Romantic Fiction, Reality Shaping and The Work

[seek10]

I finished Seven Nights in a Rogue's Bed and I wasn't expecting to like it, but the last part of the story changed everything. I felt Sidonie character was very good. Last 2 hours of the story, Sidonie's behavior became more explicit - a mature character with courage, independent, non-complaining to suffering, and of sound principles.

She comes into the castle for saving her sister's life without knowing what she is getting into, knowing it is a complete ruin of her. When one looks at the reasons for her decisions, it is pure 'Care' for others than to herself or her needs - whether it is a decision to come to the castle or decision to stay back in the castle after getting the papers which liberates her sister or risking safety to go to London to Jonas cell to release him or going far to keep the word she gave to Jonas or not reaching to Jonas when he got back his privileges. At the same time, she has a sort of purity of soul that comes out as innocence, the courage to be independent while being sensitive to other's needs, hidden maturity to see when to say 'enough is enough' while able to not judge the facade of rogueness or hurt.

For me, the highlight of the book is her answer to Jonas' question "How can I trust you?" - "Your heart knows it. For that, you need to trust your self first" or something like that.

It is interesting how instinctual protection of her feminity which looked naive, exposed the facade of rogueness in Jonas, initially as an amusement, then the shock of the suicide threat, being with him (not abandoning him) during his 'bear in the cave' time and nurture him all the way.

When I heard that Jonas wants to marry her, but abandoned her, I thought, it is ridiculous as it can get, but she didn't give up. All my sympathies are with her at that moment and Jonas looked wounded spoiled child.

Nowadays, everything is twisted. It looked everything is available ( financial opportunities, social security, food stamps, freedom, instant communication and so on ), but the society devolved into 50+ gender pronouns, gender identity changes at the whim of a thought, "talking of roles" is racism ans most importantly basic thinking. This reading is refreshing leaving aside steamy parts. These steamy parts, cheesy title, and cover page to attract men but that is only a part, and focusing on it, is missing the story.

 

[Nienna]

To Laura
Awakening involves building on top of what already works. Kundalini/awakening (snake spiraling up) start from lower sex cakra up to crown. You have to open each cakra progressively. Example at lower vibration one often involves of enjoyment in physicality (sex, food, etc) when you evolve more, you start using your mind more (reading, reflection, etc) and last you developed emotional/ spirituality (loving, meditation etc). It doesn't mean that once you progress you stop enjoying physicality. You still enjoy making intimate love to your partner with all your 7 cakra open (body, mind, emotional). reading is mind activity not the optimal choice for developing spirituality, I suggest you get quality friends so you can surrender in networking with spiritual masters.

Laura posted something about Kundalini in another thread quite some time ago. It's something that Gurdjieff said. I'm just posting the part that deals mostly with Kundalini. There is much more that was posted, and it's very instructive.

"In so-called 'occult' literature you have probably met with the expression 'Kundalini,' 'the fire of Kundalini,' or the 'serpent of Kundalini.' This expression is often used to designate some kind of strange force which is present in man and which can be awakened. But none of the known theories gives the right explanation of the force of Kundalini. Sometimes it is connected with sex, with sex energy, that is with the idea of the possibility of using sex energy for other purposes. This latter is entirely wrong because Kundalini can be in anything. And above all, Kundalini is not anything desirable or useful for man's development. It is very curious how these occultists have got hold of the word from somewhere but have completely altered its meaning and from a very dangerous and terrible thing have made something to be hoped for and to be awaited as some blessing.

"In reality Kundalini is the power of imagination, the power of fantasy, which takes the place of a real function. When a man dreams instead of acting, when his dreams take the place of reality, when a man imagines himself to be an eagle, a lion, or a magician, it is the force of Kundalini acting in him. Kundalini can act in all centers and with its help all the centers can be satisfied with the imaginary instead of the real. A sheep which considers itself a lion or a magician lives under the power of Kundalini.

