Google
 

View Full Version : Erotic Love


Tala Hotyk
05-29-2005, 04:00 PM
Erotic love is often confused with the explosive experience of "falling in love", the sudden collapse of the barriers which existed until that moment between two strangers. This experience of sudden intimacy is by its very nature short-lived. After the stranger has become an intimately known person there are no more barriers to be overcome, there is no more sudden closeness to be achieved. If there were more depth in the experience of the other person, if one could experience the infiniteness of their personality, the other person would never be so familiar. The miracle of overcoming the barriers might occur every day anew. For most people, others as people are soon explored and soon exhausted. For them intimacy is established basically through sexual contact. Since they experience the separateness of the other person primarily as physical separateness, physical union means to them overcoming the separateness.

There are other factors which to many people of this nature are considered the overcoming of separateness. To speak of one's own personal life, one's hopes and anxieties, to show the childlike aspects of oneself, to establish a common interest regarding how one views the World are all taken as overcoming separateness. Even to show one's anger, or hate, or complete lack of inhibition is taken for intimacy. And this may explain the perverted attraction couples often have for each other, who seem intimate only when they are in bed or when they give vent to mutual hate or rage. The consequence is often that one seeks love with a new stranger. Thus, the illusion begins over again and the new love ends up being no different from the earlier ones. The illusions are greatly assisted by the deceptive character of sexual desire.

Sexual desire aims at fusion but it is not merely a physical appetite for the relief of painful tension. Sexual desire can be stimulated by the anxiety of aloneness, by the wish to conquer or be conquerred, by vanity, by the wish to hurt another, as much as it can be stimulated by love. Because sexual desire is coupled in the minds of most people with the idea of love, they are easily misled to conclude that they love each other when they want each other physically. Love can inspire the need for sexual union and hence the physical relationship could lack greed and blend with tenderness. Tenderness is the direct outcome of brotherly love. If the desire for physical union is not stimulated by love, requiring that it also encompasses brotherly love, it never leads to union in more than an orgiastic sense. Sexual attraction creates the illusion of union, but without love this "union" leaves strangers as far apart as they were before. Sometimes it brings on shame of each other, or hate for one another, because when the illusion has gone they feel their estrangement even more markedly than before.

Frequently the exclusiveness of erotic love (lacking in brotherly love or motherly love) is misinterpreted as meaning possessive attachment. It is exclusive only in the sense that one can only fuse themself fully and intensely with one person. But it does not mean that in the attachment the other person is a possession. One can often find two people "in love" with each other who feel no love for anybody else. Erotic love excludes the love for others only in the sense of erotic fusion, making it a full commitment in all aspects of life.

Erotic love, when it is love, has one premise. That I love from the essence of my being and experience the other person in the essence of his or her being. Since all people are the same in essence, it should not make any difference whom we love. Erotic love should be essentially an act of will, of decision to commit my life completely to that of one other person. To love somebody is not just a strong feeling. It is a decision, it is a judgment, it is a promise. If love were only a feeling, there would be no basis for the promise to love each other forever. A feeling comes and it may go. How can I judge that it will stay forever, when my act does not involve judgment and decision? It is the act of will that should guarantee the continuation of the love. Both of the views, that erotic love is a completely individual attraction and is an act of will are true. Hence the idea of a relationship which can easily be dissolved if one is not successful with it is as much a mistake as the idea that under no circumstances must the relationship be dissolved.

Tally
05-29-2005, 07:13 PM
:eek7: what brought this on?:eek7:

meanon
05-29-2005, 07:47 PM
Since all people are the same in essence, it should not make any difference whom we love.
My experience of love is that it's makes all the difference whom we love. We love that which we perceive to be special or unique in someone, not that it is but we perceive it so.

Tala Hotyk
05-30-2005, 08:30 AM
My experience of love is that it's makes all the difference whom we love. We love that which we perceive to be special or unique in someone, not that it is but we perceive it so.
Both instances go hand-in-hand. Essence is the individual, real, or ultimate nature of a thing especially as opposed to its existence. I was showing that in Erotic Love, loving in essence should be personal choice. It is because of the decision to love what is special to us about another that makes for the essence. You may love about someone the fact that they have blue eyes compared to your green. But essentially, you both have eyes as well as the rest of humanity having eyes. It is human nature to be able to love other humans as beings since in essence we are like creatures and can identify with the similar. Would it be right, for say, the parents of a white teenager to stop him from loving a black girl b'cuz of her skin color? Or even, would it be right to stop a black boy from loving a black girl b'cuz the parents think she should have white skin? They both have human skin, right? As human beings it should not matter what other human being we love. One wouldn't fall in love with their dog and mate for life just b'cuz they think the dog is special or unique. Experiencing the love for the differences in another person doesn't mean that one isn't comparing essences to make the determination. To love someone in essence is to love them for the "being" they are, not for the conflicting contrasts.

RedRain
05-30-2005, 08:52 AM
Shouldn't you love someone for the good qualities you see in them, for their love of serving their fellow human beings? Isn't that what makes one person different from the next, the care they have for their fellow human beings?

Tala Hotyk
05-30-2005, 09:22 AM
Shouldn't you love someone for the good qualities you see in them, for their love of serving their fellow human beings? Isn't that what makes one person different from the next, the care they have for their fellow human beings?
You seem to be missing the point again. All humans as "beings" have good qualities in essence. All human beings have the ability to serve their fellow man. It's not whether or not someone cares in a different manner than you that makes for mutual essence. Rather it's that they are a caring "being" in essence that is attractive.

RedRain
05-30-2005, 04:16 PM
You seem to be missing the point again. All humans as "beings" have good qualities in essence. All human beings have the ability to serve their fellow man. It's not whether or not someone cares in a different manner than you that makes for mutual essence. Rather it's that they are a caring "being" in essence that is attractive.

Not everyone is the same if that is what you are saying.

Google