Advertisement
I was reading a mediocre "why men cheat" article this afternoon.. had the thought that I wonder if the ability to truly connect with people sexually wanes after a time. Maybe "lapses" is a better term for it. Seems after some time has passed, say... 7 years, like the itch... the ability to connect spiritually through sexuality requires significantly more effort. Some days easier to feel the depthy spiritual interconnectedness, and some days merely "servicing" each other. Is it more natural and human to connect without trying in the first phases of relationship?
After 20 years, sacred sex requires a great deal of intention I think.
Your thoughts?
After 20 years, sacred sex requires a great deal of intention I think.
Your thoughts?
posted by:
|
Cincinnati
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: why men cheat?
Mon, October 20, 2008 - 8:43 PMSacred sex always requires a great deal of intention and focus, whether it's at the first meeting or after 20 years of regular sexual activity. -
-
Unsu...
Re: why men cheat?
Wed, October 22, 2008 - 12:29 PMsacred sex requires nothing more than LOVE ... deep love .. of yourself and the other person ... it requires the abolition of fear merging souls. ... and total allowance, acceptance, and enjoyment of unity ... you must be as willing to let a woman enter you as you are to enter her. -
-
Re: why men cheat?
Wed, October 22, 2008 - 10:11 PMRight, Stella! That's intention and focus. -
-
Unsu...
Re: why men cheat?
Fri, October 24, 2008 - 9:41 AMLove is neither intention or focus... certainly not the latter! .. it is relaxation into the natural state of being!
you can use love to create intention ... just like you can use sound to "make " a song. -
-
Re: why men cheat?
Fri, October 24, 2008 - 9:35 PMStella wrote: "Love is neither intention or focus... certainly not the latter! .. it is relaxation into the natural state of being!"
Love might not, but sacred sex requires intention and focus.
And "relaxation into the natural state of being" requires both.
-
Re: why men cheat?
Sat, October 25, 2008 - 7:42 AMI agree, Stella - love and sacred sex require neither intention nor focus. Instead, it requires de-focusing, getting conscious intention and mentality out of the way so that we can be fully aware of our senses and the flow of energy between us and the universe without the interference of mental focus or intention. It requires only getting our conscious minds out of the way so that our perception can be complete. That is a kind of awareness that many people, sadly, never experience. We spend far too much of our lives in our minds - sexuality, sacred and otherwise, is an opportunity to get out of our minds for a couple of hours and truly be. When we get the part of our minds that insists upon language and analysis out of the way and let the part that does imaging and pattern recognition take over, we can see and feel the flow between us and the divine as it happens. Save the focus and intention for later.
Sex for magickal purposes requires focus and intent. For sacred/spiritual purposes I find that exactly the opposite is true. Fortunately for me, I also find that sex tends to create this state of mind naturally. Doing anything else is unnatural to me and requires tremendous effort. -
-
Re: why men cheat?
Sat, October 25, 2008 - 8:36 PMWalking Bear wrote: "love and sacred sex require neither intention nor focus. Instead, it requires de-focusing, getting conscious intention and mentality out of the way so that we can be fully aware of our senses and the flow of energy between us and the universe without the interference of mental focus or intention."
"De-focusing" is like saying, "Don't think of a pink elephant." In order to not think of a pink elephant you FIRST must think of it. If you don't focus, how can you de-focus?
For thousands of years, teachers of spirituality have shown that the way to get beyond focusing and to let go is by first focusing and letting go.
Or as I like to say, "The only way out is in."
-
-
Re: why men cheat?
Sun, October 26, 2008 - 7:14 AMBut to not think of anything does not require thinking of a pink elephant.
What you say may well apply to lots of people, but to those of us who do not and cannot think in words as the people you are most commonly used to dealing with do, you must grant the possibility that the focusing stage prior to de-focusing may not be necessary. You are already aware that I do not think the same way you do. What you do not already realize is that my difference is structural, physical. There are a great many people like me out there, perhaps as many as 1 in 150 by current counts. We don't have the "pink elephant" problem, and we don't suffer from the "can't create language without ideas and can't have an idea without language" problem either.
Now go back and re-read what I meant by "de-focusing" (I defined my use of it immediately after) and see what I meant: interrupting the conscious processes which are on most of the time and are in and of themselves a level of focus which we exercise regularly. You don't need to focus on something in particular, or even focus to more than the default degree to need to de-focus.
Got it? -
-
Re: why men cheat?
Sun, October 26, 2008 - 12:43 PMIn this instance, to de-focus is the linguistic equivalent of being open and receptive to express and receive Love. -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: why men cheat?
Wed, November 5, 2008 - 6:57 PMIf you leave the word "love" out because it is extremely limiting, yes. We're talking about exchanging a lot more than just one emotion, but also the divine and a good deal more for which I am aware of no words.
-
-
Re: why men cheat?
Mon, October 27, 2008 - 11:28 PMWalking Bear, on the contrary. The three most common ways of getting input for anyone are aurally, visually, and kinesthetically. None of those require any words. In fact, all of our primary modes of thinking are symbolic. That's why certain terms for which there are no easy, concrete symbols--such as patriotism or love--are things that have resulted in millions of words. "Tree" is easier to understand.
I never said you cannot "create language without ideas and can't have an idea without language." What I wrote is that it's impossible to not think of something. That's why the mystics for the past 10,000 years have begun by having people concentrate on an idea, an image, a sound, etc., and then let that item dissolve or fade away.
You may think you're not focusing, but you are. You have to. It's the way the conscious/unconscious matrix works.
You, yourself, say that you must "interrupt the conscious processes." That requires some form of focus. Even if it did not, it still would require an intention, for without intention people wouldn't do anything.
