Love > Sex. So the word "Sexuality" is a stupid way to talk about our natural love vantage. I've got better terminology, yo.

  • FirestormDavi...

    Posts: 340

    Jul 02, 2014 11:01 PM GMT
    Sexual Identity=Amateur terminology from the dark ages of human understanding, AKA present day. ///// Duo Love Mapping=Future ///// Putting sex before love is the fastest way to remove life's sacred glow. While we're taking the magic away from everything, why don't we just call weddings sex contract summits? Advance.
  • WrestlerBoy

    Posts: 1903

    Jul 02, 2014 11:02 PM GMT
    FirestormDavid saidSexual Identity=Amateur terminology from the dark ages of human understanding, AKA present day. ///// Duo Love Mapping=Future ///// Putting sex before love is the fastest way to remove life's sacred glow. While we're taking the magic away from everything, why don't we just call weddings sex contract summits? Advance.


    I "feel" as though I would LOVE to respond to this... but you've left me clueless as to what you're talking about?
  • FirestormDavi...

    Posts: 340

    Jul 02, 2014 11:07 PM GMT
    Hell yeah, Joe Rogen is the shit haha. Come on, I'm not speaking Spanish here.

    Let me get all literal because my lyrical idea relay is jamming your systems.

    Perception is everything. The terms Heterosexual, Bisexual & Homosexual reek of lovelessness and need to change, however widespread. To bring sex first into the notion of romance is lizard-brain-basic. It's love that reigns day in day out, not sex.
    You're now a Heterolover | Bilover | Homolover
    Good morning.

    To discuss all this from omniscience we can use the term Duo Love Mapping--it's way stronger than 'sexuality' because it locks it all down to the meat and potatoes of the matter. Love, between two. Solid as rock. Now, how to evolve society phraseology...to turn a tide as wide as the sky...

    Now you feel me.

    And shit, I need to listen to more Joe Rogen Podcasts. Dude's got a great mind on his built frame.
  • jo2hotbod

    Posts: 3603

    Jul 02, 2014 11:12 PM GMT
    FirestormDavid saidHell yeah, Joe Rogen is the shit haha. Come on, I'm not speaking Spanish here.

    Let me get all literal because my lyrical idea rely is jamming your systems.

    Perception is everything. The terms Heterosexual, Bisexual & Homosexual reek of lovelessness and need to change, however widespread. To bring sex first into the notion of romance is lizard-brain-basic. It's love that reigns day in day out, not sex.
    You're now a Heterolover | Bilover | Homolover
    Good morning.

    To discuss all this from omniscience we can use the term Duo Love Mapping--it's way stronger than sexuality because it locks it all down to the meat and potatoes. Love, between two. Solid as rock. Now, how to turn a tide as wide as the sky...

    Now you feel me.

    And shit, I need to listen to more Joe Rogen Podcasts!


    Dazed and confused
  • FirestormDavi...

    Posts: 340

    Jul 02, 2014 11:21 PM GMT
    I tweaked some words and fixed a typo. Read it again. If you're still confused...you may need to either take an english course...or stop wanking long enough to ah...you know...think a lil bit haha
  • WrestlerBoy

    Posts: 1903

    Jul 02, 2014 11:24 PM GMT
    jo2hotbod said
    FirestormDavid saidHell yeah, Joe Rogen is the shit haha. Come on, I'm not speaking Spanish here.

    Let me get all literal because my lyrical idea rely is jamming your systems.

    Perception is everything. The terms Heterosexual, Bisexual & Homosexual reek of lovelessness and need to change, however widespread. To bring sex first into the notion of romance is lizard-brain-basic. It's love that reigns day in day out, not sex.
    You're now a Heterolover | Bilover | Homolover
    Good morning.

    To discuss all this from omniscience we can use the term Duo Love Mapping--it's way stronger than sexuality because it locks it all down to the meat and potatoes. Love, between two. Solid as rock. Now, how to turn a tide as wide as the sky...

    Now you feel me.

    And shit, I need to listen to more Joe Rogen Podcasts!


    Dazed and confused


    I'll have whatever the FUCK he is drinking/smoking. Damn, that's some hot shit.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2014 11:34 PM GMT
    Hahaha I got your point tho!

    Watch this tho: http://www.ted.com/playlists/in_the_mood_for_love
  • FirestormDavi...

    Posts: 340

    Jul 02, 2014 11:36 PM GMT
    Okajuurou saidHahaha I got your point tho!

