Why topics related to sex are called obscene, vulgar?

[osho]

I often wonder why people refrain from discussing sex. And this is more so in our country though less in degree in the west and more marked in the Islamic world. Is it due to our cultural background or social setups?

Is it wrong to discuss it the way we do discuss our food habits, tastes? Why has it been limited to our private chambers or to a few whispers? Why should not be it discussion in public openly, explicitly and unreservedly the way we discuss politics, economics, cocktails and the rest of everyday chitchat?

Maybe this is a philosophical or ethical issue but digging into the very depth of it or the source of it all we arrive at it religious obligations and it was imposed on us at some epochs in history.

Even books of literature if considered steamy are undervalued in many societies. Conservatism wins through our mindscapes even we are now living in the twenty first century. Things related to sex are squeezed into pornographic books and magazines. Even sex is discusses in schools and universities but only summarily and inconclusively.
I do not want to talk much since your ideas and opinions on this may differ.

[Shaman_Raman]

Not a bad thread to start. Personally, I think it's rooted in some secret embarrassment people have when discussing it. Plus, it's hard to talk about sex without it going obscene, unfortunately. Last weekend, I'm peeing in the men's bathroom at a bar, when the drunk stranger says next to me: "Why do we need women? Just to f$%k them, am I right?" I just shrugged my shoulders, not really wanting to engage with this guy in any manner. But I've met countless guys who talk in this manner, and I don't know whether it's main stream society's fault, or if were by nature a bunch of horny apes.

But how do you mean, comparing it to food habits and tastes? Like to say a group of people should sit around and talk about which position fancies them? Again, I think it's more about just personal embarrassment over religious or ethical ideals.

Final note. 50 Shades of Grey just happened to be one of New York Time's Best Sellers. Now I haven't read it, or intend to read it, but from what I hear and gather it's all about sexual deviancy. One girl I spoke I spoke to about it didn't even care much for it, and she happens to be one of the more perverted people I know! She said it's written like Twilight, except instead of a Vampire having sex with a girl, it's a Sex addict. Point is, apparently people gathered in flocks to buy this book, which tells me there's some kinky book club talks going on right now. :brow:

All in all, it's the apple that Adam and Eve love to eat and keep a secret.

(Sorry if I rambled on, I'm a tad bored right now.) ;)

[YesNo]

I suspect people perceive the discussion of sex between two potential sexual partners as a kind of foreplay to actually having sex.

[osho]

I suspect people perceive the discussion of sex between two potential sexual partners as a kind of foreplay to actually having sex.

It is not between two potential sexual partners but in society or in public openly I am talking about.

[cacian]

Sex is almost sexist if you think about it. It is kept that way because our relation to it is twisted. We as human are unable to discociate intimacy with pleasure. Instead of letting sex be as a fact of life and move on to talk much higher important subject we deviate from the essantials of life and indulge in feeling guilty about sex. We concern ourselves with it as to sanction it as taboo and in return sex looks downwards on us as the taboo of all taboos.
Sex is such a deluge of reputations to all strattas of society that it is impossible not to point at it as the naughty steps of all steps.
The sex industry reeks secularism of destitutism and sex is used as a machine to compensate for the lack of it and thus money its benefactor is as the result to it.
In the meantime the masses use it to spend their daily allowances of time left to them to dellude in it in its worst forms ever.

[YesNo]

It is not between two potential sexual partners but in society or in public openly I am talking about.

Many of the movies I have seen, even old ones going back decades, can be considered to be mainly discussions about sex. I just saw Cover Girl last night when going through a collection of Rita Hayworth's films. This was made in the 1940's. It was all a discussion of sex--and rather entertaining in an old sort of way.

However, let's say you are at a party with both men and women in it. Bringing up sex may be interpreted as a invitation to have sex rather than an intellectual or artistic discussion of sex. This is probably why people don't bring it up at work or with their friends. The motivation for discussing it might be misinterpreted.

[osho]

Many of the movies I have seen, even old ones going back decades, can be considered to be mainly discussions about sex. I just saw Cover Girl last night when going through a collection of Rita Hayworth's films. This was made in the 1940's. It was all a discussion of sex--and rather entertaining in an old sort of way.

However, let's say you are at a party with both men and women in it. Bringing up sex may be interpreted as a invitation to have sex rather than an intellectual or artistic discussion of sex. This is probably why people don't bring it up at work or with their friends. The motivation for discussing it might be misinterpreted.

You are true to a certain extent and of course bringing up the topic may lead to a series of arousals. This is because we are going to do in suddenness. In fact if we bring it up for healthy discussions and even if we talk to our children healthily they will be aware of use and misuse. Sex has been a problem today and unhealthy use of it is leading to pedophilia, molestation, rapes and the like.

[cacian]

It is not between two potential sexual partners but in society or in public openly I am talking about.

Well the only discussion about sex in society is about protecting yourself and others as well as contraception. This does not mean it makes any difference to whether people in general comply to it or not.
The other aspects of sex are I would say are rather private but some people offer sex discussion group sessions as therapeutic and sex enhancing. That is if one is more preoccupied about sex rather then getting down to it.
I personally feel that sex is a private matter that could also lead to people treating as a subject to study. I have never heard of a diploma in sexology. Who knows maybe there is and we do not know about it.

[osho]

Well the only discussion about sex in society is about protecting yourself and others as well as contraception. This does not mean it makes any difference to whether people in general comply to it or not.
The other aspects of sex are I would say are rather private but some people offer sex discussion group sessions as therapeutic and sex enhancing. That is if one is more preoccupied about sex rather then getting down to it.
I personally feel that sex is a private matter that could also lead to people treating as a subject to study. I have never heard of a diploma in sexology. Who knows maybe there is and we do not know about it.

The act of it will be a private matter and of course partners are private entities and that cannot be socialized or shared in our civilized world. Maybe in a different civilization or a world with a different value system or cultural setup it could be thing to be publicly or socially shared and I do not want to go further discussing it since I will be singled out here.
The main theme is to discuss it, not perform it since both are two different domains. We talk about crimes without engaging it.

