlet もふう!
Reply With Quote
  #10    
Old October 18th, 2013 (5:27 PM).
Rezilia's Avatar
Rezilia Rezilia is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Gender: Female
Nature: Sassy
Posts: 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarf View Post
I would guess it would be like being a vegetarian in most societies. People expect you to do something because everyone else does it. No one will even notice until someone presents you with the offer and you refuse. There would be some stigma, probably, just because it would be something different and "unusual" but probably most people would just ignore it. You'd have to inform people who don't know you on a regular basis, but you probably wouldn't have much of a different life.
Spoiler:
I see... I can relate to that. I'm a Mesocarnivore, which means I prefer to eat meat as 70% of my diet, while 50% is still normal, and anything under that is unhealthy. My body just desires meat more than anything else... But when I tell people that not finishing their meat is disrespectful to the animal, or letting it go to waste at all is, what with my Circle of Life ideology... People get really creeped out, even those that normally like meat. Actually, I've found that people are more okay with vegetarians than mesocarnivores...

But you're right - it hasn't really affected my life personally. Now that I think about it, being asexual has given me the same glares as being a mesocarnivore!

Heck, I might **** (following my own rules!) that society more! xD At the level of vegetarians? I **** it! :D


Reply With Quote
  #11    
Old October 18th, 2013 (11:24 PM).
Indigo Plateau's Avatar
Indigo Plateau Indigo Plateau is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 16
Quote:
In a fully sexual society, sex is seen as something equal to breathing and walking. It's so very natural and has no boundaries concerning age, gender, class, or race. Though this is not always the case, people in general would tend to see it as something which would not affect them or their livelihood negatively in any way. The majority of people in that society would be pansexual.
That's quite a long chain of suppositions, though. I certainly agree that it's possible for sex to be seen as simply a natural phenomenon (and in certain eras and cultures, it was) -- but does that necessarily mean a removal about all taboos? I don't think so. Recognizing it as a natural function doesn't mean throwing out all societal expectations.

For instance, relieving one's self is a natural thing. Yet as part of living in a civilized society, we don't do it in public. Moreover, there are other -- not socially constructed -- reasons for not doing that, such as hygiene and public health.

So consider, then, your list of boundaries. What reasons do we have for those boundaries? Well, some of them are health-related (incest) and some of them are socially constructed (age). And I'll add a note that social constructions aren't bad just because they're constructed; one shouldn't take constructed to mean arbitrary. One of the reasons behind statutory rape laws is mental capacity to consent, unequal power differentials and coercion, and impact on the developmental process. It's not simple prudery from not recognizing sex as simply a biological function.

Now, the general premise of your thread was not to discuss the desirability of such a state of affairs, but what that state would look like. And while I would like to say that it hopefully wouldn't look like the far end of the spectrum, I also think that it won't necessarily look that way either because while society may dismiss some hangups as backwards, society may well find good reasons for others.
"You know that dragons are mythical Pokémon! They’re hard to catch and raise, but their powers are superior!" - Lance

Reply With Quote
  #12    
Old October 22nd, 2013 (5:37 PM).
Melody's Avatar
Melody Melody is offline
Bubbly Bubbly Bobblun
Crystal Tier
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Cuddling those close to me
Gender: Female
Nature: Naughty
Posts: 5,766
Assuming we had methods to control, combat and even prevent spreading of disease as well as a 100% reliable method of preventing procreation from said sexual contact, I could easily see sex becoming a much less taboo topic.

Most sexual taboos are caused by the wish to prevent children from doing so, and being exploited for such purposes. Rape is also a concern, however I believe that too could also become less of a problem as sex becomes less of a "Forbidden" or "taboo" thing.

I would most certainly love to live in a more sex-positive culture; given that the problems that are caused by making it taboo are far worse in my opinion. If people were properly educated early enough on about sex, it would probably be a non-issue as they'd know and understand what it does, what it is, and why and how you should be careful and responsible if you choose to have sex!