    Watch this tho: http://www.ted.com/playlists/in_the_mood_for_love



    Haha man VERY good to hear!!

    I gotta hit the hay but tomorrow I'll check it out! Ted talks have in the past always blown the ceiling off my mind.
  • FirestormDavi...

    Posts: 340

    Jul 02, 2014 11:38 PM GMT
    WrestlerBoy said
    jo2hotbod said
    FirestormDavid saidHell yeah, Joe Rogen is the shit haha. Come on, I'm not speaking Spanish here.

    Let me get all literal because my lyrical idea relay is jamming your systems.

    Perception is everything. The terms Heterosexual, Bisexual & Homosexual reek of lovelessness and need to change, however widespread. To bring sex first into the notion of romance is lizard-brain-basic. It's love that reigns day in day out, not sex.
    You're now a Heterolover | Bilover | Homolover
    Good morning.

    To discuss all this from omniscience we can use the term Duo Love Mapping--it's way stronger than 'sexuality' because it locks it all down to the meat and potatoes of the matter. Love, between two. Solid as rock. Now, how to evolve society phraseology...to turn a tide as wide as the sky...

    Now you feel me.

    And shit, I need to listen to more Joe Rogen Podcasts. Dude's got a great mind on his built frame.


    Dazed and confused


    I'll have whatever the FUCK he is drinking/smoking. Damn, that's some hot shit.


    Haha I toke the ganja but I haven't in days. Im in Europe with my family with a group of 20 and they were wine tasting this afternoon but that was hours ago and I was doing pushups outside most of the time. I love getting a WTF blank stare but only when I'm laying a certain style of joke, haha. This aint one of those times--I'm serious, earnestly working to evoke an important idea here bruthas...

    Because we all must...represent.

    And the words 'sexuality' and 'sexual identity' don't represent the best we have to offer. It's so dirty to consider that they're such widely-used terms. So many people seeing sex as our core drive rather than love...Love is in the mind and it lasts eternity. The body goes back to the Earth when we die.

    That's why I say we're in the dark ages of human understanding. You have to believe we'll advance to such a level that our current ways of discourse about this subject will appear pathetically obsolete from our future, love-centered outlook.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2014 11:46 PM GMT
    jo2hotbod said

    Dazed and confused


    I'm still dazed and confused too. Plain English, please.icon_confused.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2014 11:53 PM GMT
    In my workshops I have proposed "affectional orientation" instead of "Sexual". People seemed to like that, for (I think) the same reasons you're suggesting.

    I love more about dudes than their weiners. The weiner is kind of after the fact (at least for me).

    But -- even if I'm never gonna see em naked -- I bond more strongly with guys than girls. Always did. Guessing I always will.
  • MikeW

    Posts: 6061

    Jul 03, 2014 12:09 AM GMT
    owl_bundy saidthere's sexual attraction and then there's romantic attraction. you're confusing yourself...

    You have a point. Actually two or three. ;)
  • FirestormDavi...

    Posts: 340

    Jul 03, 2014 12:11 AM GMT
    Plain English? You mean I can't use anymore metaphors? Man aight, takin the fun out of shit, haha. Just Joshing. We can't all be linguistic beasts.

    Let me break it down. What is the one most important thing in life?

    Love.

    Love can and should be for all, and the type of love that is different from the love for all is romantic love.

    Therefore, we should not discuss who we love through the words "sexuality" or "sexual identity". We should use the word love. Suddenly, "sexuality" becomes Duo Love Mapping. Duo meaning 2, mapping meaning where we fall on the grand spectrum of who our lover is, Male and/or Female.

    Love is the grand king, the jedi master, the MC of the greatest show on Earth. Sex is merely Love's tool for deeper union. Without love, sex is nothing, just carnal contact and vanishing passion. Love is what enables us to push our spouse around in a wheel chair long after they're sexually active because we're close enough to them that our bodies don't need to get interlocked in order for us to be one. Love is what enables us to patiently wait while our guy is overseas on business for two weeks. Sex only ever is interested in its own gain, gone in an instant. Orgasm is the death of sex, but love continues after death.

    So for us to teach children that they are heterosexuals or bisexuals or homosexuals instead of heterolovers, bilovers or homolovers, well it puts emphasis on a tool of love, while embarrassingly-ignoring the Michael Jordan of life's gifts. To deny love is more than stupid, it's reckless.