Got it? -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.Unsu...
Re: why men cheat?
Tue, October 28, 2008 - 2:14 PM"free your mind and your ass will follow"
mystics of the past? ... uhm ... obviously it didn't work out so well for them ... this is now ... and
the center of the earth is the point of gravity .. not the north pole....
thats how humans got into this mess ... thinking whats on top is the most important part ... nope.
the center is. -
-
Unsu...
Re: why men cheat?
Tue, October 28, 2008 - 2:17 PMthoughts and feelings are different things ... to harmonize hem is the trick ... not to reconcile them.
to
feel.
love is a feeling.
not a thought.
you can think - about- love ... but you can not think love.
you ~ feel ~ it!
thats why there are no words that really describe Love at all.
-
Re: why men cheat?
Tue, October 28, 2008 - 9:39 PMStella wrote: "mystics of the past? ... uhm ... obviously it didn't work out so well for them "
Actually, it worked out quite fine for them, which is why every system of spirituality today is based on what they discovered. -
-
Unsu...
Re: why men cheat?
Wed, October 29, 2008 - 10:59 AMriiiiiight. ... how could i have missed how well humanity is doing with the concepts? ;)
"every system of spirituality today is based on what they discovered. "
ahhh... i humbly disagree.
i believe spirituality is coming to us thru spirit, and the HEART. I think it has been obscured over the ages, and we are re-membering now.
i also see quite a lot of evidence to support the idea that everything is always changing... growing... becoming more wonderful.
i notice vast differences in humanity in all the decades that go by. .. as far as things go in a 3 dimensional space - time reality.
...and that these "systems" haven't even included women. ... and mostly have oppressed us...and from where i stand that does most certainly not "work"
it is vastly incomplete.... and infantile. ... and separatist.
in fact. ... i think these "systems" result from ignorance... and fear... and a silly attempt to control.
for if we are to follow as spirit and LOVE dictate ... there is no need for a system... or a guru.
for one can see that the vast love of creator resides with~in the being of every creation.
the path of least resistance is what makes the river crooked.
Love is the essential nature of creation ... there is no need to fence it off...
you don't go telling flowers how to bloom.... why would you try to manipulate the growth of Love? -
-
Re: why men cheat?
Wed, October 29, 2008 - 7:17 PMStella, just because the masses have not found spirituality does not mean that those who have taught spirituality were wrong in their teachings, only that many of the masses are not ready for spiritual development. Teachers can share their light, but if someone doesn't want to see, all of the light in the universe won't force them to see.
I fully agree that spirituality is coming to us through spirit and the heart. However, I would respectfully suggest that there have been many teachers who have shared that with tens of millions of others. Unfortunately, there have been others who have claimed they were spiritual leaders and who were ego driven, seeking followers rather than seeking to share the light. Too often they made spiritual teachings rigid rather than fluid, and eventually led to the words drifting from meaning and context to rote and hate.
If you say "love" and someone else says what you're sharing is "hate," are you wrong or is that other person?
I agree that everything is always changing and growing, becoming more wonderful. However, I would say that for spiritual teachings that come from the heart and spirit, those changes are merely in the way they are communicated, not in the actual message. Perhaps you've read "The Secret." The teachings in that book (whether you agree with it or not) are thousands of years old--but they are presented in a new way.
You are correct that there are some systems that claim to be spiritual, but haven't included women, are incomplete, and separatist. However, I would contend that they use the guise of spirituality to deceive, must as a conjuror says, "Watch my left hand" when the secret stuff is going on in her left hand. The spiritual systems that I would contend are valid not only honor and respect women, but often have women as leaders (including the heads of the system) and teachers. If they don't, they are indeed based on ignorance, fear, and control.
You say there is no need for a system or a guru. I honor and respect that this is true...for you.
However, there are many hundreds of thousands of people, perhaps millions, who ache for the spiritual and consciously seek true spiritual system and teachers/gurus. Would you deny them that? I wouldn't.
You're correct. I don't tell flowers how to bloom. However, I do plant them for their health and well-being. I fertilize them and nurture them. I give them the opportunity to bloom with more strength and vigor. I don't make them bloom. I don't force them to bloom. I don't tell them how to bloom. But I give them the opportunity to find a way to bloom with more vigor and perhaps more quickly than if they were surrounded by weeds and received no fertilization, if they didn't get watered and were not talked with.
I don't think that's a bad thing. Flowers are beautiful! -
-
Unsu...
Re: why men cheat?
Thu, October 30, 2008 - 11:15 AM"However, there are many hundreds of thousands of people, perhaps millions, who ache for the spiritual and consciously seek true spiritual system and teachers/gurus. Would you deny them that? I wouldn't. "
i would deny someone if it were a crutch. because the loving thing to do is to help someone evolve.
the nicest thing isn't always the most loving thing ...
IMHO the reason none of these guru's "work" is because every man/womban is a guru.
when people learn to come into their own truth and power the world will finally change...
-
-
Re: why men cheat?
Wed, November 5, 2008 - 11:12 PMStella, I certainly agree that every man and woman is a guru. But surely you would agree that most don't understand, acknowledge, accept or use that, wouldn't you? Therefore, they turn to gurus and teachers for guidance.
Respectfully, you saying you would deny that to people turns you into the guru police and a rather know-it-all attitude that you know what people need better than they do. I find that either entirely cruel or highly egotistical.
You've probably hear the saying that when the student is ready, the teacher will appear. If that's true--and I would contend that it is--then it is also true that when the student is ready to be ripped off, the person who will rip them off will appear.
Lessons come in many forms, and to deny people lessons they want and need--even if you or I don't like them--is far more Bush than Obama. -
-
Unsu...
