Art, Filosofia, Philosophy, Psicologia, Psychology

Mas-turbation VS Coit-uS

There are topics which are kept hidden even in a century where there aren’t enough limitations, where the well-beloved super-io seems to be becoming a mere puppet in the hands-on ignorance.

One of the topics I want to treat here is the conception of masturbation as a substitute for sex, in particular, the role of the (sex) toy as a substitute for human presence.

For the majority of people, sexuality is desire and this one is understood merely like coitus. In reality, sexuality is just a concept, nothing more. When we say “sex” we go over centuries of narrative where scientists and medics were standardizing humankind’s understanding of pleasure.
In a few words, desire is yourself.

Generalizing a bit, people experience desire through mutual manipulation, stimulation and, in rare cases, ecstatic multi-senses relationships, with other humans; though, humans get pleasure by projecting desire through and by bodies.

In the capitalistic view of desire, even the most powerful sensory experience is reduced to an object. This situation contributed to mixing up the conceptualization of masturbation as a substitute for coitus. It is well known that in the past centuries people were happy to enjoy their pleasure with several mechanisms, situations and even with the help of toys; however, eroticism as “masturbation” was not a mere product of pleasure or sublimation of the wild instinct of copulation, rather was an experience without limitations nor related psychosis.

Coming back to our days, it is interesting how the sex toy is taking over the mere body presence of the others. The strongest pleasure experienced during toy masturbation (because of the high technology behind the sex item)/ is obscuring the need for the presence.

What are we missing here?

There is no miss. This is the nowadays reality, made by non-presence connections, high-tech sensory experiences always more close to the actual reality. Perhaps we are missing just one thing: we are missing the “self”, the consciousness. It is not whether you use a plastic toy or a penis or vagina attached to a body… Even those could be a “toy”. What we are missing is the understanding of ourselves, our being. Once the self is fully aware of itself in space and time we can experience the others’ selves in full harmony.

The multi-senses experience is strongly linked to self-awareness.


Put the case that a woman/man buys a toy capable not only to stimulate the vagina-clitoris-penis but also “simulating” in a way never experienced before (humans to humans) Here we have a miss. We are missing the senses, the warm feelings, the natural smoothness, fragrance, the taste and the “mutual agreements”. Yes, when two or more selves are together they can create the experience itself.

In absence of conscience, technology arises. In absence of self-consciousness, masturbation is the sublimation of coitus and not multi-sensorial-self-referential-experience.

It is evident how the self-gratification by an external “being that it is not self” (ontological difference?) is not reducible to a mere pleasure but a various dynamics rooted in our cultural order. The so-called object, that is mine, is the new projection of perfection. Thus, the human body becomes a commodity, commodifying itself for the sake of the moment. In that particular moment, just the deep breath, the heart rating and the veracious flux of dopamine give the Self its satisfaction.

Neither the object nor the act itself (called masturbation) can replace the coitus. Perhaps, what “we” have experienced was the real love that we cannot find with others.

There is no link between self-experience-of-pleasure and shared-feral-titillating of coitus.
The two experiences are two different worlds that should not be mixed up nor devalued against the sacred-that-is-not coitus.

Finally, the plastic toy can’t replace the human’s flesh as the human’s genital exercise can’t be replaced by the self-hypnotic-titillation.
The experience of pleasure is a unique way to reach the awareness of the self and the world around us.


For further elucubrations:


Standard
Art, Filosofia, Philosophy, Psychology

Love beyond the mere concept of affection. Brief rumination on the concept of desire – Feat. E. Schiele

Premise

Desire is the key concept of this article, so, no apologies for the repetition!

Meditation I – Sturm und Drang

In every representation of the (my/ours) reality, some objects and facts stand out miraculously: the fact that I am here, now and the object that is my body.
I have always thought that my presence in the world is a mere fact present to myself, that my being among others, even better, among objects, is a relation purely subjective.
During those ruminations, I used to touch myself, feeling the present that is mine towards my conscience, connecting the dots of my being with those of the others of outer space, not mine. During those moments, I realized that I was alive and I was a sad object called a living being.
Among objects and beings – two different experiences. Each connection with those entities is a pure matter of sadness and desperation. Being among objects was a sign of mere mortality, here and now, the cold touch of the pure non-being; while, being among the beings was always a conflict, a fight for reproduction.
All my thoughts about myself and the world around me were conveyed to one point – the desire.

Desire – the lonely sing of the desperation

I (for not saying “we”) desire because of an innate instinct of reproduction. I have always thought that desiring was a mere human fact but with the following experiences I have realized that I was just a mammal.
The concept of love is the sweetener of the pure wild desire.
At the same time, I have noticed that love is an interesting experience: from one side, it shows our nature as human beings, from the other it shows our remote belonging to wild nature.
As human beings, we can think abstract and create concepts; therefore, we’ve created the concept of love to disguise the wild instinct of desire. At the same time, love represents the pure willingness to cooperate and support, typical in a lot of species on this planet: thus, we share this beautiful concept with all beings.
By referring to this brief reasoning, I admit my origin and the conflict that it is purely mine as a human being.

The paranoid impulse

We have explained how love doesn’t match completely with desire. The fact that we desire is not a matter of love, but instinct. For desire, I mean any attractions to the others being.
Almost our life is driven by desire. In every connection, we are unconsciously guided by the primordial lewd desire. This is not a negative vision of the life/world but a mere consideration of the nature of our being. As humans, we have developed the ability to sufferer without being afflicted by it; however, under the thick layer of our conscience, we know we are lost in the dark circle of instinct.
I won’t write more about that, I just give you time and space to think about your current situation together with that of your fellow people and living being.

The paramount conflict

In every connection/relationship we can see a latent conflict. I don’t mean that our life is based on conflict since our life is among others, however, as part of nature the answer is clear, implied.
How can we overcome this situation? Of course, for many, that is not an issue, their life is going well, full of love and happiness; but what about your inner being? how can we become real humans against wild desires and habits? Nature, instinct and wild habits are not the absolute negative, not at all; but they are impediments to the fulfillment of certain souls not able to overcome that inner and rooted dimension.
By overcoming the instinct we can be the owner of ourselves, successful and fulfilled.
This is/was just a meditation. The way? go and find that out by yourself.

Postface

I was still blind, but twinkling stars did dance Throughout my being’s limitless expanse, Nothing had yet drawn close, only at distant stages I found myself, a mere suggestion sensed in past and future ages.
Novalis

Standard