[stlukesguild]

Undoubtedly there are multiple forces at play with regard to our reluctance to discuss sexuality. There are the outside pressures or strictures established by religious institutions and conservative moralists. These are often based upon their own hang-ups... fears... and thoughts that sex is somehow "filthy", "ugly", or "shameful". I agree that there is a degree of embarrassment involved... as there appears to be in many cultures with anything having to do with the body and bodily functions. But there is also something of a sense of decorum... or perhaps a sense of loyalty, fidelity, confidence, or even reverence in keeping private personal details of what transpires between two human beings who care about each other. With regard to artistic expressions of sex... there is certainly a delicate balance between a work of art that celebrates sexuality on a personal level, and a breaking of confidence. Painting... or writing a poetic celebration of the beauty of the human body... or even lovemaking... is one thing. It is something else when it becomes personal. I would think the same is true of discussions of sex. Going on in public about a lover's physical attributes, his or her stamina, your own abilities, or how much cxxk or pxxxy you've gotten does indeed come off as vulgar and tasteless braggadocio... something that one cannot imagine one would do when speaking of someone one truly loves... or even just cares about.

Again, I would quote a few "artists":

"Flesh was the reason oil paint was invented."
-Willem DeKooning

"A young mistress is better than an old master."
-H.G. Wells

"The nakedness of woman is the work of god."
-William Blake

"People say I think too much about women, yet after all, what
is there more important to think about?"
-Rodin

"The most simple subjects are eternal. The nude woman, whether
she emerges from the waves of the sea, or from her bed, is
Venus... and one's imagination cannot conceive anything better."
-Renoir

"If it wasn't for the female breast I don't think I'd have been an artist!"
- Renoir

"I have unbounded admiration for the nude. I worship it like a god."
- Auguste Rodin

"Art can never exist without Naked Beauty display’d."
- William Blake

"If I have chosen the female form in particular, it is because beauty has been debased and exploited in our sensual twentieth century. We seem to have a need to turn innocent nature into evil ugliness by the twist of the mind. Woman has been target of much that is sordid and cheap, especially in photography. To raise, to elevate, to endorse with timeless reverence the image of woman, has been my mission – the reason for my work."
-Ruth Bernhart (Photographer)

“Sex and art are the same thing”
– Picasso

“But there are things that happen between a man and a woman in the dark… that sort of make everything else seem… unimportant.”
- Tennessee Williams

"I am still of opinion that only two topics can be of the least interest to a serious and studious mood - sex and the dead."
- William Butler Yeats


Again... it seems that more than a few artists disagree with cacian's suggestion we should let "sex be as a fact of life and move on to talk much higher important subject(s)." As Yeats suggested, Sex and Death... Freud's Eros & Thanatos... the dual human basic instincts... remain central to art. The great art historian, Sir Kenneth Clark, suggested that the erotic element of art was so pervasive simply as a result of the fact that the desire to grasp and be united with another human body is so fundamental and a part of human nature. Many of our most profound and emotional experiences are erotic in nature. It thus seems a bit ingenuous to suggest that sex could ever be simply dismissed as a basic fact of life... perhaps as nothing more than defecating... or that there are so many "higher and more important subjects.

[cacian]

The act of it will be a private matter and of course partners are private entities and that cannot be socialized or shared in our civilized world. Maybe in a different civilization or a world with a different value system or cultural setup it could be thing to be publicly or socially shared and I do not want to go further discussing it since I will be singled out here.
The main theme is to discuss it, not perform it since both are two different domains. We talk about crimes without engaging it.

I am not so sure we talk about crimes without engaging in them. Films and television is made around crimes. Mafia films glorified for us to watch.
It is what we call the slap on the fact let's talk about crime and then watch as an entertaining business.
Affairs and dramas around killing and violence is what makes entertaining exciting and lucrative.
I remember talking to someone about rape in pornography. I suggested it was not a good idea to portray rape in pornography his point was well why not? One must think about all tastes and interest. He defended rape in pornography as something perfectly ok because it should cater for those who like the idea.
Pornography talks sex but in more unrealistic situations that eventually turn out to be real because subconscially people would want to act on them.
In a way that is sex watched rather then talked about


Again... it seems that more than a few artists disagree with cacian's suggestion we should let "sex be as a fact of life and move on to talk much higher important subject(s)." As Yeats suggested, Sex and Death... Freud's Eros & Thanatos... the dual human basic instincts... remain central to art. The great art historian, Sir Kenneth Clark, suggested that the erotic element of art was so pervasive simply as a result of the fact that the desire to grasp and be united with another human body is so fundamental and a part of human nature. Many of our most profound and emotional experiences are erotic in nature. It thus seems a bit ingenuous to suggest that sex could ever be simply dismissed as a basic fact of life... perhaps as nothing more than defecating... or that there are so many "higher and more important subjects.
I feel I have to describe sex as just another fact of life because it simply is.
Sex to me represents the norms and should be regarded as another other normal subject. This to allow to people get on with it rather then use to their detriment or not.
Sex in the act rather then a solitude of envy. I would rather get on with it then talk about it. Sex without the act is not sex it is lust. Why lust over something when one can just get on with it. I mean one goes to sweet shops to buy sweets and not to stare and wonder about it.
Sex in art however is not my cup of tea simply because I do not understand in that context. I consider art as something that is not within our reach something we do not always capture in real life and therefore I look into art to represent it to a magnified perfection.
And yes there are much more urgent matter to talk about then spend hours looking at something that I already know. I also do not go to sex classes and learn about the mechanism of the act I just do it and it stops there. Sex however has other benefits and one of them is procreation. That is one reason why sex should just be another way of life because it allows for some to go forth and multiply.
OF course that is my views on it and you have different views about it and so yes people are different about different things.