Re: why men cheat?
Thu, November 6, 2008 - 10:26 AMSham...
"Respectfully, you saying you would deny that to people turns you into the guru police and a rather know-it-all attitude that you know what people need better than they do. I find that either entirely cruel or highly egotistical."
uhm ... you undoubtedly missed the point ENTIRELY!
I am saying there's nobody in charge of you, but you! ... there's no one who knows whats best for you better than you!
That every man and womban may tap into Divine source- no matter what form it takes to them, and navigate this "reality".
Using the compass of the heart.
Your position in this conversation seems to me merely to argue for the sake of argument. I am not interested in debating semantics, and language.
"Lessons come in many forms, and to deny people lessons they want and need--even if you or I don't like them--is far more Bush than Obama."
...you lost me. ... i don't see where these ideas came into play.
I never mentioned like-dislike... this has nothing to do with anything ...and i don't see any relevance to your response. -
-
Re: why men cheat?
Thu, November 6, 2008 - 10:35 PMRespectfully, Stella, I didn't miss anything. Perhaps you missed the point where you wrote, " i would deny someone if it were a crutch. because the loving thing to do is to help someone evolve. the nicest thing isn't always the most loving thing ."
As the U.S. government is learning, you can't force democracy on people. It has to come from within. Likewise, by saying you'd deny a guru to someone, you're saying that you know better than other people what they need. That turns you into the guru cop. "Nope, You can't study with someone because that would be a crutch. I, the great guru cop Stella, have spoken!"
I'm not arguing for the sake of arguing. Rather, I'm pointing out the flaws in your argument and you seem to be very upset about that.
If you and I were just talking, I would have said, "If that's your belief system, it's fine for you" and walked away. But this is not just a talk between you and me. It's an open forum where many people read posts and often don't post themselves. Your posts present your ideas. I have presented alternatives and showed why I think your ideas are wrong.
In many cases, I have agreed with you. For example, I agree with you that "every man and womban may tap into Divine source- no matter what form it takes to them, and navigate this "reality". "
But notice your word "may." Even you realize that not everyone does tap into Divine source--or at least, is not aware of it. That's why you used "may."
Your claim is that because they might do this you would deny them a spiritual guide today. I find that cruel and heartless. There are many gurus who I deeply respect and others I do not. But I would rather tell people why I think guru X is worthy and guru Y is not rather than act like a cop and say you may not learn from any of them because some day you might tap into Divine source.
C'mon and have a heart, Stella! One of the keys to the aquarian age that we are entering is that each person should be free to find his or her own path. Taking a path away is so 20th century, so piscean. From your posts I'm sure you're spiritually more developed than that. There's no reason to deny people anything. Instead, give them more. Share you wisdom instead of denying them access to the wisdom of others, even if you disagree with that other person's wisdom. -
-
Unsu...
Re: why men cheat?
Fri, November 7, 2008 - 9:06 AMsham......."I find that cruel and heartless" "C'mon and have a heart, Stella!" "That turns you into the guru cop"
these statements are way out of line. this space should be a place for helping each other heal, not a place for tearing each other down. quite hypocritical to start your statement with the word respectfully. maybe you should start using the preview button and proof read what you are writing before hitting the submit button.
-
-
Unsu...
Alborosie - Love is the Choice
Fri, November 7, 2008 - 9:59 AMAlborosie - Love is the Choice
www.youtube.com/watch
-
Re: why men cheat?
Mon, November 10, 2008 - 12:29 AMKristalini, if you follow the thread, you'll see that I presented my position and instead of focusing on differences, Stella repeatedly presented a her-view-is-the-only-acceptable-view position. But you didn't say that her dogmatic position was out of line. Nor did you say that her position that was cruel and heartless was out of line, only that my pointing it out was supposedly out of line. Telling people that they can't have a guru was Stella's point of view, even if they wanted one. Do you think telling people that they can't have spiritual guidance is helpful?
I know exactly what I was writing. I stand by it. If someone feels they need a guru I'm not going to act the role of a guru cop and decide who they may have as a guru. That is what Stella wants to do.
If you feel that limiting people's possibilities is a way to help them heal, that's up to you. I would respectfully disagree.
Stella says it's okay to deny a guru to people who need one. Do you really think that's spiritual?
What does limitation have to do with sacred sexuality? -
-
Unsu...
Re: why men cheat?
Mon, November 10, 2008 - 8:40 AMsham, its ok to have different opinions and views on a subject. it is not ok to personally attack another person for not agreeing with you. not everyone is on the same path shams, our differences are our beauty. not everyone could be a leader or a follower or there would be no balance.
-
-
-
Unsu...
Re: why men cheat?
Fri, November 7, 2008 - 12:01 PMHonestly I am not upset Sham... I find your arrogance rather amusing. .. and would not take these judgments seriously.
I have never been perceived as cruel or heartless in my life and I actually laughed out loud :)
I never said anything about no one ever having teachers. Crutches.
I hope you can find a little room in your ego to let new concepts in one day.
thanks for you input. -
-
Unsu...
Re: why men cheat?
Fri, November 7, 2008 - 12:15 PMSham... please re-read the above post
"
Re: why men cheat?
Thu, October 30, 2008 - 11:15 AM
"However, there are many hundreds of thousands of people, perhaps millions, who ache for the spiritual and consciously seek true spiritual system and teachers/gurus. Would you deny them that? I wouldn't. "
**** i would deny someone ::: IF ::: it were a crutch. because the loving thing to do is to help someone evolve.
the nicest thing isn't always the most loving thing ... ****
IMHO the reason none of these guru's "work" is because every man/womban is a guru.
when people learn to come into their own truth and power the world will finally change... -
-
Unsu...