    As we fight for our right to marriage, could it be that the words we use to advance our arguments are hurting us? Yeah, it could be and it fucking is. We gotta bring love into the conversation whenever possible because there will never be anything more important than love. Bringing sex before love would be like presenting a movie poster and putting some lowlife dumb shit's name in giant letters on the poster while ignoring the most talented and powerful actor in the world, who is the star of the flick...

    Is this plain English enough? I'm going to bed either way haha.
  • FirestormDavi...

    Posts: 340

    Jul 03, 2014 12:22 AM GMT
    owl_bundy said


    there's sexual attraction and then there's romantic attraction. you're confusing yourself by putting love (romantic attraction) and sex (sexual attraction) as one thing when they are two different things. you can be sexually attracted to guys only but be romantically bisexual.


    and when they say "sexual" in homosexual, it doesn't necessary mean that it means who you have sex with. more of like the sex of the person. heterosexual is the "opposite sex". homosexual is "same sex". bisexual is "both sexes".


    Ehh dude somehow you got confused because I agree and state that love and sexual attraction are different. Ha, funny--I'm sexually attracted to guys and romantically bisexual. The females that I love, oh damn. In their unattainable eyes I see monster rampages.

    Anyway, when we describe the sex of a person, we are literally talking about sex. So why not say which Love are you--male or female (or both eh)? Because love always eclipses sex.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 03, 2014 12:44 AM GMT

    Firestorm, I know what you're talking about. On FB, a friend from RJ and I started a page we titled: Homoloveual. He ended up deleting his account there and also the page, which is really too bad. I think the term is a good one.

  • WrestlerBoy

    Posts: 1903

    Jul 03, 2014 12:51 AM GMT
    meninlove said
    Firestorm, I know what you're talking about. On FB, a friend from RJ and I started a page we titled: Homoloveual. He ended up deleting his account there and also the page, which is really too bad. I think the term is a good one.



    How fucking hip are you, Menin!!! lol I'm still clueless!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 03, 2014 1:01 AM GMT
    WrestlerBoy said
    meninlove said
    Firestorm, I know what you're talking about. On FB, a friend from RJ and I started a page we titled: Homoloveual. He ended up deleting his account there and also the page, which is really too bad. I think the term is a good one.



    How fucking hip are you, Menin!!! lol I'm still clueless!


    LOL! We just figured the term homosexual was too narrow, and also thought that removing the sexual part of the term and replacing it with the word love would be an exercise in awareness for the boneheads who state they don't agree with 'the gay lifestyle' and that they then might understand that it's not just about sex but about something much more powerful not mentioned in the term 'homosexual' - who and how you love.
  • WrestlerBoy

    Posts: 1903

    Jul 03, 2014 1:04 AM GMT
    meninlove said
    WrestlerBoy said
    meninlove said
    Firestorm, I know what you're talking about. On FB, a friend from RJ and I started a page we titled: Homoloveual. He ended up deleting his account there and also the page, which is really too bad. I think the term is a good one.



    How fucking hip are you, Menin!!! lol I'm still clueless!


    LOL! We just figured the term homosexual was too narrow, and also thought that removing the sexual part of the term and replacing it with the word love would be an exercise in awareness for the boneheads who state they don't agree with 'the gay lifestyle' and that they then might understand that it's not just about sex but about something much more powerful not mentioned in the term 'homosexual' - who and how you love.


    Am I supposed to be "thinking" about this as I am "falling" in love? I mean, I think (in English) we call it "falling" in love because... that's what it is? Not "planning", "considering" "intellectually dissecting", or "parsing concepts" in love? I am "falling" (lack of control) in love? What have I missed, here?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 03, 2014 1:09 AM GMT
    WrestlerBoy said
    meninlove said
    WrestlerBoy said
    meninlove said
    Firestorm, I know what you're talking about. On FB, a friend from RJ and I started a page we titled: Homoloveual. He ended up deleting his account there and also the page, which is really too bad. I think the term is a good one.



    How fucking hip are you, Menin!!! lol I'm still clueless!


    LOL! We just figured the term homosexual was too narrow, and also thought that removing the sexual part of the term and replacing it with the word love would be an exercise in awareness for the boneheads who state they don't agree with 'the gay lifestyle' and that they then might understand that it's not just about sex but about something much more powerful not mentioned in the term 'homosexual' - who and how you love.


    Am I supposed to be "thinking" about this as I am "falling" in love? I mean, I think (in English) we call it "falling" in love because... that's what it is? Not "planning", "considering" "intellectually dissecting", or "parsing concepts" in love? I am "falling" (lack of control) in love? What have I missed, here?