[osho]

I am not so sure we talk about crimes without engaging in them. Films and television is made around crimes. Mafia films glorified for us to watch.
It is what we call the slap on the fact let's talk about crime and then watch as an entertaining business.
Affairs and dramas around killing and violence is what makes entertaining exciting and lucrative.
I remember talking to someone about rape in pornography. I suggested it was not a good idea to portray rape in pornography his point was well why not? One must think about all tastes and interest. He defended rape in pornography as something perfectly ok because it should cater for those who like the idea.
Pornography talks sex but in more unrealistic situations that eventually turn out to be real because subconscially people would want to act on them.
In a way that is sex watched rather then talked about

Pornographic things are to create arousal and all I am talking about creating awareness, social awareness in family, society. Let us take it without attaching it to vulgarity. In fact it is a matter of beauty, creativity and awareness. Let it stop sex-related perversions. This is a spiritually enlightening act and in the east temples are teeming with acts of sex. The ancients were were aware of the importance of sex-education and we the moderns are not,

[cacian]

Pornographic things are to create arousal and all I am talking about creating awareness, social awareness in family, society. Let us take it without attaching it to vulgarity. In fact it is a matter of beauty, creativity and awareness. Let it stop sex-related perversions. This is a spiritually enlightening act and in the east temples are teeming with acts of sex. The ancients were were aware of the importance of sex-education and we the moderns are not,

Pornography arousal absolutely but that leads me to think aren't people aroused already by the presence of their sexual partner?
Is the idea of sex not enough to arouse? I do not know.
I agree sexual awareness is important but then in what way do you wish to aware it?
I personally think that the more we look at something too closely the more we lose its meaning and sway about it but then I could be wrong. This is speculations.

[osho]

Pornography arousal absolutely but that leads me to think aren't people aroused already by the presence of their sexual partner?
Is the idea of sex not enough to arouse? I do not know.
I agree sexual awareness is important but then in what way do you wish to aware it?
I personally think that the more we look at something too closely the more we lose its meaning and sway about it but then I could be wrong. This is speculations.

The point is it is not a thing of ugliness and it is as pure as a rose and as bright as a star and we have through our conditioned minds are clouding it

[stlukesguild]

I feel I have to describe sex as just another fact of life because it simply is. Sex to me represents the norms and should be regarded as another other normal subject.

Birth, death, war, rape, murder, illness, etc... are all also "just another fact of life"... but like sex and love (Eros) they trigger intense responses in most human human beings. The fact that any of these subjects are "normal"... are a fact of our world and existence as we know it... does not necessarily reduce the subject to something about which we can be blase.

I would rather get on with it then talk about it.

Who wouldn't? What does that have to do with the merits of talking about sex/eros or creating art that deals with sex/eros?

Sex without the act is not sex it is lust. Why lust over something when one can just get on with it. I mean one goes to sweet shops to buy sweets and not to stare and wonder about it.

So might we not apply this to nearly the whole of art? Why create poems about love... lusting over love... when when could go out and find the real thing? Why make paintings like this:

http://i1245.photobucket.com/albums/gg581/StlukesguildOhio/th_SCHOOTENFlorisGerritszvan2_zps72ab2ae4.jpg (http://s1245.photobucket.com/user/StlukesguildOhio/media/SCHOOTENFlorisGerritszvan2_zps72ab2ae4.jpg.html)

http://i1245.photobucket.com/albums/gg581/StlukesguildOhio/th_still-life-with-bottle-and-apple-basket-1894-1_zps813f8268.jpg (http://s1245.photobucket.com/user/StlukesguildOhio/media/still-life-with-bottle-and-apple-basket-1894-1_zps813f8268.jpg.html)

http://i1245.photobucket.com/albums/gg581/StlukesguildOhio/th_img_thiebaud_frostedfractions_lg_zps876cecc2.jp g (http://s1245.photobucket.com/user/StlukesguildOhio/media/img_thiebaud_frostedfractions_lg_zps876cecc2.jpg.h tml)

http://i1245.photobucket.com/albums/gg581/StlukesguildOhio/th_Abbey-Ryan-1_zps7f237372.jpg (http://s1245.photobucket.com/user/StlukesguildOhio/media/Abbey-Ryan-1_zps7f237372.jpg.html)

http://i1245.photobucket.com/albums/gg581/StlukesguildOhio/th_andywarholsoup_zpsc31d1058.jpg (http://s1245.photobucket.com/user/StlukesguildOhio/media/andywarholsoup_zpsc31d1058.jpg.html)

http://i1245.photobucket.com/albums/gg581/StlukesguildOhio/th_candy-rainbow-candy-painting-6-500x343_zps28c7a551.jpg (http://s1245.photobucket.com/user/StlukesguildOhio/media/candy-rainbow-candy-painting-6-500x343_zps28c7a551.jpg.html)

http://i1245.photobucket.com/albums/gg581/StlukesguildOhio/th_image-1_zps0b3b48f0.jpg (http://s1245.photobucket.com/user/StlukesguildOhio/media/image-1_zps0b3b48f0.jpg.html)

Are you suggesting that art with food as the subject matter is pointless because you would rather eat the real thing?

What about paintings of food... and sex?:

http://i1245.photobucket.com/albums/gg581/StlukesguildOhio/th_tumblr_l776oqDpSS1qabj53o1_1280_zpsfb49983f.jpg (http://s1245.photobucket.com/user/StlukesguildOhio/media/tumblr_l776oqDpSS1qabj53o1_1280_zpsfb49983f.jpg.ht ml)

http://i1245.photobucket.com/albums/gg581/StlukesguildOhio/th_lola-cola-by-mel-ramos_zpsc04bb97d.jpg (http://s1245.photobucket.com/user/StlukesguildOhio/media/lola-cola-by-mel-ramos_zpsc04bb97d.jpg.html)

http://i1245.photobucket.com/albums/gg581/StlukesguildOhio/th_Dona_2_zps8e9bd5e6.jpg (http://s1245.photobucket.com/user/StlukesguildOhio/media/Dona_2_zps8e9bd5e6.jpg.html)

Could I not apply you idea to any subject matter? Why make paintings or write poems or compose works of music about nature and the landscape, when I could go out into the landscape in person?

Sex in art however is not my cup of tea simply because I do not understand in that context. I consider art as something that is not within our reach something we do not always capture in real life and therefore I look into art to represent it to a magnified perfection.

Perhaps this is the problem... you have your own biases or limitation as to what is or is not the valid or worthy subject matter for art.