Re: why men cheat?
Fri, November 7, 2008 - 12:16 PM** please not the I
it is not intended to tell you or anyone else what to do.
-
-
Re: why men cheat?
Mon, November 10, 2008 - 12:59 AMStella, I have no doubt that you see your way as being the only allowable way--that's your arrogance. It never ceases to amaze me that the people who would limit our potential and our possibilities so often call others arrogant while ignoring their own arrogance. But your lack of self-vision is not my problem.
Be that as it may, let's revue YOUR comments, okay?
First, you accuse the mystics and spiritual teachers for thousands of years of being failures:
You wrote:
"mystics of the past? ... uhm ... obviously it didn't work out so well for them"
*****************
Then, because you spiritual systems don't work for you, you denounce them all:
You wrote:
"i think these "systems" result from ignorance... and fear... and a silly attempt to control."
That's amazing. There are hundreds, if not thousands of systems, but you know them all. Fascinating.
********************
Then, if someone isn't ready to work on their own, you say you would deny them a teacher because that might be a crutch. Would you pull the crutch away from someone missing a leg, too, saying it's the nicest thing for them?
You wrote:
"i would deny someone [a guru]if it were a crutch. because the loving thing to do is to help someone evolve. the nicest thing isn't always the most loving thing ... "
*********************************
Reverting back to your attack on people who are not as advanced as you and who might need the "crutch" (I would say "guidance") of a teacher, you write:
"I am saying there's nobody in charge of you, but you! ... there's no one who knows whats best for you better than you!
That every man and womban may tap into Divine source- no matter what form it takes to them, and navigate this "reality". "
I don't deny that everyone "may" tap into Divine source. What I do say is that not everyone is capable of doing that. I say if they need guidance--what you call a "crutch"--such guidance should be graciously given. But you would deny them this. I would contend that such denial is cruel and heartless as it prevents thousands of seekers from reaching the state where they can tap into Divine source. Or perhaps because you can do so (or imply that you can do so), you want to deny the training for others to reach that level so you can be above them?
*************************
And now, in your latest attack on those who need help, you write,
"IMHO the reason none of these guru's "work" is because every man/womban is a guru.
when people learn to come into their own truth and power the world will finally change... "
Amazing. There are tens of thousands of gurus in the world and you claim that none of them "work" as if you've studied and practiced with all of them. That shows your arrogance so very clearly. You claim to know more than so many others.
I absolutely agree with you that when people learn to come into their own truth and power the world will finally change. From your posts, however, you seem to want to prevent people from doing that unless they can suddenly jump to where you (think you) are. All along I have suggested that we should not deny guidance to those who are striving to reach that level.
I want to encourage and help people get there. You want to limit possibilities and prevent people from getting there. I think there are many paths to the mountain top. Your posts indicate you only want to allow one way--Stella's way.
There is an old Hawaiian saying that goes, "Not all wisdom is in your school." Not Stella's "school" or path. Not my path. Not anyone's path. That's why, IMO, each person needs to find the path that works best for her or him. Limiting the possible paths prevents people from discovering their own path.
And that's neither nice nor loving.
Oh, and I am sure you think you have never been perceived as cruel or heartless. As the poet Burns wrote,
"O wad some Power the giftie gie us
To see oursels as ithers see us!
It wad frae monie a blunder free us
An foolish notion"
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: why men cheat?
Wed, November 5, 2008 - 6:54 PM> I never said you cannot "create language without ideas and can't have an idea without language."
I never said you did, but linguists and cognitive scientists very commonly do (or at least they did when I was studying them). It seemed relevant and a useful illustration of my point so I added it to the conversation.
> What I wrote is that it's impossible to not think of something.
You were slightly too specific to make it clear to me that you were being general. I also disagree: in my experience clearing the mind of ideas and even images is simply not a problem much of the time.
> That requires some form of focus. Even if it did not, it still would require an intention, for without intention people wouldn't do anything.
Which effectively renders the statement fairly meaningless. If you absolutely always have to do something, then saying that you have to do is is a distraction. If you're going to take these definitions to that extremely small level, I would say that what you are truly saying is nothing more than "it requires a decision." And as I believe I have already made clear it's a very simple decision at that.
Your mileage will vary. (That statement, too, is completely pointless because it is always true)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: why men cheat?
Thu, October 23, 2008 - 7:29 AMin a perfect world, this is the norm. in our cultural reality, this can only happen in doses.. when both parties are at their best. tell me you are at your best at all moments, and i'll likely ask you to consider how authentic you're being. if acceptance and enjoyment of unity were the norm, we would have no affairs, no divorce, no war.. only love. reaching the uniform state of unconditional acceptance is for all of us to reach the highest level of enlightenment and maintain the level's mind state always.
that's a naive pipe dream i think. after 20 years, my wife and i still bounce from completely connected to distant and unconnected. serves to keep things interesting and new i suppose. to think we would be sexually connected at every single interraction sounds somehow unattractive.
roller coasters are fun, elevated trains are not. -
-
Re: why men cheat?
Thu, October 23, 2008 - 11:34 PMHey David, I have a different perspective. Check this out.
Please tell me that you understand that you NEVER know when you are going to meet someone who will spark an awakening of some sort. I have struggled to try to communicate to my dearest friend, who is somehow unable to be continuously affectionate with me because he equates this with sexuality. It is a very interesting conundrum/clusterfuck of emotions, so let's analyze this if you will humor me just a bit more. I have a point, I promise.
He is married to my other dearest friend, and they are a gay couple who live downstairs from me. I have known them casually for many years, but in the past 2 years or so we became like a family. I used to tell people that I lived on a Will and Grace episode. I have spent the absolutely best times of my life with these guys.