"Kundalini is a force put into men in order to keep them in their present state. If men could really see their true position and could understand all the horror of it, they would be unable to remain where they are even for one second. They would begin to seek a way out and they would quickly find it, because there is a way out; but men fail to see it simply because they are hypnotized. Kundalini is the force that keeps them in a hypnotic state. 'To awaken' for man means to be 'dehypnotized.' In this lies the chief difficulty and in this also lies the guarantee of its possibility, for there is no organic reason for sleep and man can awaken.

"Theoretically he can, but practically it is almost impossible because as soon as a man awakens for a moment and opens his eyes, all the forces that caused him to fall asleep begin to act upon him with tenfold energy and he immediately falls asleep again, very often dreaming that he is awake or is awakening.

"There are certain states in ordinary sleep in which a man wants to awaken but cannot. He tells himself that he is awake but, in reality, he continues to sleep—and this can happen several times before he finally awakes. But in ordinary sleep, once he is awake, he is in a different state; in hypnotic sleep the case is otherwise; there are no objective characteristics, at any rate not at the beginning of awakening; a man cannot pinch himself in order to make sure that he is not asleep. And if, which God forbid, a man has heard anything about objective characteristics, Kundalini at once transforms it all into imagination and dreams.

 

[seek10]

We need to add the Mackenzie saga books.

Also, there is a trilogy by Balogh that is excellent: Courting Julia, Dancing with Clara, Tempting Harriet. The middle one is the jewel of this set.

Some excellent standalones from Balogh: The First Snowdrop, An Unacceptable Offer, The Obedient Bride, The Ideal Wife, Dark Angel/Lord Carew's Bride.

Also, Untouched by Anna Campbell

There is another really great series by Mary Balogh: The Survivor's Club with the following, in order: The Proposal, The Suitor, The Arrangement, The Escape, Only Enchanting, Only a Promise, Only a Kiss, Only Beloved.

I updated the sheet with the missing suggested books.
Updated sheet

 

[Yas]

After reading all the latest comments, I think (hope) I'm starting to understand this a bit more. After reading The Madness of Lord Ian Mackenzie I also felt kind of a roller coaster of emotions, but thought that was probably inappropriate and maybe just me. I remember I used to get pretty immersed in novels when I was a teenager and I felt somewhat scared to be hooked up with fiction books again.

I also wondered why we are being encouraged to read books which generate those feelings, emotions and sensations and felt unsure if there was something to it or not. But now, from what I'm reading, it seems as if it would make sense to transmute this through the stories we read on those books. Because, true, what I saw in the story is a couple that might have started with pure attraction but grew to deep love and care. They were devoted to one another, while at the same time caring for their family and enjoying themselves.

I've also been wondering if the sex was necessary in the story. And I also realized that part of why I didn't like the explicit sexual content in the book is because I felt embarrassed by it. At a certain moment, I had a glimpse of a thought suggesting that maybe it wouldn't have the same effect without it. I wondered if would deliver the same 'inspiration' I felt when finishing the book without it. Maybe that part is necessary after all.

Now, I think I see a bit more of the point of it and realize this can indeed be a great tool to work through that part of ourselves in a healthy way. That the way in which these stories develop and how they stir up things is like a fire that melts some things that have remained rigid within ourselves, with the stories leading to a positive resolution that may imprint new ways of relating to one another and experiencing these emotions and feelings.

I'm listening to the second book of the Mackenzies saga and I'm finding it very good too. Here the theme of finding something higher and deeper than pure sexual intercourse is quite explicit. The husband is trying to connect deeply with his wife, to be her friend, to gain her trust. And I guess she has her share of lessons to learn too. I'm looking forward to seeing how their relationship develops.

 

[Deleted member 4320]

I have started Anna Campbell's Seven Nights in a Rogue's Bed and would like to share some of my initial observations. I am also wondering how my perceptions will change after the end of the book.

First, vocabulary and descriptions, as it is mostly for women, the language has its specificity, more closer to the women. It's pleasant and understandable, however definitely, if I would express the same things, I would get to it in other words and highlight other things.