And yes there are much more urgent matter to talk about then spend hours looking at something that I already know.

I highly suspect you may know a lot less than you claim. Again... is the role of art solely to represent the unfamiliar, the exceptional... or the fictional?

[ftil]

Originally posted by stlukesguild
Undoubtedly there are multiple forces at play with regard to our reluctance to discuss sexuality. There are the outside pressures or strictures established by religious institutions and conservative moralists. These are often based upon their own hang-ups... fears... and thoughts that sex is somehow "filthy", "ugly", or "shameful".


Sex as expression of love is beautiful. There is nothing shameful or ugly about it. Talking about sex, however, is an attempt to fill the inner emptiness and lack of deep and intimate relationship. People who do have fulfilled relationship don’t have any need to talk about but enjoy do it. It is as simple as that.

BTW, you have quoted a few artists about nudity, and of course, you have posted a few paintings. You can’t give yourself a break but you endlessly bring that subject. :ihih: There are much more than nudity in art. Very boring indeed.

[Scheherazade]

Sex as expression of love is beautiful. There is nothing shameful or ugly about it. Talking about sex, however, is an attempt to fill the inner emptiness and lack of deep and intimate relationship. People who do have fulfilled relationship don’t have any need to talk about but enjoy do it. It is as simple as that. Not necessarily so. Do you not talk about a meal that you have enjoy, a movie, book or piece of music that has affected you? Do you not talk about your hobbies?

[OrphanPip]

Also, people naturally have insecurities and questions about sex, particularly young people, and speaking frankly about the subject helps to work through those insecurities. Especially for gay kids who are painfully ignorant about expectations and options that are available to them, because the media and schools will not communicate what needs to be and the parents are often not equipped to do so. Talking about sex is vital for a healthy society.

[ftil]

Not necessarily so. Do you not talk about a meal that you have enjoy, a movie, book or piece of music that has affected you? Do you not talk about your hobbies?

Sex as a hobby? :lol: Don’t you think that it is a big difference between talking about book or music and sex? I hear you that you also enjoy talking about sex. You are free to do so as I am free to say that people who have inner emptiness and lack of deep and intimate relationships have the burning urge to fill it with empty talk about sex or pornography. I am not the only one who share that opinion. :ihih:

[cafolini]

For God's sake, people. Sex is the only means to procreation. Even if people refused to do it without that in mind, and some, very few do, God's force would prescribe it and cause it.
By the way, there is more f*****g by people going to churches than anywhere else. LOL
That's why a sex education is absolutely necessary. Case closed.

[Scheherazade]

I am not the only one who share that opinion. :ihih:Oh, do tell! We are always looking for some enlightenment :lol:

Now you got me thinking on what might possibly put people off talking about sex. To begin with, people who do not get to have sex would also be unwilling to talk about it, I guess... As there wouldn't be much to talk about. :ihih:

Also, not having had a date since Moon Landing or Reagan Presidency might deter people :rofl:

[stlukesguild]

Well... if that's the problem, we can always turn to literature. Lord John Wilmot, Earl of Rochester perhaps.:ihih:

http://allpoetry.com/poem/8515139-Signior_Dildo-by-Lord_John_Wilmot

[ftil]

For God's sake, people. Sex is the only means to procreation. Even if people refused to do it without that in mind, and some, very few do, God's force would prescribe it and cause it.
By the way, there is more f*****g by people going to churches than anywhere else. LOL
That's why a sex education is absolutely necessary. Case closed.

I thought that it is a forum for adults not elementary school. :lol: Unfortunately, I can’t find an interesting video about sex education at schools, its consequences, and protest of parents. Real eyes opening.

Do you want to change a topic to sexual abuse in religion? Catholic Church in not alone.


"In the Name of Enlightenment - Sex Scandal in Religion" - About Sogyal Rinpoche



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWhIivvmMnk

[stlukesguild]

Also, people naturally have insecurities and questions about sex, particularly young people, and speaking frankly about the subject helps to work through those insecurities. Especially for gay kids who are painfully ignorant about expectations and options that are available to them, because the media and schools will not communicate what needs to be and the parents are often not equipped to do so. Talking about sex is vital for a healthy society.

I quite agree. A great many of the students I teach in the inner city are sexually active... and far too knowledgeable about certain aspects of sex... but most of this "knowledge" comes from the wrong sources: their peers, pornography, the media, pop icons, the internet, etc... Under the proper circumstances these students will open up an ask a great many questions that reveal just how naive they are in some aspects... and how desperate they are for information... and even guidance.

[Scheherazade]

Under the proper circumstances these students will open up an ask a great many questions that reveal just how naive they are in some aspects... and how desperate they are for information... and even guidance.Well, now you can tell them that talking about sex is "...an attempt to fill the inner emptiness and lack of deep and intimate relationship." That'll shut them up. :ihih:

Or you can let our kids watch one youtube video after another. After all, what better education can we hope to offer them? :lol:

[ftil]

Well, now you can tell them that talking about sex is "...an attempt to fill the inner emptiness and lack of deep and intimate relationship." That'll shut them up. :ihih:




Well, I have simplified the subject that has deeper roots. But since you have asked for some enlightenment, I may start with a short introduction to Alfred Kinsey and Wilhelm Reich . If you inspire me…..I may bring more. :wink5:



It comes as a big shock to learn that two of the fathers of the Sexual Revolution were both sexual perverts with an evangelical mission in life: to infect society with their wacky ideas and turn the world into a vast masturbatorium.

I refer to the 2oth century’s premier sex researcher Alfred Kinsey (1894-1956) and his notorious contemporary, cult psychoanalyst Wilhelm Reich (1897-1957).

Steeped in the dangerous claptrap of the fraudulent Freud—see here and here—both Kinsey and Reich enthusiastically embraced the laissez-faire Freudian philosophy: “I advocate an incomparably freer sexual life”. Like their Viennese mentor, they would have been only too pleased to add, “If only Americans knew—we are bringing them the plague!”

The underlying assumption here is that sex is the great liberator and that all political and economic frustrations can be alleviated by sexual activity—particularly by obsessive and addictive sex. People who spend all their waking hours in search of sexual stimulation are obviously unfit to organize pogroms, mount bloody revolutions, or become a threat to the rich and powerful.


