FireShadow
Jedi Master
Iron said:I understood your sentence as not willing to look at the issue. Or at least not considering all possibilities. Since others have pointed other possibilities than seeing the feeding aspect of sex and no reply of yours about trying to see if some of these possibilities is true, I assumed that you were stuck at this thought.
But I did post about looking into other possibilities - beginning with the book "Cupid's Poisoned Arrow"! I also posted the possibility of menopausal hormones affecting me, but pointed out that I may be close to menopause but not yet seeing many symptoms.
Now I understand you. Perhaps it was not really your fault. Maybe its me how should have read with more attention.
Sometimes it can be difficult to communicate through the written word alone, much nuance is lost! I am glad to have cleared up this much at least.
Iron said:FireShadow said:Yes, those vedas may be corrupted or they may reflect a piece of truth.
Depends on whether or not the theory of 2 kinds of sex is accurate. If it is, the truth would depend on what kind of sex you are engaging in - fertilization/orgasm-based sex that feeds the Lizzies/physicality and keeps us firmly rooted in physicality/feeding cycles or bonding-based sex with facilitates enlightenment/increased intimacy.
I agree with you, that the mode of sex can be of feeding the STS chain, and that with effort and knowledge perhaps can transform itself in something more sublime.
FireShadow said:If there is only one choice and it is fertilization/orgasm-based/feeding sex, perhaps coming to a place where you are repulsed is part of a process.
In pondering your words and my reply, it occurred to me that my repulsion seems related to recently being able to really see (as opposed to just knowing about) the "feeding-behavior" aspect of sex. I have only recently been able to see that aspect as I was very entranced by the hedonism for so long. I am thinking that upon first sight, it is repulsive. I am not aware of any guilt feelings, I don't really regret much of my past, I learned a lot from it.
The part were I dont agree is on the dopamine/orgasm being the reason why couples stay longer or not. Perhaps I would have to read the book, but it seems to me a very weak explanation. It fails to take into account narcissism, the emotional wounds that each partner sustains, their own reactive programming.
Many things more are under a relationship than just dopamine highs and lows. Perhaps those dopamine highs and lows are different in people less narcissic, in other words tending more to the STO side of things?
The problem with basing observation solely on the physiology of the body, is that for many process it is just the endpoint.
Many other things happen before this endpoint, and since the ongoing discoveries that the mind controls more process to the genetic level than was thought before, I think that avoiding orgasms = to longer relationships is a somewhat shallow reasoning for me at the moment.
Not saying that you agree 100% with the authors of the Cupid's poisoned arrow, just trying to show you a different view, and to try not to toss the baby out with the bathwater in this sex issue.
The thinking of many is rather black and white in this issue.
Either you must have it, and have it now, in the worst way, or you shouldnt have it, never, yuck!
I think reading the book is a good idea as she goes into the details of this very complex issue. No, she does not talk of the other issues of relationship - that is outside the scope of the book.
However, in my previous training as addiction counselor, I can say that what she describes fits in well with the previously known aspects of the addictive cycle. And, it was known to us (counbselors) that to really determine the underlying issues of emotions/psychology, it was necessary to get clear of the addictive cycle and balance the neurochemistry before a true analysis of those other issues was possible. The chemistry can cause someone to mimic several other disorders.
And, the information fits in well with much of what the C's and Laura have said (see thread on book review of "Cupid's Poisoned Arrow" - http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=21030.0 as I have recently added more quotes from my studies).
And, I think I am taking the emotional/psychological issues under consideration as in this post:
Add these factors to my "issues" of abandonment and feelings of not being loved that I developed during a dysfunctional/abusive childhood, I can now see why it was so very hard for me to work through these issues in my past. The biology seemed to have intensely exacerbated my emotional issues. I do wish I had known then what I know now! But, at least I do have the information now - better late than never.
Now it is the time for testing this new information - without dismissing it as shallow reasoning.
I thank you for taking the time to answer this post in a so gentle manner.
And still one of the most important thing you are doing, that is to discuss with your Husband! I salute you for that... shows concern!
And for trying a alternative even feeling strongly against it... whatever you two learn don't forget to post it.
Not a problem! It is good to question.
It is sometimes quite difficult to get oneself across just by writing online. You have done very well, IMO! I am guessing that not all of what you have been saying was read by the last few posters, but it got cleared up nevertheless. There was that separate thread on Cupids P Arrow that I missed.
It is funny to me too. At the same time, I have had two nights in a row with sexual dreams--strong ones, and I am now feeling that those dreams were "planted," as it were, by 4D STS to throw me off track for a bit. This happens every once in a while, and I am not sure why, except that it might be part of getting free of very strong programs!
:D
4 dreams about the same lady? What is the 'relationship' like with her? What do you do together? Is she your age or young? What age are you in the dreams? Does it feel like a different density (a 4D bleedthrough for instance or a concurrent lifetime?) Just curious! Take care.