In the very beginning, the story started very creepily. Poor girl. But how brave and able to sacrifice. Definitely strongness and empathy pierce through her but in a not so obvious way. Interesting from the beginning. The man's character (Jonas): and from this point it has the sense to read. Different thoughts come to mind, how I would behave, what I would do in his situation.

Turnarounds of actions. Changeability: in the one moment story goes badly, suddenly another moment positively (for the main characters); the turnarounds are once for a good once for bad, but the story maintenance the general tendency to positive. And everything is very succulent in the various descriptions of the internal states and surroundings that allow blossoming into the experiences.

Honestly, I have never focused on that, but yeah, the most often structure of the romances (as I understand this genre) respond to the construction of the human psyche. From the most "primitive"/reptile parts of the psyche to the more mature and complex. And the action of those books is created like that reader is situated as he would enter the tower through the broken stairs.

The reader at the one hand experience that he/she (more often she) stays on the damaged stair and on the other hand experience pulling herself up thanks to the railing. And the stairs from the beginning are ugly and broken, but with further steps come to be more neat and beautiful. And walking up through such stairs is like taking one step back and two-step further, which makes experiencing emotional states quite good balanced with the counterweight on the more positive side, with the smooth dissociation into the next better states.

Just like the best and expected learning process in real life. The first: meet with the problematic situation, next: acceptance of the unpleasantness. Further, step back (however rather "step back" means in real-life look into the one's interior - real self), the act of the creativity to solve the problems (while reading romances, this "act of the creativity" is replaced by the railing that I wrote about, however in fact reader also can be creative and "make up" the story in her/his mind, sometimes finding even better solutions/scenarios).

And all of that, of course, that everyone should live long and happy

 

[nature]

You don't have to, but I will do so after embarking on this reading adventure (I haven't received the books yet that I have ordered).

I used to read a lot of fiction, and usually when I talk about books -fiction and non-fiction alike - I also mention the author, because they are like mothers and babes, inseparable.

"You don't have to": yes
"but I will do ..." : of course. Everyone makes as he feels. Did I say the contrary? Did I ask that we don't give the author?

Your are a little harsh with someone, in that case Perlou, that is making a big effort with English. We are here between friends and we try to help each other the most we can. To ask for the name of the author when you talk about a book does not mean we are lazy or we are not making work our grey neurons.

No, loreta, I talked to you, I quoted YOUR post. You present things as me being nasty with Perlou. It's to you that I talked.
Perlou was lost, which is comprehensible. I was lost too. That's why I gave her a tip to be able to navigate in titles/authors/series. And she was satisfied with that tip (see her evaluation with the smiley). So there was no problem with Perlou, and you present me attacking the person of Perlou?

You say: "To ask for the name of the author when you talk about a book does not mean we are lazy or we are not making work our grey neurons." See how you divert the thing? My only answer to Perlou was this:

Here is a francophone site, where you can click on the author, then you have all their books, with tranlated ones (in french).
Voici un site francophone, où tu peux cliquer sur l'auteur, puis tu as la liste de tous ses livres, avec ceux qui ont été traduits en français.
Les Romantiques, le site francophone dédié au roman féminin

Then you came from nowhere (there was no problem), saying that Perlou didn't asked that. What did you want loreta? What disturbed you in the tip I gave? What is the problem to get the info by using this website and making a list? That's why I responded TO YOU about this exercise of doing a part of work. Yes, in my response to you, there was the imagery of plate/feeding, as you came as someone spitting in the soup. It was not aimed at Perlou, but at you who contested my response to Perlou. Then you say I'm harsh, and I admit I should have been diplomatic. What about you, creating a drama from nothing, presenting things as me attacking Perlou? Is it nice?
I'd like to move on, there are more interesting discussions in this thread.

 

[Laura]

I updated the sheet with the missing suggested books.
Updated sheet

Thank you!