This, in a nutshell, was the philosophy of Wilhelm Reich, high priest of the “masturbation industry”, to borrow a phrase from E. Michael Jones’s magisterial work Libido Dominandi, where Kinsey and Reich are both discussed in great detail.

Sex, according to the philosophers of the Sexual Revolution inspired by Reich, is to be the panacea for all society’s problems: the new opium of the people. If people cannot have bread, let them eat cake. If they cannot have jobs, security, fulfillment, and a valid purpose in life, let them have sex as a substitute. If nothing else, recreational sex will provide a useful distraction and give people something to do.

Reich was, by his own account, not only a compulsive masturbator from early childhood but a self-confessed pervert with wide-ranging sexual interests. Beginning sexual activity at the early age of four with a maidservant whose pubic hair he was allowed to play with, he went on to seduce the family cook at eleven-and-a-half. While still a small boy, he had begun to take an unhealthy interest in farm animals and could be seen prowling around the stables where he “stimulated mares by inserting whip handles in their vaginas.” At 15 he began visiting brothels where his insatiable appetites made him the talk of the town. Here he is in his Autobiography describing his uncontrollable libido:

Was it the atmosphere, the clothing, the red lights, the provocative nakedness, the smell of whores—I don’t know! I was pure sensual lust. I ceased to be. I was all penis! I bit, scratched, thrust, and the girl had quite a time with me! I thought I would have to crawl inside her…

Nursing an incestuous passion for his mother, he would snoop on her having sex with the family tutor. “I need a woman,” he wrote in his journal, “who isboth mother and whore.” Once he was tempted to break into his mother’s room, while she was engaged in sex with his tutor, and demand to be part of a threesome:

I heard them kissing, whispering, and the horrible creaking of the bed in which my mother lay. Ten feet away stood her own child, a witness to her disgrace…. All I remember of that catastrophic night is that I wanted to rush into the room, but was held back by the thought: they might kill you!… I crept back to bed, without hope of consolation, my youthful spirit broken! For the first time, a deep feeling of misfortune and of having been abandoned overcame me…. [I even thought of] breaking in on them and demanding that she have intercourse with me too (shame!), threatening that otherwise I would tell Father.

As it turns out, he did inform his father about his mother’s infidelities, conveniently omitting to mention his own incestuous desires for his mother. His disloyalty to her in becoming an informer, combined with the brutal ill-treatment she was to receive from her tyrannical husband Leon, finally drove his mother to suicide. She swallowed a pint of Lysol, a common domestic cleaning fluid, and died in agony. Another account fills in the bizarre background details to this family saga: “She swallowed one poison after another, while Leoncontinued to beat her as she died” (emphasis added).
Wilhelm Reich, her son, the famous psychoanalyst-to-be, was only 13 at the time.

This is the man who went on to become, like his equally perverted contemporary Alfred Kinsey, one of the godfathers of the Sexual Revolution of the 1960s.

From the likes of Kinsey and Reich, the easily duped Americans were to receive instructions on how to conduct themselves sexually.

As part of the neo-Freudian school of psychoanlysts, Reich received the enthusiastic support of a number of psychiatrists and writers, many of them part of the Jewish psychoanalytic sub-culture that was so important to erecting a powerful critique of Western culture, reaching its peak influence in the post-WWII era: Herbert Marcuse, Erich Fromm, Adorno, Horkheimer, Alexander Lowen, Stanley Keleman, Moshe Feldenkreis, Ida Rolf, Paul Goodman, Norman Mailer, Allen Ginsberg, Saul Bellow, Fritz Perls and Arthur Janov (see here and here).

The Case against Kinsey

It comes as no surprise to learn that Kinsey, like Reich, was also an avid consumer of pornography, even going so far as to photograph his own penison several occasions and getting his wife to act in home-made porn movies. His favorite boast was that his Institute’s collection of pornography was the second largest in the world, the largest being housed at the Vatican. A malicious lie, it turned out, since it was easy enough to prove that the Vatican was entirely porn free. (See “The Case Against Kinsey”, here)

It has to be emphasized that Alfred Kinsey, though born and brought up as a Christian, was not only an atheist with a lifelong hatred of Christianity in general and the Catholic church in particular, but was also a Zionist and Shabbat goy who owed his spectacular success entirely to organized Jewry. His fraudulent research, designed to make deviancy appear to be the norm, was generously funded by the Rockefeller Foundation and other Jewish-dominated organizations. (pp. 340–341). “By the time it cut him off in 1954,” E. Michael Jones tells us, “the Rockefeller Foundation had poured hundreds of thousands of dollars into the coffers of the Kinsey Institute.”

The only reason they decided to stop the funding is that by this time the Institute, anxious to retain its squeaky clean image, could no longer take the risk of being associated with Kinsey. His shady criminal activities with a predatory homosexual pedophile, a pervert who had molested and tortured 800 children, suddenly made Kinsey persona non grata (see E. Michael Jones, Libido Dominandi, pp. 327–337).

A sexual pervert of the kinkiest kind, Kinsey once inserted a toothbrush into his urethra and had himself filmed, subsequently adding this gem to his porn collection. Himself a homosexual with an avid interest in little boys, he would make a point of measuring the penis, both recumbent and erect, of every male he interviewed while conducting his “research”. Why? One can only guess.

Dr. Judith Reisman writes:

An early adherent and advocate of masturbation, Kinsey suffered an untimely death due, at least in part, to ‘orchitis,’ a lethal infection in his testicles that followed years of orgiastic self-abuse.

The New York Times, owned by the Sulzberger family and known to be America’s foremost organ of left/liberal propaganda, did its best (like the Rockefeller Foundation) to promote Kinsey and turn his name into a household word. Indeed, it comes as no surprise to learn that Arthur Hays Sulzberger, publisher of the New York Times, was actually on the board of trustees for the Rockefeller Foundation all during the time it was approving money for Kinsey’s dubious experiments (see here, p. 340).