Semi-Hiatus PM/VM/IM
Reply With Quote
  #13    
Old October 22nd, 2013 (6:07 PM).
Silais's Avatar
Silais Silais is offline
That useless reptile
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Gender: Female
Nature: Quiet
Posts: 297
This society would only work and be sustainable if contraception were readily available and free (including abortion), and STIs and other disease transmitted by sexual activity were completely eradicated. That being said, I would think that the only differences within this world and our world would be that we would be more comfortable with our sexuality, our physical appearance, and our amount and frequency of sexual activity. Monogamous relationships and marriage would not exist; free sexual activity would sever the strong, emotional bonds between two individuals and instead would value "free love". Thus, I can see personal relationships and human empathy suffer as a result.

Would adults feel the need to reproduce? That's a hard question to ask. On one hand, they may not feel it is necessary to use contraception and thus many children would be born, and likely be neglected. On the other, adults may use contraception to avoid creating children, which would stunt the population.

Quote:
Most sexual taboos are caused by the wish to prevent children from doing so, and being exploited for such purposes. Rape is also a concern, however I believe that too could also become less of a problem as sex becomes less of a "Forbidden" or "taboo" thing.
I'd just like to point out here that most rape is not because sexual activity is taboo or seen as forbidden. Rape normally occurs as a play on power; an individual dominates another person in a struggle for power. Sexual pleasure is not normally a motivating factor for rape.
Reply With Quote
  #14    
Old October 22nd, 2013 (6:43 PM).
Kanzler's Avatar
Kanzler Kanzler is offline
naughty biscotti
Crystal Tier
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Toronto
Gender: Male
Nature: Relaxed
Posts: 5,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silais View Post

I'd just like to point out here that most rape is not because sexual activity is taboo or seen as forbidden. Rape normally occurs as a play on power; an individual dominates another person in a struggle for power. Sexual pleasure is not normally a motivating factor for rape.
It's oft-repeated, but I don't know how much of that is true. "Struggle for power" is very vague language - I don't can't imagine how to relate to it. Maybe for war rape it would make sense, but when I think about it in our own societal context it just doesn't seem to be an accurate description.
Reply With Quote
  #15    
Old October 23rd, 2013 (6:11 PM).
CoffeeDrink's Avatar
CoffeeDrink CoffeeDrink is offline
GET WHILE THE GETTIN'S GOOD
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Lootin' Your Poké's
Gender: Male
Nature: Bold
Posts: 1,136
Communi- err, koff~

Hm. This society is interesting in theory. While in this one today we have all sorts of colorful weirdos running amok. I do not believe that a completely sexualized society would lack these sorts. The child chasers and the rapists and so on and so forth. It would be nice to think that a society like this would be devoid of these kinds, but I don't believe that would be the case at all. Yes, the cases of rape/molestation would might be lesser than what we have now, but they would still persist. Rules and regulations. . .

I really don't know what to think really, koffi~
Reply With Quote
  #16    
Old October 25th, 2013 (7:28 PM).
Rezilia's Avatar
Rezilia Rezilia is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Gender: Female
Nature: Sassy
Posts: 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silais View Post
Monogamous relationships and marriage would not exist; free sexual activity would sever the strong, emotional bonds between two individuals and instead would value "free love". Thus, I can see personal relationships and human empathy suffer as a result.

Would adults feel the need to reproduce? That's a hard question to ask. On one hand, they may not feel it is necessary to use contraception and thus many children would be born, and likely be neglected. On the other, adults may use contraception to avoid creating children, which would stunt the population.
I disagree.

In many hentai (esp. on Fakku, it's choc-full of this concept) and similar mediums focusing on sexual acts, it is believed that sex is the precursor to love. In religious terms, it is believed that love which comes after sex is NOT love but, instead, lust - which is deemed sexual desire without love. The idea there is that "pure love" will fail to exist without sex and thus why virginity is so important to those that believe such a thing.

However, this is based on the idea that sex = love, or something similar. If sex is no longer attributed to love, then love will not be something tied in with sex. Remember, sex is an act while love is an emotion. They have completely different natures.