I think that by now, everyone is coming to understand why there needs to be a good list and to read MANY of these stories. I have found that it takes numerous exposures to acquire the needed state and perspective. Not only that, but there are so many situations and types of characters, a broad range is needed for the required "education". You are not just re-wiring yourself, you are learning some darned good psychology and a LOT about internal and external considering.

 

[reilpmeit]

I will try to put my words in most sincere way about this topic,even if it will get me banned from this forum.Maybe it will be very "unpopular" but it will be sincere.

I think that reading "romantic" novels is not much different than watching porn.
There are so called "soft porn" movies,that have plots,characters etc that are exactly like in this novels. Difference is that these movies are not called "romantic",but soft porn,as it should be.

Those who want to see real character development and real feelings,real love,can find it in works of Dostoevsky.For example "Brothers Karamazov" or even better "The Idiot".

So,reading this novels represents same behavior, same escapism as watching porn. Some could argue that for those romantic novels,it's not all about sex,and there is not so much scenes in terms on quantity .But those sexual scenes(even if there is just one scene) are no less pornographic than than just full-on porn,written or filmed-in the end it doesn't really matter. It is old fashioned Playboy (mostly for women) in written form.

What I see ,the main issue here is what one should do when there is excess of sexual energy(heightened libido )? Well fire is not extinguished by putting more oil on it,and that is for sure. So indulgence is not the answer.
Perversions could come from suppression ,but from indulgence as well. Orgasm is like a drug,it is a drug,and like all drugs every next time you want heavier dose from last time. That is when perversions could,and will kick in.
So if not than suppression must be answer right? No. When one have negative attitude,feelings or thoughts about some thing,they are just fueling that thing in "negative loop" way. When someone is feeling hate to someone/something,he/she is not in control,but it is reverse, hate (or thing which is hated )is controlling that person.It will seep in subconsciousness. Anger/disgust/hate will spread to other things(not just that which is about sex),it will deform that person. So if indulgence is not the answer,suppression (and/or false ignorance) is not the answer,what is the answer?

Before answering that I will talk more about LGBT vs "hetero" conflict nonsense.
It's about LGBT "pride" and how "non-straight" a "proud" of being "non-straight". But this is all nonsense. For straight people,there is nothing to be a proud of in lusting of opposite sex, in the first place .There are no sexual feelings.There are only sexual cravings.Lust or sexual arousal is much more similar to what hunger is,not to what emotions are. Is there pride in someone who feels hunger?How can be pride in this things? Can you really love your food,your cake?Well some people say-"I love spaghetti" but is it real love? Is it really a feeling,an emotion?
If I'm lusting for someone,is it really a feeling,or just craving,a hunger?Ask sincerely yourself ,and you will know what the answer is.

So what is the answer?
The right word here is independence from sexual arousal,or sublimation of sexual cravings.
Just physical activity(exercise,physical work) will lower libido,smaller food intake,and even little sunbathing will lower it too.

But sun doesn't shine always,nor everyone can do physical work.
Problem is that what comes from East to West,in Western culture everything ends up being perverted. Tantra yoga for example is practice how not to achieve orgasm,how not to release energy.But when you read Western tantric authors it is all about achieving "ultimate orgasm" "big O" and all that crap.
Western Christianity lacks that practical work,especially in "mainstream" but there are authentic writings and works from "non-mainstream" authors,in fields like Alchemy,Mystical Christianity,Tarot,Kabbala,Rosicrucianism and so on.And not just writers,but painters,poets,musicians and so on.In Orthodox Christianity,situation it is little better,as there still is some authentic monastic practice going on

So how can one be free from sexual cravings?
It is done by redirecting arousal and,it is practical,physical work. And it must be done really careful ,because one can by "reverse redirecting" end up in multiplying instead of driving off sex energy,and by doing it completely destroying themselves and other people. That is why is better for some things to stay hidden,or to be "veiled" at least.
Many if given opportunity to get rid of sexual energy,or to multiply it will chose the latter. The sincere ones should find a way,anyway.There are hints,almost everywhere.