Kinsey’s most vocal critic and nemesis, Dr. Judith Reisman, has this to say about the Kinsey-Rockefeller connection:

The Rockefeller Foundation was the major funding source for Kinsey, even though it had ample, repeated warning from noted statisticians and social scientists that Kinsey’s pseudo-science was a hoax….

Kinsey is second only to Darwin in the secular pantheon, and a lot of people recognize that exposing Kinsey’s lies is a major assault on the Sexual Revolution and a threat to the sexual license they enjoy….

Kinsey claimed to have proven, based upon the deviant samples used in his research, that 95 percent of American men engaged in deviant sex and thus were sex offenders….

Kinsey believed that all sex was legitimate—pedophilia, bestiality, incest, adultery, prostitution, group sex, transvestitism, sadomasochism—and he worked to overthrow all laws prohibiting any of these perversions. (See here)

Kinsey went out of his way to interview the dregs of society, frequenting slums, gay bars, brothels and prisons. From these interviews he formed sweeping generalizations about the sexual habits of society in general. His methodology, you could say, was outrageous.
Dr E. Michael Jones is as convinced as Dr Judith Reisman that Kinsey was far more than just an impudent fraud, he was in fact a criminal: a blackmailer (p. 330 ff), a perverted pornographer, and a pedophile who masturbated little children as part of his so-called “research”.

One four-year-old was “specifically manipulated” for twenty-four hours around the clock. This child achieved twenty-six orgasms in this time period. Another eleven-month-old infant had fourteen “orgasms”, according to the Kinseyan definition, in a period of thirty-eight minutes, or one orgasm every 2.7 minutes. (E. Michael Jones, Degenerate Moderns, p. 106)


To read article:
http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2012/06/portraits-of-masters-of-porn-the-systematic-promotion-of-recreational-sex-sexual-callousness-and-sexual-deviancy/

[OrphanPip]

Delusional claptrap soaked in moralizing bull**** and antisemitism, it certainly helps illustrate the kind of insidious mindset behind your own ideas, but would do little to convince anyone with any sense.

[ftil]

Delusional claptrap soaked in moralizing bull**** and antisemitism, it certainly helps illustrate the kind of insidious mindset behind your own ideas, but would do little to convince anyone with any sense.



Is it your only response to the lives and “research” of Alfred Kinsey and Wilhelm Reich?

Try to think harder and argue your point……. Try to defend Freud too. :ihih:

[OrphanPip]

Is it your only response to the lives and “research” of Alfred Kinsey and Wilhelm Reich?

Try to think harder and argue your point……. Try to defend Freud too. :ihih:

I have no need to defend people 60 years dead who have no relevance to contemporary understandings about sex. Particularly when the substance of the criticism is ad hominem nonsense steeped in antisemitism.

[*Classic*Charm*]

That excerpt comes from a website whose tag line is: "White Identity, Interests, and Culture"

A reliable, unbiased source, if you ask me.

[ftil]

I have no need to defend people 60 years dead who have no relevance to contemporary understandings about sex. Particularly when the substance of the criticism is ad hominem nonsense steeped in antisemitism.

Well, if you don’t have no need to defend them…why did you post such a response? :lol:

Again, you bring anti-Semitism that is absolutely irrelevant ……but I have noticed that it is a hopeless argument for some people. The next will be personal attack….to argue the point. :reddevil:

Enjoy LitNet.....I don't have time for that.

[OrphanPip]

You misunderstand, my purpose wasn't to defend them, but to point out what a humongous twat you are.

[Delta40]

You misunderstand, my purpose wasn't to defend them, but to point out what a humongous twat you are.

LMAO. So subtle Orphan - this nearly passed me by :shocked:

[*Classic*Charm*]

Ftil, I fail to see how your post supports your argument.

That excerpt comes from a highly biased source, by an author who refuses to state his/her real name or state credentials, and therefore can safely be assumed to have zero authority on the subject. The two gentlemen of which the article speaks are not unknowns, and reading this report is not a source of enlightenment by any means, as your comment suggests. Kinsey's work is majorly considered defunct, but opened up a completely new field of research and new ways of looking at sexual orientation that have led to good research today. Much of his research has been proven to have been falsified (IE, presenting data from one subject as though it was a survey of many), and the claims made against him by Judith Reisman have never been proven, that is, her claims against his involvement with children. So, he most likely wasn't the crazed sex maniac, whose existence would back you up.

Aside from that, what's your point? These men are the ones who want to talk about sex, and are also highly sexual individuals. That means that everyone who talks about sex is "sex-crazed" and devoid of meaningful relationships, as your article implies and with which I presume you agree?

What makes you think that they didn't have meaningful relationships?

Sexual addiction is a medical condition, much the same as any other psychological pathology, though it was not recognized as such at the time. If he were afflicted (I have no authority to say whether or not this was the case), would that not explain his intense interest in explaining his own behaviour?

And if not, and he was purely interested in the topic, how on earth can you draw the inference that everyone who talks about sex has the same interests as he?

Am I missing something?! If so, what is your actual argument and how does Kinsey's life and work support it?

[ftil]

Ftil, I fail to see how your post supports your argument.

That excerpt comes from a highly biased source, by an author who refuses to state his/her real name or state credentials, and therefore can safely be assumed to have zero authority on the subject.





Well, why don’t you do your own research about Alfred Kinsey and Wilhelm Reich? Don’t forget to investigate Freud. Don’t stop there but find out where those ideas originated.

BTW, are you going to continue arguing your point by attacking the author? I have found that on forums and websites character assassinations is so common when there is no intelligent argument. Of course, personal attacks are the last weapons. :yikes: Sad, or a better word, pathetic.

[stlukesguild]

Character assassination? But isn't that exactly what you have done with Reich and Kinsey?

[ftil]

Character assassination? But isn't that exactly what you have done with Reich and Kinsey?

Oh come on, you know very well what character assassination means. You have used anti-Semitism or political associations rather than discussing the book of the author. :lol: In the articles I have posted, the author presented personal lives of Reich and Kinsey.

[*Classic*Charm*]

Well, why don’t you do your own research about Alfred Kinsey and Wilhelm Reich? Don’t forget to investigate Freud. Don’t stop there but find out where those ideas originated.

