On the nature of sex
Sex is undeniably the most talked about and fundamental aspect of a human psyche. Skipping its historical perspectives, I am interested in this blogpost to talk directly about what place sex has in our lives today. In this post-modern world, the old beliefs on sex are being continously and progressively shunned by most classes (economic or intellectual). Most of the banal conversations between well-to-do humans is on the topics like, polyamory, casual sex, threesome, gender sexual identity, choosing partners, extra-marital sex, open relationships etc. I am interested to find what's the most fundamental consideration to hold while deciding on your decision or belief system, when your future actions are falling into this domain of life.
Unarguably, the human body (including mind) is a complex unit of intermingled biological, emotional, rational, irrational, evolutionary and lot other facets. These are so jumbled up that there is no point of even delineating them and explaining them - but everyone is so keen to play with these divisions while deciding their actions. For example, while choosing a partner for marriage a rational reason invokes to find yourself a stable partner in financial, social aspect but while choosing a partner for sex a psychological reason invokes to find yourself a sexually compatible partner. Given the fact that human changes variably with time and so do their goals and baseline facets for making decisions, it is safe to say that human can never have a control over him/her-self. When I say control, I mean self-awareness. The least I am sure about human pscyhe is its own self-awareness to why it is making a certain decision. It just happens to be. For this reason, drawing a reason from baseline facet to explain your decision is a task susceptible to self-bias, making-it-up, and such psychological issues. Mapping these inferences to another person, it is even more safe to say that a human can never understand even to a fair agree the intermingled facets of another person (a potential partner in our case). Hence, the idea of loving the soul (metaphor for intermingled facets) of the person is purely metaphorical and you can never explain or word it down. But experimentally, love happens as evident from billions of people throughout the course of human history who have again and again re-iterated this proposition. So, I can not write anything about love here. But what about sex? Sex is another talked about topic just like love and they both have some psycholoical correlations. However, sex is an action stemming from the intermingled facets I mentioned above. To decide to do sex is to understand these facets. If you choose not to understand these facets, you are not a human as you should be. But humans can not understand these facets because of limits in our cognition. Hence, it might be safe say that one shouldn't do sex. One might argue that just like love, the act of sex just happens to be. If it is the case, then sex should be as abstract as the love is - for love just happens in your mind, so the sex should be. But what's the origin of love? Is it the phsyical proximity with that person or an idea of that person. My contention is that love is with the idea of that person, existing in your person. So even though, love can have causal factors like physical proximity, finance, social factor, genetic factor, psychological factor, the most fundamental and common trademark of love is the idea of person existing in your mind. That's how love becomes abstract for it exists only in your mind. If you decide to do sex by not finding a fundamental trademark of sex, then it is a fairly common act and you can always find arguments to choose any side on the topics related to sex like casual sex, threesome etc. For example, homosexual incest is a perfectly normal act because there is no chance of pregnancy and from biological perspective, it should be legal/normal/open. "But is such an act fundamentally understood or felt before executed?" -- You can say it is felt like it should be done it is done. "But when you felt it, what should you do about what you felt"? -- I will just do it when I felt like doing it. "So the act happened physically and altered something in brain, but you ignored the brain part and focused on the physical part and that's it" -- But you said that there are some intermingled aspects as causal factors of sex which you can't delineate properly and there is nothing other than doing sex which you can do." -- Yes, so I just need to do it and not think at all. But there's something missing in your argument of "just doing it". "It was an experience in your brain which was so abstract and fundamental and omniscient that you forgot to notice. This experience is that of re-creating sex in your brain. Just like love, sex is all in your brain and you can imagine sex with any person/animal/object possible in the known universe and it is legally/socially/morally acceptable. What I mean to say is that though you can do sex without thinking, but just thinking about sex is a better action that actually doing it. When I say thinking about sex, it means writing, drawing, talking, any everything imaginary about sex than the actual physical sex. The game of imagination has much higher payoffs than an actual game. The possibilities of abstract sex is immensely larger even to write than few possibilities of phsyical sex (and its evolution) which always bring moral/legal/social issues in societies. Sex is important for humanity but not doing and just imagining sex is a well-thought, constructed, pleasurable, diverse act with immense benefits. Choice is yours.