 

[loreta]

"You don't have to": yes
"but I will do ..." : of course. Everyone makes as he feels. Did I say the contrary? Did I ask that we don't give the author?


No, loreta, I talked to you, I quoted YOUR post. You present things as me being nasty with Perlou. It's to you that I talked.
Perlou was lost, which is comprehensible. I was lost too. That's why I gave her a tip to be able to navigate in titles/authors/series. And she was satisfied with that tip (see her evaluation with the smiley). So there was no problem with Perlou, and you present me attacking the person of Perlou?

You say: "To ask for the name of the author when you talk about a book does not mean we are lazy or we are not making work our grey neurons." See how you divert the thing? My only answer to Perlou was this:


Then you came from nowhere (there was no problem), saying that Perlou didn't asked that. What did you want loreta? What disturbed you in the tip I gave? What is the problem to get the info by using this website and making a list? That's why I responded TO YOU about this exercise of doing a part of work. Yes, in my response to you, there was the imagery of plate/feeding, as you came as someone spitting in the soup. It was not aimed at Perlou, but at you who contested my response to Perlou. Then you say I'm harsh, and I admit I should have been diplomatic. What about you, creating a drama from nothing, presenting things as me attacking Perlou? Is it nice?
I'd like to move on, there are more interesting discussions in this thread.

Sorry it was really not clear. And I don't need to be feed at all. So you were talking to me? And I made a drama? And you are right, move on.

 

[Approaching Infinity]

Having discovered that it is not always easy to find out from Amazon which books are in the same series, it turns out the pages of the authors if available often can help. Below, I list what I found.
In the first post there was:
Next was the list in Laura's post on page eight with names of authors, their series or titles Using Books to Imagine a New Reality Among these are some of the authors from the first post. In the copied excerpt from the post on page eight, I have inserted links to author pages. Perhaps this might help those who look for translations. Some author names appear more than once, but the link will be the same.

The Madness of Lord Ian Mackenzie and subsequent books have been mentioned in several posts. They are by Jennifer Ashley and is part of The Mackenzies / McBrides Series of which the book mentioned is the first.

Two other authors mentioned in the first post have also their own pages:
Emily Hendrickson
Laura Kinsale
And a few have passed away or I could not find them:
Alice Chetwynd Ley
Georgette Heyer This is a fan website.
Dorothy Mack

A good resource for this is goodreads.com. On each author's page you can see each of their series. Just scroll down a bit. For example:

Mary Balogh

Author of Slightly Dangerous, Slightly Married und Slightly Wicked

www.goodreads.com

Click on "more series" to get the full list:

All Book Series by Mary Balogh

Mary Balogh has 207 books on Goodreads with 989325 ratings. Mary Balogh's most popular series is Bedwyn Saga

www.goodreads.com

 

[Approaching Infinity]

I think that reading "romantic" novels is not much different than watching porn.
There are so called "soft porn" movies,that have plots,characters etc that are exactly like in this novels. Difference is that these movies are not called "romantic",but soft porn,as it should be.

I can see why you'd think so - I've had similar thoughts in the past. But I think there is a real difference between picturing sex in one's mind, and seeing ready-made images of real people (or even drawings).

So,reading this novels represents same behavior, same escapism as watching porn. Some could argue that for those romantic novels,it's not all about sex,and there is not so much scenes in terms on quantity .But those sexual scenes(even if there is just one scene) are no less pornographic than than just full-on porn,written or filmed-in the end it doesn't really matter. It is old fashioned Playboy (mostly for women) in written form.