BTW, are you going to continue arguing your point by attacking the author? I have found that on forums and websites character assassinations is so common when there is no intelligent argument. Of course, personal attacks are the last weapons. :yikes: Sad, or a better word, pathetic.

I'm sorry, what?

I am familiar with them, and the allegations made against them. Which is why I mentioned that some of them mentioned in your post have yet to be proven correct. I'm also familiar with Freud. And yet, I don't see how any of their views makes me a person devoid of fulfilling relationships if I choose to have a conversation about sex. Technically, we're talking about sex right now. Both of us. So I guess neither of us has fulfilling relationships either?

Also, at what point has a character assassination occurred? You stated an opinion. You provided an excerpt from an article to back it up. I have discredited the article.

At what point did I personally attack you? Because at no point did I ever call you sad or pathetic, as you have just called me.


Oh come on, you know very well what character assassination means. You have used anti-Semitism or political associations rather than discussing the book of the author. :lol: In the articles I have posted, the author presented personal lives of Reich and Kinsey.

I have stated that some of the allegations made about Reich and Kinsey by that author have not been validated. Which makes the article an unreliable source of information, and therefore invalidates your use of the information to back up your argument.

It doesn't mean that your argument is invalid, just that your evidence is null. You're welcome to try to defend your argument using other evidence.

However, if you choose to be rude and sarcastic, I will choose not to participate.

[ftil]

Originally posted by *Classic*Charm*

I have discredited the article.

No, you did not. You questioned credentials of the author of the article without knowing who he was. BTW, do you believe those who have credentials without checking what other scholars had to say? It is not very wise considering the fact that we are bombarded with pseudo scientists who have credentials. :lol:

I don’t have doubts that you know Freud. Who doesn’t know that fraud? It was not my point.


However, if you choose to be rude and sarcastic

I am not rude or sarcastic. I am definitely bored. I like intelligent discussions where I learn something. Life is too short to be wasted. :ihih:

On this note, we may end our discussion. Enjoy LitNet.

[qimissung]

Maybe you're done, maybe you're not; nevertheless:

R e m i n d e r

Please do not personalise your comments.

If you are not ready to accept the fact that your opinions might be questioned by the others,

please refrain from posting in public forums.

Posts containing such remarks and off-topic posts will be removed without further notice.

[qimissung]

fitl, you may not think that you are rude and sarcastic, but your tone is dismissive and argumentative, which is not conducive to a discussion, intelligent or otherwise.

[cacian]

Sex in art to me convey this analogy of I like sex for what it is and not for what it does.
Painting of nudity of sexual natures but never actually the end result the fulfilment it brings to the mind and the body. Art I am thinking would not be able to depict the pleasures sex is truly about and therefore one is left to ponder at the body rather the actual physical attainment of it.

[osho]

Art, literature, music and poetry are adders. Fuel and fire your appetite and plant a desire inside you. Sex begins in the head and of course your imagination about it fans your desires. Everything has an art, a style, a presentation and if you do it appropriately or effectively the degree of satisfaction will be all the more or else it will be a mechanic and boring activity. If you are not sufficiently literate about it you are likely to lose the thrust, the intensity of it. Reading novels, watching movies and discussing it amongst friends will indeed add to our eagerness and zeal. Sometimes even a movie will arouse us and when we go home after watching a big cinema movie in a hall the act of sex will be really juicing.

[ftil]

fitl, you may not think that you are rude and sarcastic, but your tone is dismissive and argumentative, which is not conducive to a discussion, intelligent or otherwise.

Thank you for your honesty but I don’t share your opinion. What you call dismissive and argumentative, I call honesty. :biggrin5:

[Helga]

this thread just shows how flammable this subject can be. Here on the ice there is really an awakening about sex and educating teenagers about it. There is a weekly column in the biggest newspaper written by a scholar in the subject and lectures regularly.

The original post was about discussion between friends and in society, in my simple opinion (simple!) I don't think I would like to discuss this with anyone except a partner, unless it's for educational purposes when for example I need to talk to my son about the subject.

[ennison]

I guess the term "humungous twat" does fit this thread. I'm glad that I have nothing else to note here.

[ftil]

The original post was about discussion between friends and in society, in my simple opinion (simple!) I don't think I would like to discuss this with anyone except a partner, unless it's for educational purposes when for example I need to talk to my son about the subject.

I share your opinion in terms of talking about sex with a partner or with a son or a daughter. It should be a domain that is reserved for parents only. Unfortunately, there is a big push to introduce sex education for children as young as 5 years old. It sounds that it is a programming to accept pedophilia.


Michelle Fields - Chicago Public Schools Sex Ed Policy Extended to Kindergarden


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ihPvR4bi8Y

[Ecurb]

I disagree with the premise of the thread. Since when are people reluctant to talk about sex? Half of the people I know seldom talk about anything else.

I’ll grant that explicit descriptions of sex were literary taboos until the last 100 years or so (“Ulysses” was banned in the U.S. for being pornographic). However, times have changed (as Cole Porter wrote in the 1920s), and now “anything goes”.

Good taste may still suggest that romance is more interesting that sex (although the two are surely walking hand in hand, if not actively necking ). After all, when Jane Austen wrote about a dinner party at Rosings, readers remember the conversation between Darcy, Col. Fitzwilliam, Lady Catherine, and Elizabeth, but not the menu. For all I can remember (and I’ve read the book several times), descriptions of the meat and fish were sparse.

So the “good taste” that prefers scenes of romance or flirtation to those of sexual congress is not a form of prudery. It is the same taste that prefers descriptions of witty conversation (ala Austen) to descriptions of food. Food nourishes the body; friendship nourishes the mind and soul. Has literature been improved by a more open attitude toward graphic descriptions of sex? Well, I don’t hold it against Poldy Bloom that he masturbated on the beach, while ogling some women. I’m glad Joyce wrote the scene. But in the end, I’d rather read (or talk) about relationships than sex, and dinner conversations than food. It’s more interesting.

One more thing: in literature (and, by extension, conversation) the merely physical tends to be boring. The essence of drama is relationships. One of my favorite pieces of advice for budding writers came from the novelist and essayist Kingsley Amis. When asked if he could offer young novelists any advice he said, "Never mention clouds."