    No, the term is for the numbnuts (many full of religiosity) that think being gay is solely about sex. icon_wink.gif

    I always thought of 'falling in love' being a description of the sensation.
  • MikeW

    Posts: 6061

    Jul 03, 2014 2:18 AM GMT
    FirestormDavid saidPerception is everything.
    FirestormDavid saidThat's why I say we're in the dark ages of human understanding.
    I agree with both those points. The problem is we're dealing with language, specifically contemporary English, as it has developed through time. Hell, we still talk about the sun rise and sun set, when it does no such thing, never has nor never will.

    Still, I do get your point. How we describe things to ourselves matters. I'm of the opinion that sexuality itself is very basely understood by contemporary humans. (I'm not certain it has ever been better understood than we do, but I am certain we don't understand it well at all.) When we talk about sex (not meaning gender identity) what *are* we talking about?

    Most people seem to think it is as obvious as the nose on your face; I quite disagree. Still, though, I'm neither a psychologist nor a philosopher, much less a sexologist. I'm not sure I can explain what I mean. For me it is as much "intuition" as something "thought out".

    We know, for example, that Madison Avenue has been playing on our subliminal sexual "instincts" (which may or may not be the right word), since Freud's nephew, Edward Bernays, got women to suck on cigarettes…



    6a00d83451ccbc69e201287706ac4b970c-400wi

    lucky-strike-ad.jpg

    …the positioning of the cigarettes between two fingers is highly suggestive.

    But if Freud and his kindred are right, keys, battering rams, pencils, rockets, pistols, swords, knives--anything long and essentially cylindrical that either gets shoved into something else or emits some sort of fluid--can be understood as a symbolic sexual object. Same in the reverse for envelopes, gloves, pillow cases, cups, wine glasses, doorways, purses and brief cases--anything that is a passageway and/or receptacle (yes, including the mouth and anus).

    We have to consider the origin of the word "sex" itself which has an interesting (Greek?) creation myth associated with it. First, "sex":
  • MikeW

    Posts: 6061

    Jul 03, 2014 2:19 AM GMT
    sex (n.)
    late 14c., "males or females collectively," from Latin sexus "a sex, state of being either male or female, gender," of uncertain origin. "Commonly taken with seco as division or 'half' of the race" [Tucker], which would connect it to secare "to divide or cut" (see section (n.)). Meaning "quality of being male or female" first recorded 1520s. Meaning "sexual intercourse" first attested 1929 (in writings of D.H. Lawrence); meaning "genitalia" is attested from 1938. Sex appeal attested by 1904.
    For the raw sex appeal of the burlesque "shows" there is no defense, either. These "shows" should be under official supervision, at the least, and boys beneath the age of eighteen forbidden, perhaps, to attend their performance, just as we forbid the sale of liquors to minors. [Walter Prichard Eaton, "At the New Theatre and Others: The American Stage, Its Problems and Performances," Boston, 1910]
    Sex drive is from 1918; sex object is 1901; sex symbol is 1871 in anthropology; the first person to whom the term was applied seems to have been Marilyn Monroe (1959). Sex therapist is from 1974.

    ---

    section (n.)
    late 14c., "intersection of two straight lines; division of a scale;" from Old French section or directly from Latin sectionem (nominative sectio) "a cutting, cutting off, division," noun of action from past participle stem of secare "to cut," from PIE root *sek- "to cut" (cognates: Old Church Slavonic seko, sešti "to cut," se čivo "ax, hatchet;" Lithuanian isekti "to engrave, carve;" Albanian šate "mattock;" Old Saxon segasna, Old English sigðe "scythe;" Old English secg "sword," seax "knife, short sword;" Old Irish doescim "I cut;" Latin saxum "rock, stone").

    According to one author's synopsis of Aristophane's Speech from Plato's Symposium:

    This creation myth places humans of all three genders (androgynous, male, and female) in a primeval state of eternal bliss. However, we grew insolent in our blissful state and refused to properly honor the gods (and even tried to pursue them in their mountainous home). As punishment, we were split in two. Those with a "male" nature (the Children of the Sun) became homosexual men; those with a "female" nature (the Children of the Earth) became Lesbians; and the androgynes (Children of the Moon) became heterosexuals. Navels are the souvenirs of the operation we all went through in being divided from our beloved other half. The myth warns humanity to be careful in always honoring the gods (especially Eros) or we will be hewn in two once more, leaving us to hop around on just one leg. Part of properly honoring Eros is to search for and find our lost half, to be restored to our natural state of bliss.