I think that's a fairly rigid, black-and-white take on the topic. I'd even call it dogmatic. Ironically, that seems to me to be a result of the very 'abuse of sex' G talks about here:

The energy of the sex center in the work of the thinking, emotional, and moving centers can be recognized by a particular 'taste,' by a particular fervor, by a vehemence which the nature of the affair concerned does not call for. The thinking center writes books, but in making use of the energy of the sex center it does not simply occupy itself with philosophy, science, or politics—it is always fighting something, disputing, criticizing, creating new subjective theories. The emotional center preaches Christianity, abstinence, asceticism, or the fear and horror of sin, hell, the torment of sinners, eternal fire, all this with the energy of the sex center. ... Or on the other hand it works up revolutions, robs, bums, kills, again with the same energy. The moving center occupies itself with sport, creates various records, climbs mountains, jumps, fences, wrestles, fights, and so on. In all these instances, that is, in the work of the thinking center as well as in the work of the emotional and the moving centers, when they work with the energy of the sex center, there is always one general characteristic and this is a certain particular vehemence and, together with it, the uselessness of the work in question. Neither the thinking nor the emotional nor the moving centers can ever create anything useful with the energy of the sex center. This is an example of the 'abuse of sex.'

Can you really love your food,your cake?Well some people say-"I love spaghetti" but is it real love? Is it really a feeling,an emotion?
If I'm lusting for someone,is it really a feeling,or just craving,a hunger?Ask sincerely yourself ,and you will know what the answer is.

Can you love the person you have sex with? Obviously the answer is yes. There is sex, there is love, and there is sex with love.

The right word here is independence from sexual arousal,or sublimation of sexual cravings.

By your own logic, that's like saying that one should be independent from hunger. Like hunger, sex is a part of life.

 

[loreta]

I updated the sheet with the missing suggested books.
Updated sheet

Thank you very much for this list. What an excellent job you did those who did the list. Fantastic.

 

[Chu]

Those who want to see real character development and real feelings,real love,can find it in works of Dostoevsky.For example "Brothers Karamazov" or even better "The Idiot".

You are missing the point with this comparison (apples and oranges).

o what is the answer?
The right word here is independence from sexual arousal,or sublimation of sexual cravings.
Just physical activity(exercise,physical work) will lower libido,smaller food intake,and even little sunbathing will lower it too.

Those things can indeed lower libido in some people. But you are missing the point, and you sound like someone who is very afraid of the emotional realizations and work involved in transforming that "libido" into something creative, and good for others. I think that you are confusing "independence from sexual arousal or sublimation of sexual cravings" with repression of same, fueled by self-importance, by someone who decided they are "beyond all that nonsense" before really understanding their machine, finding out their real emotions, and working towards becoming a better person. It is choosing the easy path to exercise, fast or whatever instead of doing the very hard work of facing one's own nature (with the good and the bad it contains), and working with it, not against it.

 

[reilpmeit]

I can see why you'd think so - I've had similar thoughts in the past. But I think there is a real difference between picturing sex in one's mind, and seeing ready-made images of real people (or even drawings).

This is ego talking- "Real sex is awful ,let's just imagine it as something better"
Ultimately there is no difference. Real question is "Why I'm imaging sex,or about sex in the first place?"

I think that's a fairly rigid, black-and-white take on the topic. I'd even call it dogmatic. Ironically, that seems to me to be a result of the very 'abuse of sex' G talks about here:

Rigid or not,it is truthful. Reading "romantic" novels,watching porn,or "practicing sex to achieve better relatioships" all falls under abuse of sex as Gudjieff say. There are different levels of abuse,but abuse is abuse. Why do you think that all religions insist on using sex only for continuation of human kind?Just to annoy you?

Can you love the person you have sex with? Obviously the answer is yes. There is sex, there is love, and there is sex with love.

Sex can be mixed with love.But it is the love that loses part of itself because of lust. Real love dosen't have sexual component in itself.The truer love,the lesser lust is.And true love can not came from lust itself. You can lie to yourself as much as you want,but this is a fact.Not dogma,but pragmatic fact.

By your own logic, that's like saying that one should be independent from hunger. Like hunger, sex is a part of life.