Heck, love wasn't even a major thing until romanticism. The idea of Love in the Bible was seen as mutual respect and acknowledgement rather than as something you feel. Marriages occured as contracts which aided the prosperity of two individuals and their families. Love had absolutely nothing to do with it, the majority of the time.

Now, the idea that people HAVE to love one another in order to marry is a thing. Okay, sure, but people now get married even if they've both been "soiled" when they were in middle school. I'm pretty sure sex wasn't the thing that caused them to love one another, and I doubt a lack of sexual glorification would make them separate.

--

By removing the sex = love ideaology, sex won't go away. Neither will love. They'll be more separate which means that love will be even less of a physical thing...unless psychologists/neurologists get their way, atleast. This means that love could be elevated even higher, since sex will no longer "hold it down".


----


As for children, I want to have a daughter. Heck, I want 5 million daughters, atleast. But trust me, I can live without a "partner".


Reply With Quote
  #17    
Old October 25th, 2013 (9:37 PM).
Kanzler's Avatar
Kanzler Kanzler is offline
naughty biscotti
Crystal Tier
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Toronto
Gender: Male
Nature: Relaxed
Posts: 5,612
To an extent, sex is love. The two "behaviours" have closely linked neural pathways, to put it one way. One can lead to another. Humans are not capable of shutting down the hormonal cascades that accompany certain behaviour, for example, the release of oxytocin after orgasm. This is why there can be a certain anxiety after a one night stand - no matter what "you" tell yourself to think, there's still a neurological association going on. As such some of us have maintained that monogamy, or at least exclusivity will be maintained no matter what kind of societal setup we have - it's the impact of biology.
Reply With Quote
  #18    
Old October 25th, 2013 (9:51 PM).
Rezilia's Avatar
Rezilia Rezilia is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Gender: Female
Nature: Sassy
Posts: 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rezilia View Post
They'll be more separate which means that love will be even less of a physical thing...unless psychologists/neurologists get their way, atleast.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlahISuck View Post
The two "behaviours" have closely linked neural pathways, to put it one way. One can lead to another. Humans are not capable of shutting down the hormonal cascades that accompany certain behaviour, for example, the release of oxytocin after orgasm. This is why there can be a certain anxiety after a one night stand - no matter what "you" tell yourself to think, there's still a neurological association going on. As such some of us have maintained that monogamy, or at least exclusivity will be maintained no matter what kind of societal setup we have - it's the impact of biology.
And scene!

Darling, darling~

This shows a difference in fundamental beliefs!

You seem to believe that the brain creates emotions. I believe it can generate FAKE emotions but that TRUE emotions come from the etheric heart, something the brain doesn't control~

Your statement, and that of those ridiculous neurologists is that we are ruled by the body, which is controlled by the brain. I disagree.

The body is only one part of VARIOUS things that make up oneself~ Thus, the brain has limited control over us. The amount of control it has can easily fool people into thinking it's the only thing that controls us, when this isn't the case.


Reply With Quote
  #19    
Old October 25th, 2013 (10:04 PM). Edited October 25th, 2013 by Kanzler.
Kanzler's Avatar
Kanzler Kanzler is offline
naughty biscotti
Crystal Tier
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Toronto
Gender: Male
Nature: Relaxed
Posts: 5,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rezilia View Post
And scene!

Darling, darling~

This shows a difference in fundamental beliefs!

You seem to believe that the brain creates emotions. I believe it can generate FAKE emotions but that TRUE emotions come from the etheric heart, something the brain doesn't control~

Your statement, and that of those ridiculous neurologists is that we are ruled by the body, which is controlled by the brain. I disagree.

The body is only one part of VARIOUS things that make up oneself~ Thus, the brain has limited control over us. The amount of control it has can easily fool people into thinking it's the only thing that controls us, when this isn't the case.
Well yeah, there's a nervous system that's coordinated by the brain which communicates through hormones and neurotransmitters. This stuff can be measured. I guess they can take blood samples from a couple post-coitus and measure their oxytocin levels. They can do experiments on animals to see what the effects of an elevated concentration of hormone would have after sex. At least they've realized oxytocin is associated with that kind of person-to-person bonding?