[Shaman_Raman]

Phew, what a bunch of personal drama going on here, lol. Perhaps sex is such a taboo topic.

[OrphanPip]

Phew, what a bunch of personal drama going on here, lol. Perhaps sex is such a taboo topic.

That's because you are not yet used to ftil's tendency to muster support for her delusions from any conspiracy theorists on the net.

In this thread alone we have her quoting from a white supremacist website, and it is not the first time I have caught her doing so.
The section she quotes insinuates that Jews are behind a conspiracy of sexual corruption to degrade Western society.
On top of that, the passage quotes Judith Reisman, a woman who thinks all Nazis were gay, that all gays are pedophiles, and that they recruit other gays by deliberately molesting children.

Anyone who doesn't realize ftil is a twat is as big a twat as she is.

She does not engage in debate, but rather obfuscation. She is a troll and should probably be banned.

[stlukesguild]

It has nothing to do with the subject and everything to do with a certain individual who repeatedly brings her personal obsessions and endless citations from occultists, antisemitics, and racists to bear upon whatever the topic at hand is. Several threads upon a subject as seemingly non-controversial as the discussion of art and painting have been closed as a result of a certain individual who I suspect is almost allowed to run rampant because her posts bring a certain drama to an otherwise staid site.

That's because you are not yet used to ftil's tendency to muster support for her delusions from any conspiracy theorists on the net.

In this thread alone we have her quoting from a white supremacist website, and it is not the first time I have caught her doing so.
The section she quotes insinuates that Jews are behind a conspiracy of sexual corruption to degrade Western society.
On top of that, the passage quotes Judith Reisman, a woman who thinks all Nazis were gay, that all gays are pedophiles, and that they recruit other gays by deliberately molesting children.

Anyone who doesn't realize ftil is a twat is as big a twat as she is.

She does not engage in debate, but rather obfuscation. She is a troll and should probably be banned.

:iagree:

What he said.

[Delta40]

Wow so who does she hate more I wonder - Jews or Nazis?

[ftil]

That's because you are not yet used to ftil's tendency to muster support for her delusions from any conspiracy theorists on the net.


Here you go again. And you accused me of doing character assassination. :biggrin5:
You know very well that I may start believing in conspiracy after you have lost half of your posts as you made 10k +. It will be only conspiracy worth of my attention. :lol:



In this thread alone we have her quoting from a white supremacist website, and it is not the first time I have caught her doing so.

The section she quotes insinuates that Jews are behind a conspiracy of sexual corruption to degrade Western society.


Well, I don’t agree with everything what the author wrote. I posted that article because it was stimulating enough to do own research and to find out whether it was truth about Kinsey or not.



On top of that, the passage quotes Judith Reisman, a woman who thinks all Nazis were gay, that all gays are pedophiles, and that they recruit other gays by deliberately molesting children.

Anyone who doesn't realize ftil is a twat is as big a twat as she is.

She does not engage in debate, but rather obfuscation. She is a troll and should probably be banned.


I thought that you can argue your point without calling names. :reddevil: Intellectual constipation? Is it a reason to ask for banning me? :biggrin5: Have you forgotten our conversation on your art threads or Pornography or Voyeurism in Sex? How would you call our conversation? You know very well that I post only when I feel inspired. I don’t have time to waste and world is much bigger than virtual reality.

I have a gift for you. A documentary movie, Yorkshire Television production for Channel 4, produced and directed by Tim Tate, aired August 10, 1998. In words of former Kinsey’s colleagues. Argue with them...... or try to ban them. :lol:


Secret History: Kinsey's Paedophiles



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nkeRvtPmn0

[osho]

Ftil succumbs to short tempers. I used to discuss sex with her and we have talked a lot on D. H. Lawrence’s Sons and Lovers. Of course we have differences and everybody has. What we talk here does not mirror our real self. That I openly and overtly discuss sex here does not mean I am perverted and what I might have said could be fictional. Ftil connected what I wrote to my life and philosophy and I still do not have animosity with her. I like to discuss with her more but she withdrew and she kind of created a sour relationship.

I urge her let us be cool, fitl. I have no access to your PM and that is why I want to say in public that you are an intelligent person and your presence here on the forum is really making it more interesting.

Never take anything personally and what I said cannot totally reflect who I am and what I am writing is mostly fictionalization for literature. Literature is mostly fiction, imagination and reality has a narrower domain and of course we have to fiction, fancy and imagination hinge on for our materials.

I never took you personally and you recently maybe after many months we had discussions and it went very well until you took it personally and felt offended though there was little stuff and no intention to offend you, my friend

[ftil]

Ftil succumbs to short tempers. I used to discuss sex with her and we have talked a lot on D. H. Lawrence’s Sons and Lovers. Of course we have differences and everybody has. What we talk here does not mirror our real self. That I openly and overtly discuss sex here does not mean I am perverted and what I might have said could be fictional. Ftil connected what I wrote to my life and philosophy and I still do not have animosity with her. I like to discuss with her more but she withdrew and she kind of created a sour relationship.



Let know my generosity as I may respond to your post. First, you have opened 2 threads about pornography in two months as if one thread was not enough. Are you surprised that as a female I addressed that subject as there are many misconceptions. In fact, I talked to 2 former prostitutes who successfully recovered. One of them who did master in counseling and had been working with prostitutes for more than 20 years shared her knowledge. Very painful indeed.

Second, I had conversation with you about D. H. Lawrence’s Sons and Lovers. I got bored when you started repeating the old arguments. Politely, I ended our discussion but you couldn’t accept that and push to continue. When you didn’t succeed you become abusive. Who has a short temper? Unlike you, I don't jump from being charming to being abusive. I value my integrity and I can't stand charm but love honesty.

That all. I don’t have anything else to say to you. You better put me on ignore list as I did. :lol:

Enjoy LitNet

[Scheherazade]

~

Since this thread is not serving its original purpose anymore,

it will now be closed.

~

Osho> Please feel free to restart the thread again if you are still interested in the topic.