    In this mythology, human beings are "sectioned," "separated," and this appears to be the root association with "sex" in the English language. "X" not only marks the spot, and is the universal + (Axis Mundi) made impotent by being turned on its side, it is "us" cut in half (rendered spiritually impotent).

    So, as you can see, there is a lot going on here in terms Western man's evolving (or devolving) conception of sexuality if one chooses to delve into it. Later it all gets crossed (pun) yet again as Paganism gets crossed with Christianity.

    ….
  • MikeW

    Posts: 6061

    Jul 03, 2014 2:19 AM GMT


    But what I want to point back to is the Axis Mundi which, to my mind, is the crux (pun, Latin crux = "cross") of the matter. The tree of Life and (its shadow) The Tree of Knowledge "of good and evil" that stood in the midst of the garden and from whom Eve took that beguiling apple from the Serpent (Phallic, of time, Chronos > chronology [thus history, 'his+story']), offering it to the body of the man from whom she had been taken as he slept, is none other than this Axis Mundi.

    Lets see if I can even begin to pull this somewhat together. The erect penis is a biological representation of this very Axis Mundi. This is much more clear in some Hindu representations:

    bgod.jpg

    Lord Shiva lingam:

    shiv_lingam1.jpg

    Shivalinga.jpg
    According to the Hindu mythology:
    ‘During the great mythical churning of the ocean called Samudra Manthan, a pot of poison emerged from the ocean. The gods and the demons were terrified as it could destroy the entire world. When they ran to Shiva for help, he in order to protect the world, drank the deadly poison but held it in his throat instead of swallowing it….
    The phallus symbol representing Shiva is called the lingam. It is usually made of granite, soapstone, quartz, marble or metal, and has a ‘yoni’ or vagina as its base representing the union of organs.


    From here on it may help if I refrain from referring to "sex" (separation) and refer, rather, to the act of union, reuniting, "becoming one with" -- which is, in fact, what the activity we call "sex" actually is. The search for our "lost half" (which is as much psychological metaphor as romantic) is the desire for "reunion," of becoming "one with" and thus made whole. This is the worship of Eros spoken of before.

    You've brought up "love" as being the focal point rather than sex and you're right to do so. What I'm trying to point toward is that the problem underlying Western civilization's attitude toward *union* isn't simply a semantic issue. True, the words we choose to explain ourselves to ourselves and one another, do matter. However it is also true that our languages evolve out of concepts and *perceptions* that have, in some instances, *ancient* historical precedent.

    Using some mixture of quasi-religious terminologies, human history is a 'fall' into separation (loss of wholeness) and one of the *symptoms* of this loss of integrity shows up in, for example, "shame and guilt" (Adam and Eve hid their nakedness, something they didn't know they were, nor cared, prior to their little revolution of the mind).

    *Union* is a very powerful psychological force, *especially* if it is denied, subverted, and one might as well say "perverted" into a total lack of understanding of what *union* is and possibly can be. So perverted, *union* is denied and replaced with substitutes which is what "sex" (Western, diminutive, the act of physical gratification for its own sake) is. Denied our wholeness we seek solace in, well, most anything "civilization" (especially commercialized civilization) tosses in our path. We want the beefiest hottest, shiniest, meanest, bad ass hot mother fucker we can find to fill that big black void of emptiness we all experience (more or less) since we all became houses divided against ourselves.

    Put differently, there is no "shame and guilt" in *union* properly understood. *Union* won't sell Cigarettes and Chryslers or anything else. *Union* is the 'eternal love' you're speaking about realized within one's self and one's relation to the whole matrix (there's that 'x' again… late 14c., "uterus, womb," from Old French matrice "womb, uterus," from Latin matrix (genitive matricis) "pregnant animal," in Late Latin "womb," also "source, origin," from mater (genitive matris) "mother" (see mother (n.1)). Sense of "place or medium where something is developed"), which is none other than that proverbial garden within which the Axis Mundi stands, casting its shadow into history and time, the very "dark ages of human understanding" you speak of.

    We're a long, long way from home and, although you're quite right so far as it goes, re-uniting the fragments of the human soul into a state of grace is going to require a bit more than mere semantic substitutions. Not that there is anything wrong with that. Just saying.
  • WrestlerBoy

    Posts: 1903

    Jul 03, 2014 2:31 AM GMT
    Ok, now I've taken ten minutes to actually read through the entire thread.