I would never, ever pretend to not be ready, willing, and able to alllow our relationships to turn completely mind-boggling-ly sexual. On my level of awareness, when people share Unity Consciousness, it is a very natural thing to desire to want to be able to express that intimacy sexually, especially when we are so continuously stifled from showing affection to ANYONE, as our societies are generally set up. (The desire may or may not be the result of growing up in dysfunctioanlly un-affectionate familes, as in my case, but I digress).
You bet I recognize that they stir the original creation energy in me. And you bet that I would not be able to live with myself if I ever crossed a personal boundary such as a monogamous marriage. I think I would rather die.
I do wish that they would both be able to wrap thier minds around the fact that this (platonic affection) is possible. They are still in the affection = sex paradigm, and that's totally OK - I love everyone and give them the space to be where they are at. But wow they just don't know what they are MISSING! OMG.
I wonder what is the percentage of men who cheat because they are unable to escape that paradigm? Maybe if they were aware of Unity Consciousness understood and experienced it they would not be compelled to cheat.
LOVE TO ALL, JUDGMENT TO NONE
dave
-
-
Re: why men cheat?
Mon, October 27, 2008 - 9:16 AMI'm getting this slowly, and through many synchronous paths. I thank you for this contribution to my life.
and yes, after careful consideration and agonizing honesty I see that I am still stuck in the sex= affectionate expression paradigm.
there is so much more available, but elusive when the weight of our lives sits on our shoulders. maybe the real disconnect that needs to happen for me is to break the connection to the reality of day-to-day living that sits with us during interraction.. like the ironic connection to a stranger who one can feel for their presence at the moment.. not their presence of years.
I won't have an affair, but feel the need for the connectedness through disconnection.. simply stated, i need to have an affair with my wife.
-
Re: why men cheat?
Mon, October 27, 2008 - 11:23 AMsomehow my last reply to this was not posted...
after painful consideration, i have to confront that i am still living the paradigm that sex=expression of affections. i've tasted the "so much more" that you are talking about here, and having a hard time regaining that. Possible that the weight of day-to-day family life and kids weighs heavy on our shoulders. too heavy to set down at times, but to consciously discuss making that happen could work.
though i won't have an affair, i long for the connection in the present without the weight of the past on us.
to your point, and counter:
platonic affections are unnatural albeit possible, you can see that by your "stirrings".. we do, or want to do, what comes natural to human behavior. platonic affections only say "i like you" but the universal communication of love is physical contact. maybe simple contact, but even touching one another.. hand to hand or cheek to cheek.. is communication of love in a sexual way.
i can see where the structural tension between you and your neighbors is a rewarding experience... i have those too. And what a joy to be conscious of the sexual urges and desires, then not act on them... and just be with it. So what do you categorize as "continuously affectionate without being sexual"? to me, if it feels sexual, it is... even if it's just hands or lips.. maybe your neighbor feels a guilt thing from your presence, in which case.. just "being" together is construed as sexual. Non-contact sexuality is all part of the sacred to me. sometimes simple eye contact can be the whole of the connection...
-
-
Unsu...
Re: why men cheat?
Fri, October 24, 2008 - 9:51 AMperhaps then you are not fulfilling each others needs anymore.
and you are together out of habit.
i know people who are still in love after 40 years.
madly deeply passionately in love. -
-
Re: why men cheat?
Fri, October 24, 2008 - 7:36 PMIts nice to hear that some people are a certain way for years,,,some aren't ,,
,every relation has a expiration date,,whether someone moves on ,to another location or thru death,,
some people stay past the expiration date,,,some people want closeness and the other wants distance,,,
when two can be together then that is what it is,,no use in over-analyzing things to death,,,
men cheat for the same reasons women cheat,,,,because they aren't honest with their
selves, with the other, or with the one at the other place,,,if people had the backbone to say
to their current partner, before the start of the relation that they may have outside needs
then at least it gives the other person a choice of staying ot leaving with honesty,,,
and some people, men and women, like the thrill of the lie,,,sacredness is up to the person who percieves it,,,
some times there is sacredness between two passing strangers,,,it has nothing to do with time,,,there are no rules
-
-
Unsu...
Re: why men cheat?
Mon, October 27, 2008 - 11:53 AM"in a perfect world, this is the norm. in our cultural reality, this can only happen in doses."
well david ... you are the creator of your world ... if it's not perfect ...
"when you change the way you look at things the tings you look at change " - Wayne Dyer
create your own culture ... you don't have to accept crap on a spoon just cause someone is handing it to you.
-
-
Re: why men cheat?
Wed, March 25, 2009 - 12:17 PMThat's beautiful STella.......
So much so I'd like to repost that
".....deep love .. of yourself and the other person ... it requires the abolition of fear merging souls. ... and total allowance, acceptance, and enjoyment of unity ... you must be as willing to let a woman enter you as you are to enter her "
-
-
-
Unsu...
Re: why men cheat?
Fri, November 7, 2008 - 5:38 PMdavid
I apologies that this got off topic. I hope you can come to understanding with in yourself as to why you are having trouble connecting spiritually with your partner. ... the beautiful part about relationships, of any kind, but especially intimate ones is that they give us such a clear in-sight. ... all is reflection. ... this fact can hardly be disputed.
take for example the interaction here within this post.... what was said by one person was totally misconstrued by another... that is because all we can see hear and think about our stimulus is based on our own history, hopes and fears. ... we will never in fact be able to truly know where any other person is coming from...
that is one reason why relationship is so important, when people act ... and we react.. this gives us a precious chance to see aspects of ourselves we may not have re-cognized with out provocation.
take this dis-ease in your relationship as a test of love and a lesson you have asked yourself for.
what a blessing to have a life and dis-cover the depths of love!
easy? no! ... worth it? yes!
you are the creator of your life!
sacred sexuality always begins with love! ...self love. ... when two whole hearts can come together it does not = 1+1 ... but multiplies exponentially.
