We Are Obsessed With Sexual behavior when we proclaim it evil or distasteful or debasing,hide it, and pretend that its is primarily “Animalistic.”
We are also obsessed with sexual behavior when we proclaim its merits in an exaggerated fashion from the marketplace. We are obsessed with sexual behavior when we put tight, unrealistic bans upon its expression, and also when we set up just as unrealistic standards of active performance to which the normal person is expected to comply.
Sexual freedom, then, does not involve an enforced promiscuity in which young people, for example, are made to feel unnatural if their encounters with the other sex do not lead to bed.
We begin to program sexual activity when we divorce it from love and devotion. It is very easy then for church or state to claim and attract our uncentered loyalty and love, leaving us with the expression of a sexuality stripped of its deepest meanings.
I am not saying here that any given sexual performance is “wrong,” or meaningless, or debased, if it is not accompanied by the sentiments of love and devotion. Over a period of time, however, the expression of sex will follow the inclination of the heart.These inclinations will color sexual expression, then. To that degree, it is “unnatural” to have sexual desire for someone whom you dislike or look down upon. The sexula ideas of domination and submission have no part in the natural life of our species, or that of the animals.We have interpret animal behavior according to our own beliefs.
Dominance and submission have often been used in religious literature in periods when love and devotion were separated from sexuality. They became unified only through religious visions or experiences, for only God’s love was seen as “good enough” to justify a sexuality otherwise felt to be animalistic. Instead, the words “domination” and Submission” have to do with areas of consciousness that to a certain extent was bent upon dominating nature. We considered this male in essence. The female principle then became connected with the earth and all those elements of its life over which we as a species hoped to gain power.
God, therefore, became male. The love and devotion that might otherwise be connected with the facets of nature and the female principle had to be “snacthed away from” any natural attraction to sexuality. In such a way, religion, echoing our state of consciousness, was able to harness the powers of love and use them for purposes of domination. They became state-oriented. A man’s love and devotion was a political gain. Fervor was as important as a government’s treasury, for a state could count upon the devotion of its lieutenants in the same way that many fanatics will work without money for a cause.
Some people are naturally solitary. They want to live lone lives, and are content. Most, however, have a need for ending, close relationships. These provide both a psychic and social framework for personal growth, understanding, and development. It is an easy enough matter to shout to the skies: “I love my fellow men,” when on the other hand we form no strong, enduring relationship with others. It is easy to claim an equal love for all members of the species, but love itself requires an understanding that at our level of activity is based upon intimate experience. We cannot love someone we do not kn ow– not unless we water down the definition of love so much that it becomes meaningless.
To love someone, you must appreciate how that person differs from yourself and from others. We must hold that person in mind so that to some extent love is a kind of meditation–a loving focus upon another individual. Once you experience that kind of love we can translate it into other terms.. The love itself spreads out, expands, so that we can then see others in love’s light.
Love is naturally creative and explorative– that is, we want to creatively explore the aspects of the beloved one. even characteristics that would otherwise appear as faults attain a certain loving significance. Because these are still attributes of the beloved attains prominence over all others.
The span of a god’s love can perhaps equally hold within its vision the existences of all individuals at one time in an infinite loving glance that beholds each person, seeing each with all his or her peculiar characteristics and tendencies. Such a god’s glance would delight in each person’s difference from each other person. This would not be a blanket love, a soupy porridge of a glance in which individuality melted, but a love based on a full understanding of each individual. The emotion of love brings us closet to an understanding of the nature of All That Is. Love incites dedication, commitments. It specifies. We cannot, therefore, honestly insist that we love humanity and all people equally if we do not love one other person. If we do not love oneself, it is quite difficult to love another