    I think the topic is extraordinarily interesting, and I think the OP is extraordinarily interesting.

    Like him, however, I have to go to bed, too; but I am going to do something I would normally never do. It's long, "tricky", but I think it's "on point" for this discussion. My latest collection of poetry (to be published in January) is titled "On the Mathematical Principles of Love." Here's an extract from the preface. Talk tomorrow?

    "I read that what is most abstract in poetry is most concrete in mathematics,
    and what is most abstract in mathematics is most concrete in poetry. He also wrote that mathematics deals with relations, and poetry deals with qualities. But a sphere, for example, results when we can see the relations holding between the qualities.

    Mathematics is the science of relations as such.

    Love is the absence of a science of relations as such.

    Poetry sometimes attempts to describe, and to create, this absence.

    Poetry sometimes attempts to deal with the qualities of absence, which are love.

    A sphere is a round body whose surface is at all points equidistant from the center:

    x² + y² + z² = r²


    Such unfabled truths, as this equation, have a remarkably sedative effect on mathematicians; none whatsoever on lovers.


    We speak of our own loves in both universal and particular terms. Philosophically speaking, things are particulars and their qualities are universals. At the same time we might use something resembling the universal and existential quantifiers of logic to describe our loves. When we sit together with our beloved and imagine ourselves into the future, into that eternity of which Hachenberg writes, and we use phrases such as, “When our story is told, the world will…”, we are universalizing what we see to be the truth of our relationship. We tend to use existential quantifiers to talk about our relationships when we feel threatened, (“It’s just you and me against the world.”) It might strike us as inapt, at first, to use the terminology of logic to talk about love, but as Buchanan says (and rightly, I think), “It is logic, not drugs or dreams, that justifies men in strange fantastic ways.”

    Our love seems to falter when its magnitude ceases to flow. In mathematical terms, we might say that when our love stops flowing it has stopped functioning altogether. A static love is one which becomes trapped within a set of parameters which no longer take account of the fundamental dynamism inherent in lovers. When love ceases to flow it begins to corrupt those in which it resides. Ultimately, in this case, the love with which we were once filled will wane to mere residue.

    We can make mistakes in performing a mathematical function or calculation, and when we do so we recognize those mistakes for what they are, errors on our own part. We do not blame the universe for not adding up, for being somehow objectively at fault, but realize instead that the fault lies within ourselves. In comments he made many years after he had written Werther, Goethe said much the same thing. Werther did not finally commit suicide because he was the victim of unusually tragic circumstances beyond his control; he did so because his character was flawed. When faced with a situation familiar to most of us who have ever loved or been loved – that in which we loved someone who was unable or unwilling to return our love, or in which someone loved us and we were unable or unwilling to return theirs – young Werther’s world collapses. But Goethe makes clear that there is nothing wrong with the world, yet something wrong with his young hero. He is unable to respond to events in a way many of us struggle to respond, by simply getting on with life. Mathematics per se is never wrong. Love per se is never wrong (how could it be?), but our response to it can be."

    In other words, language IS "the stratification of behavior", and any attempt to "rank" love "above" sex, or vice-versa, is inherently folly.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 03, 2014 3:05 AM GMT
    ^^^ It is analogous to writing works for three simultaneous audiences. Thus one writes for the theoretical/technical audience. Then one writes in the poetical/mathematical "tense" to convey it's "true" meaning. Finally one writes in layperson's terms to be understandable to those just average.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 03, 2014 3:09 AM GMT
    You're both simplifying and idealizing here...

    It's not just about love. It is about PHYSICAL and EMOTIONAL connection to whoever/whatever is in question... you can't talk about HomoLove, HomoSex, HomoSapiens, HomerSimpson, or anything else without SEX being involved. It exists. Human beings care about it. American in particular are SCARED of it. We can run away from Sex or we can grow up as a culture and treat it with respect, not fear. We can't pretend it doesn't exist and hope the retards forget we're having it.
    I get that you're saying it implies a sexual act, without intent, but it's not why it makes us picture the sexual side of things. We picture a Sexual inclination because it exists and we can't deny it.

    It's Definitely not about terminology.

    Even if we managed to Completely replace "Homosexual" with the word "Perfect" on billboards, media, and in all conversation - nothing would change. 'Perfect's are still threatening the status quo. Fundamentalist Assholes still picture their houses burning down in the midst of the Hellfire which our Ass Sex spawns.