I might suggest taking time to honour your self, and your partner. ...
make a sacred space with him/her. ... and state your intentions together. .. express your appreciation for one another. ... align your energies. complete the circuit.
Blessings and good fortune.
"when you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change" - Wayne Dyer -
-
Re: why men cheat?
Mon, November 10, 2008 - 7:52 PMthanks, thats generous of you.
-
Re: why men cheat?
Mon, November 10, 2008 - 11:21 PMLots of wisdom Stella - thanks for that. -
-
Unsu...
Re: why men cheat?
Tue, November 11, 2008 - 1:11 PMthank you! for holding good space. ... and listening. ... er.. reading :) -
-
Unsu...
Re: why men cheat?
Wed, November 12, 2008 - 6:34 AMgood luck - if it were me, i would talk to my lover and tell them how i feel, how much i want to relate in that amazing way like it used to, and it seems i feel like in a lull, or....however describe it, and see how they feel?
i like to preface with the great feeling and connection i feel towards them, and how i currently feel, and how we can work to get that on track?
xo
-
-
-
-
Re: why men cheat?
Thu, March 26, 2009 - 11:00 AMwould Love be that which you give freely whether it's returned or not
and intent and focus be that which you are engaging in for yourself or for exchange ? -
-
Re: why men cheat?
Fri, April 17, 2009 - 9:39 PMWhy do men cheat? Because they think they can get away with it.... -
-
Re: why men cheat?
Sun, April 19, 2009 - 11:05 AMwhy does anyone cheat? opportunity and lack of will power....
-
-
-
Re: why men cheat?
Sun, April 19, 2009 - 2:43 PMI must say that I find the idea of "cheating" somewhat trouble some...I was never clear what sexual exclusivity necessarily has to do with sacred sexuality. my sense of the latter has a lot to do with the following:
"The body is the part of nature that we are most concretely. And the sexual energy that is expressed through the body is not, anymore than nature is, something to be exploited for the pleasure of a dissociated ego. As Taoists, Tantrics, and other have long known, the purpose of sexual energy is to create Life. That Life can be in the form of another being or it can be in the form of greater Life and wholeness within and between the individuals who are generating it. To put it in more modern terms, sexual energy is the energy of evolution. We can evolve as a species via reproduction and/or we can use that same energy to evolve as Individuals. "
--from the Essay "Sex, Gender and Healthy Culture integralscience.motime.com archive Mar/27/06
We are more than just bodies of course we are also hearts, minds, and souls, but I think on the deepest level there is no contradiction between these other 3 aspects of our wholeness as individuals and the healing and nourishment of the body. Just as the body is engaged, nourished and healed in sacred sexuality so is the heart, mind, body, and soul. That is what makes it healthy and sacred.
(there is something in this, by the way, that I think is relavent to the disagreement between shams and stella. In the kind of sacred sexuality I practice (the Taoist kind) there is the understanding that women lose sexual energy through menstruation rather than through the actual sex act whereas men lose it through ejaculation. This means that the sense of intercourse as being draining and potentially harmful to and exploitative of the body/nature is probably much stronger in men since it is directly associated with the aftermath of ejaculation. Since avoiding this exploitation and draining by rechanneling the sexual energy requires (at least since the neolithic--i think it possible that the first humans might have been able to do this naturally) a great degree of intention and focus at least at certain points during the proceedings, its understandable to me why Sham sees it the way he does. For a women, according to the Taoists, being diffuse and unfocused during sexuality is fine so far as Her body is concerned though the same commitment to the evolutionary use of sexual energy manifest in more focused ways at other times. Again I think that human beings were once connected enough with their own bodies that men could control their ejaculations--an women their menstration--at will but my guess is that that was probably in prehistory....)
Anyway, back to "Cheating". Now its not clear why any of this that I have been describing as sacred sexuality should require some kind of promise of exclusivity though I can see how it might require some other kind of promise or at least a commitment to inner and outer healing and inner and outer consensus. That is my view of healthy sexuality anyway; something reflecting a conscious intention to make of sexuality a ritual of inner inner and outer healing and inner and outer consent. But inner consent ( mutual inner-consensus between mind, heart, body, and intuition) as well as any outer consensus between human beings to be regularly sexual or sexually exclusive with each other, are both Living Changing things that need to be maintained and renegotiated in an ongoing way. If, for example, in an intimate situation ones partner says "yes" and then something changes and they say "no" a few minutes later, does that mean one holds them to the "yes" and just continues on? Or guilt-trips them about it? In the same way, If there is no longer (for the time being--however long) no desire to be "exclusively sacredly sexual", or if a positive the desire to include others can be justified in terms of inner and outer healing and inner and outer consensus (and I can see scenarios in which it could be), than what is wrong with that? On the contrary, exclusivity just for the sake of exclusivity (ego, private ownership) is what really amounts to "cheating", cheating on the part of oneself that wants to grow beyond such motives for being in "relationship". But this cheating is something that happens at the beginning and is a mutual thing involved in the nature of the usual contract/agreement tacit (mis) understanding itself....
I-P
-
-
Re: why men cheat?
Sun, April 19, 2009 - 3:19 PMI perfer a monogamous realtionship.
No everone does, which is completely acceptable to me...
however, when 2 people enter a relationship and share the desire/intention to be monagamous and exclusive
....and both agree to that...there is an expectation to abide by that understanding.