Perhaps I should clarify - the brain is the coordinating centre. We respond to stimuli, so I guess you could make a philosophic argument that the stimuli is the immediate cause - our environments control us Or we could take one step away from the environment and say that our genetics control us, because after all, why else do we have emotions the way we do? You could make the argument that the brain isn't "controlling" anything, nor is it responding, it's just coordinating.

I know it's not the easiest idea to swallow, but it makes sense. It's plausible that we have a system of coordinated action in our body, and since emotions tend to be pretty coordinated, well, emotions should be regulated by that same system eh?

What does an etheric heart have to do with anything?
Reply With Quote
  #20    
Old October 25th, 2013 (10:16 PM).
Rezilia's Avatar
Rezilia Rezilia is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Gender: Female
Nature: Sassy
Posts: 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlahISuck View Post
Well yeah, there's a nervous system that's coordinated by the brain which communicates through hormones and neurotransmitters. This stuff can be measured. I guess they can take blood samples from a couple post-coitus and measure their oxytocin levels. They can do experiments on animals to see what the effects of an elevated concentration of hormone would have after sex. At least they've realized oxytocin is associated with that kind of person-to-person bonding?

I know it's not the easiest idea to swallow, but it makes sense. It's plausible that we have a system of coordinated action in our body, and since emotions tend to be pretty coordinated, well, emotions should be regulated by that same system eh?

What does an etheric heart have to do with anything?
*facepalm*

You're still looking at things through a taught perspective. That is to say, you're using logic WITHOUT using imagination - and the logic you're using is not your own, it's what other people having given you, taught you, etc.

“Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand.”

― Albert Einstein

You believe emotions are generated by the brain, that sex and love are wholly connected, etc, because you were TOLD that. It isn't a conclusion you came to yourself, on your own.

Imagination goes beyond the realm of possibility. It does not assume. It only envisions. When you write down that the brain generates love, you state it as fact rather than as only a possibility. This shows a lack of acceptance for OTHER possibilities, which is why you didn't get what I said when I talked about the etheric heart.

The etheric heart would be a metaphysical object, separate from the physical heart. That's easy enough to deduce. But I stated that TRUE emotions, in their "pure" forms, such as "pure love", come from the etheric heart, NOT the brain.

This means that the brain's fake love, which is connected to sex, is NOT the same as true love, which is NOT connected to sex.

Thus, the separation between sex and love being that fake love would not be deemed love as we have it in modern regard, but rather a slight wince which is a side effect of sex. True love, which is separate from sex, would be more recognizable in its effect since fake love would no longer have authority.


Reply With Quote
  #21    
Old October 25th, 2013 (10:29 PM).
Kanzler's Avatar
Kanzler Kanzler is offline
naughty biscotti
Crystal Tier
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Toronto
Gender: Male
Nature: Relaxed
Posts: 5,612
The fact of the matter is that I have no idea what an "etheral heart" is. It's not that I'm not open to the possibility, it's that the idea is very vague. It's not objective, and the use of quotation marks everywhere makes its subjectivity obvious. It's also highly arbitrary, since you're coming up with many claims without a shred of evidence nor an explanation in their support. At least with a neurological explanation of emotion (and sex) you're linking it to something we already know. Let me ask you the negative - given what we know about the nervous system coordinating our actions (our impulses, hunger and thirst, reflexes, etc.), why should emotions be separate from the nervous system?

And why is the brain's love fake love, and the heart's love true love? What is true emotion versus fake emotion? Isn't what's fake and true subjective ?
Reply With Quote
  #22    
Old October 25th, 2013 (10:54 PM).
Rezilia's Avatar
Rezilia Rezilia is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Gender: Female
Nature: Sassy
Posts: 322
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlahISuck View Post
The fact of the matter is that I have no idea what an "etheral heart" is. It's not that I'm not open to the possibility, it's that the idea is very vague. It's not objective, and the use of quotation marks everywhere makes its subjectivity obvious. It's also highly arbitrary, since you're coming up with many claims without a shred of evidence nor an explanation in their support. At least with a neurological explanation of emotion (and sex) you're linking it to something we already know. Let me ask you the negative - given what we know about the nervous system coordinating our actions (our impulses, hunger and thirst, reflexes, etc.), why should emotions be separate from the nervous system?