I'm saying that concentrating on sex and food is good way to chain spirit to matter. Once that you have sex in mind,soul (counsciousness unit) don't want to think about spiritual,or STO ideas.It just want to consume,it becames STS. What a geat way it is,to implant ideas of food and sex to souls,surround them with bunch of OP and use them as feeding mechanism.It is perfect perpetum mobile for 4D STS .
Souls are not born from sex. Bodies are. Many are confused with this.
We live in material world,and we must eat to stay in material world.It is just that simple.But just only for few decades,but many are forgetting,or don't want to be reminded that life is transient. And who says that hunger of the soul wont stay once the body expire? So who cares about spirit,who cares about bloodlines,of STO,just let me to consume,and be consumed as well.

 

[Approaching Infinity]

This is ego talking- "Real sex is awful ,let's just imagine it as something better"

That's not what I said - but I suspect you already know that. I never said real sex is awful or that we can imagine it as something "better" than the real thing. I said there is probably a difference between the two forms of sexual imagery, which should be self-evident. What the significance of that difference is is up for debate. But we know where you stand. You've made that very clear.

Ultimately there is no difference. Real question is "Why I'm imaging sex,or about sex in the first place?"

Yes, that's a good question. But seemingly in your mind there is only one category of reasons, and they're all "bad" or "sinful". In other words your position is dogmatic, one-sided, with no room for nuance. Again there is the vehemence of what Gurdjieff calls abuse of sex - and ironically it concerns the very topic of abuse of sex.

Rigid or not,it is truthful.

I doubt it.

Reading "romantic" novels,watching porn,or "practicing sex to achieve better relatioships" all falls under abuse of sex as Gudjieff say. There are different levels of abuse,but abuse is abuse.

What do you mean "practicing sex to achieve better relationships"? All of what you said here CAN be abuse of sex. It can also NOT be. Can you imagine a scenario where any of those examples is not? I can think of several.

Why do you think that all religions insist on using sex only for continuation of human kind?Just to annoy you?

I'm not annoyed. I'm somewhat amused, though. While the first sentence is an exaggeration, I agree there is a tendency to curb sexuality. There may be some good reasons for that. But can you imagine any bad reasons? Again, I can think of several, but it would probably be a good exercise for you to come up with some on your own. Think of it as a mental exercise. It might loosen up your rigidity, but I'm not holding my breath.

Sex can be mixed with love.But it is the love that loses part of itself because of lust. Real love dosen't have sexual component in itself.The truer love,the lesser lust is.And true love can not came from lust itself. You can lie to yourself as much as you want,but this is a fact.Not dogma,but pragmatic fact.

Not very pragmatic, in my opinion.

This might help. It was written by the founder of Christianity as we know it, who was himself celibate. It shows a pragmatism that you seem to lack:

7 Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: “It is well for a man not to touch a woman.” 2 But because of cases of sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. 3 The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does; likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. 5 Do not deprive one another except perhaps by agreement for a set time, to devote yourselves to prayer, and then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 6 This I say by way of concession, not of command. 7 I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has a particular gift from God, one having one kind and another a different kind.

8 To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain unmarried as I am. 9 But if they are not practicing self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion.

I'm saying that concentrating on sex and food is good way to chain spirit to matter. Once that you have sex in mind,soul (counsciousness unit) don't want to think about spiritual,or STO ideas.It just want to consume,it becames STS. What a geat way it is,to implant ideas of food and sex to souls,surround them with bunch of OP and use them as feeding mechanism.It is perfect perpetum mobile for 4D STS .
Souls are not born from sex. Bodies are. Many are confused with this.

I think you're the one who is confused.

We live in material world,and we must eat to stay in material world.It is just that simple.But just only for few decades,but many are forgetting,or don't want to be reminded that life is transient. And who says that hunger of the soul wont stay once the body expire? So who cares about spirit,who cares about bloodlines,of STO,just let me to consume,and be consumed as well.

And maybe your rigidity will stay once your body expires, and you'll find that you refused to learn some very basic lessons about what life is all about.