If a partner has needs that change, can no longer be met etc...
or other wise just wants to explore other partners
and no longer be monagomous..whatever reason you dont want to be committed, fine.
But you need to tell your partner. bottom line.
You are not obligated to stay in the relationship...
but you are obligated to be honest.
Deception is never justified. and is nothing but self-serving and distructive...
-
-
Re: why men cheat?
Mon, April 20, 2009 - 12:42 AMAccording to a response on WikiAnswers (without any source), 14% of women cheat and 22% of men cheat.
Up to 37% of men and 22% of women admit to having affairs according to Dr. Bob Lanier,
One study showed that 45-55% of married women and 50-60% of married men engage in extramarital sex at some time or another during their relationship (Atwood & Schwartz, 2002 - Journal of Couple & Relationship Therapy).
About 60 percent of men and 40 percent of women will have an affair at some point in some marriage according to , Therapist Peggy Vaugn in "Monogamy Myth."
Since none of these studies were done through observation, but rather through questioning, it is actually likely that the percentages are higher than given above.
The bottom line is that it is quite likely that just over half of men and women who have promised monogamy with another end up breaking their promise. This means that not following this promise is normal and makes the value of such a promise questionable.
More important, however, is that there has been a running undercurrent in this thread of unabashed misandry and the assumption that men are far more likely to cheat than women.
Perhaps it might be more interesting to look at this false assumption and the reasons why people are far more likely to assume that men will cheat when evidence shows that although more men cheat than women, it's not be a very large percentage.
-
Re: why men cheat?
Mon, April 20, 2009 - 4:17 AMI understand what you are saying. I was not advocating deception but renegotiation. but mostly I was questioning the motives for the arrangement in the first place. It seems to me that if people are going to be making sacred vows, it should be motivated by more than the mutual preference for permanent security and private sexual ownership over inner and outer growth and healing as a whole human being. Being enraged at most cheating is like being enraged at someone not holding up their end of a business deal which itself was immoral to begin with, being motivated (as most business deals are) exclusively by selfishness on both sides and with no real thought to either the greater outer good or the deeper inner good. Under such conditions it doesn't really matter what happens within the agreement; the main point is that the agreement itself is lame and in bad faith...
-
-
Re: why men cheat?
Mon, April 20, 2009 - 4:26 AMthe above post was meant as a reply to oneinmotion rather than Sham.
-
-
Re: why men cheat?
Mon, April 20, 2009 - 5:49 AMIssuing sacred vows to avoid being humbled is not conducive to enlightenment.
-
-
Re: why men cheat?
Mon, April 20, 2009 - 7:07 PMI-P from a social perspective my understanding of monogamy revolves around
nurturing and providing stability of the children produced from these unions.
in a nut shell: giving children both of their parents...
-
-
Re: why men cheat?
Wed, April 22, 2009 - 7:17 AMWhen there are children involved I certainly understand some kind of agreement , among everyone involved, to contribute to the upbringing of the child, but even this says nothing about how many people should or or shouldn't be involved. It has no necessary bearing on the issue of sexual exclusivity so far as I can see. Why not give children 3 parents? Or a whole village of Parents?
But maybe I should clarify myself and my best case scenario. For me I am interested in Sacred Sexuality (as I described it) because it is a ritual of healthy culture and healthy culture, as a culture of (among other things) inner and outer consensus rather than inner and outer coercion, is the only hope for a future worth living in for anyones kid.
Situations and arrangements (political, economic, social, intimate, even individudal) that are not engendered (and maintained, and renewed) by inner and outer consensus are usually engendered, ( and maintained, and renewed) by direct or indirect (an inner and outer) coercion and repression. If anything is worth committing to with a sacred vow, it is the futhurance of that kind of inner and outer healthy culture which is an expression of the former and not the latter state of affairs. . When relationships with others are ordered in this way, by good will--by the will toward inner and outer healing an a better world for everyone--everything else becomes contingent on the details of the best way to do this under changing individual and collective circumstances.
The Adult in us (which I think begins to TRY to manifest, almost as a kind of cognitive instinct, once we are physically able to reproduce another human being) is concerned that there be a better future, not only for our own possible children and their children but for all the children of the world, human or other wise (it being obvious by now, if it wasn't earlier, that all of those futures are connected). For people who are really concerned about the children, I think it is More and not Less of a necessity to challenge the blinkered, childish, and selfish power over, motives that usually surround what is called relationship or marriage, or having and raising kids for that matter.
But my point is not that it is Never possible, within a specific situation, to justify some kind of relative exclusiveness (sexual or otherwise) for some degree of time by criteria that have to do with real good will, its that I have no sense that those kind of criteria ever have anything to do with the decision or agreement at all. Maturity, Goodwill, Adulthood, real Friendship, these seem to play very little part in peoples decisions or actions in regard to "relationships", sexuality, or having children...most of the time quite other things are obviously going on...
-
-
Re: why men cheat?
Fri, July 17, 2009 - 11:43 AM" Why not give children 3 parents? Or a whole village of Parents? "
Because biologically and legally they are the product of 2 parents.
-
-
Re: why men cheat?
Fri, July 17, 2009 - 9:08 PMOneinmotion wrote: " Why not give children 3 parents? Or a whole village of Parents? "
"Because biologically and legally they are the product of 2 parents."
Biologically, yes children are the product of 2 parents, although that is changing.
Legally, not necessarily true.
However, that has nothing to do with why children should not be raised by more than 2 parents.
In fact, traditionally, children were raised by more than 2 people. In early cultures they were raised by the clan. Later, they were raised by the family. It has only been over the last few hundred years that the belief that 2 people could raise a child as well or better than a group has become popular--with no legal, moral, or biological reason. -
-
Re: why men cheat?