And why is the brain's love fake love, and the heart's love true love? What is true emotion versus fake emotion? Isn't what's fake and true subjective ?
etheric - here, edumacation and all that

The "fake" nature of fake love exists due to the idea that neurological love is not anchored. As in, what we call love in terms of the brain is subject to alteration into various things which are not the same. This is due to how the brain functions. On the other hand, "true" love is true due to existing as its own thing, not subject to alteration. While the etheric heart is where true love comes from, the emotion of love itself is not designed or altered by the etheric heart, while neuro-emotions are altered all the time, based on factors other than themselves. Things like sex, for example.

In other words, fake love is a temporary phenomenon while true love is an ever-present force.


Reply With Quote
  #23    
Old October 26th, 2013 (2:27 AM).
murkage's Avatar
murkage murkage is offline
Fairy Key Chain Sweeper
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Johto
Age: 23
Gender: Male
Nature: Modest
Posts: 96
Sex is really just a means to an end at its base. Very few species of animals practice casual sex. Male lions use it to further his dominance, Chimps on the other hand do it as a form of social interaction which is a huge part of their nature much like humans. Humans have such a deep conscious and most become emotionally attached to other living things whether it be an animal, another human as a friend or a lover. I think people tend over think sex. The general line in this thread seems to be those who look at it in a scientific way with pheromones and such, and then those who view it as more spiritual and imaginative experience. I think as individual humans we should be able to explore sex as we choose but at the same time we have get a grasp on what is wrong and right. Not just based on a religion or political affiliation.
Reply With Quote
  #24    
Old October 26th, 2013 (8:31 AM).
Kanzler's Avatar
Kanzler Kanzler is offline
naughty biscotti
Crystal Tier
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Toronto
Gender: Male
Nature: Relaxed
Posts: 5,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rezilia View Post
etheric - here, edumacation and all that

The "fake" nature of fake love exists due to the idea that neurological love is not anchored. As in, what we call love in terms of the brain is subject to alteration into various things which are not the same. This is due to how the brain functions. On the other hand, "true" love is true due to existing as its own thing, not subject to alteration. While the etheric heart is where true love comes from, the emotion of love itself is not designed or altered by the etheric heart, while neuro-emotions are altered all the time, based on factors other than themselves. Things like sex, for example.

In other words, fake love is a temporary phenomenon while true love is an ever-present force.
Don't you see how it's subjective though? I could be a person who thrives on "fake" love in your eyes, yet I will claim it to be true. And how does the brain function in such a way corroborates with what you're saying? Why does "anchoring" matter and how does it occur? And what does "true" love existing as its own thing even mean? If it comes from the etheric heart, why isn't it designed or altered? What's the point of having an etheric heart when it doesn't do anything to "true" emotion?
Reply With Quote
  #25    
Old October 26th, 2013 (3:55 PM).
TheTorraRegion's Avatar
TheTorraRegion TheTorraRegion is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Gender:
Posts: 53
Aaaaaah big words!

I think that it would be hard to practice monogamy if people were having sex with everyone all the time. It just seems like a more personal, intimate thing to me, but that's an opinion and not a fact. Sex is a part of social structure for some animals, like dolphins, s what would it be for us? Right now it's a sign of partnership (except for rape and stuff), so hat would out become? Just something to do? If so, why? Why have it become so natural, what purpose would this serve? How would actual couples have anything special/private left that would provide a purpose for couples? Love, which can change?

Sorry, but I'm complicated. And weird. And don't forget I'm white and nerdy!
Igloo's Shtuffs
[/URL
[URL=http://www.nodiatis.com/personality.htm]
Reply With Quote
Reply Post Reply
Quick Reply

Sponsored Links
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Minimum Characters Per Post: 25

Forum Jump


  All times are GMT -8. The time now is 2:26 AM.


Contact Us Archive Privacy Statement Terms of Service Top