Thu, August 13, 2009 - 7:12 PMOne's got a point.
Doesnt matter if it's "not necessarily " true. Currently in society the majority of the legality of how things are maintained, divided, care for, etc sides with the biological "parents". Precedence is crucial. And precedence right now sits with the biological producers. I say producers becuase they make exception when the "parent" cant be found or is unfit and unfit is a WIDE swath to run through.
-
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: why men cheat?
Tue, August 25, 2009 - 11:19 PMI-P:"Why not give children 3 parents? Or a whole village of Parents? "
Oneinmotion: "Because biologically and legally they are the product of 2 parents."
Coco: "Currently in society the majority of the legality of how things are maintained, divided, care for, etc sides with the biological "parents". Precedence is crucial. And precedence right now sits with the biological producers. I say producers becuase they make exception when the "parent" cant be found or is unfit and unfit is a WIDE swath to run through."
I-P: no offense, but these are not very imaginative replies. I live in an intentional community in the country where there are children with more than two "functioning" parents. sometimes this is just the more usual thing of the two biological parents remaining friend after are "repartnering", so that, since everyone is still living in the same community, the child is effectively parented by 4 adults. But in more then one case the arrangement is deliberate and entered into before conception and the children understand themselves to have more than two "parents". Although neither of these particular kinds of arragements approach what I believe is possible and necessary, I have not seen the results of them being at all worse then the nuclear family model. on the contrary.
So far as law goes; the fact that "currently in society" the law supports private exclusive ownership of ALL kinds, and so makes sharing (as opposed to charity) problematic is no argument for anything. "Currently in society" corporations privatize freshwater sources in poor desertifying countries (and rich ones too) and leave only polluted rivers to drink from for free. then they sell the poor their own water back to them (the part that isn't bottled in plastic shipped out of the country) at rates that end up being dearer for the poor than for the rich (see the book or movie "Blue Gold"). My point is; we live in a sick culture with a sick legal system. To unconditionally surrender to that fact is to abandon morality and sanity altogether...
Nor is "Biology" any kind of excuse. Like Shams was saying, there are all kind of examples of humans have other then the two parent arrangements.
Moving in the direction that I am describing has more to do with commiting to healthy culture--and thus to inner and outer healing as a priority--than necessarily to any specific details social or sexual arrangement, since these would need to be evaluated in context. Still the direction of progress and growth seems clear enough to me. Just a matter of good will and imagination.
I-P -
-
Re: why men cheat?
Thu, August 27, 2009 - 12:09 PMI could be slightly closeminded and idiotic and leave it to say men have been bred for generations to get into as many women as they can and as young as they can .... legally
I dont think that would be too far off either -
-
Re: why men cheat?
Thu, August 27, 2009 - 12:59 PMThat's an interesting comment, Coco.
I don't think it's either close-minded or idiotic to make that statement, however I do think it is the popular answer and may not be the most accurate one. There are, after all, other possibilities:
• Men and women are highly monogamous, but in each generation, the training in attitudes from childhood have influenced the desire to spread sperm. This would be the nature vs. nurture concept.
• Men and women, by nature, want to have as many sexual partners as possible. However, women have be bred for generations to only want to be with one man. Thus the real problem would not be that men "cheat," but that women's freedom has been limited and pushed against what is natural, but they put blame on men rather than on themselves.
• Men and women are highly polygamous, but in each generation, the training in attitudes from childhood have influenced the desire for women to give their ova to just one male (at a time). This, again, would be the nature vs. nurture concept.
I don't know which is actually correct. Perhaps it's different for each person.
Perhaps instead of asking "why men cheat," any person who is cheated on should ask, "why did my partner cheat?" I don't want this to sound like I'm "blaming the victim" because the bottom line is that their partner did cheat. IMO that's wrong. But why is it that a person determined that a partner who was prone to cheating would make a good partner in the first place? By looking at "why did my partner cheat" instead of blaming it on genetics or nurturing, a person could find out what they really want in a partner and seek a person with those characteristics rather than a person who is more likely to cheat on them. -
-
Re: why men cheat?
Sat, August 29, 2009 - 4:31 PMWell, let's take gender out of it and simply say that evolutionary biologists have established that we are not a monogamous species. Both men and women are predisposed to create children by multiple partners. and it makes perfect sense from a genetic point of view. Now, we are conscious, but how often to we actually discuss reality with our partners and consciously decide to be monogamous? Not often, I'd venture, and rules are not nearly as powerful as promises between two.
-
Re: why men cheat?
Sat, November 7, 2009 - 8:54 PM" By looking at "why did my partner cheat" instead of blaming it on genetics or nurturing, a person could find out what they really want in a partner and seek a person with those characteristics rather than a person who is more likely to cheat on them. "
I heartily agree.
-
-
Re: why men cheat?
Thu, November 5, 2009 - 10:35 AMwho is to say, what is being closeminded and idiotic about why mean cheat? i think when the right conditions and opportunity is presented, somethings bound to happen. i think men likes to own, stake property , possession, power. when this things are already in place in his environment he tends to be complacent. then he is vulnerable to start looking. -
-
Re: why men cheat?
Sun, November 8, 2009 - 6:53 AMI 'd like to throw in my two cents on this topic. It seems many of us men are more likely to screw around than women. I have befriended two married men and they both felt the need for some variety or they were both oversexed. I think i read something somewhere that said its imprinted in a mans DNA to seek out different lovers.
I wouldn't be surprised if there are a lot of well to do married men who mistresses on the side.
I have also worked with a couple of guys who've been married for quite some time, their kids are all grown up and have moved out of the house and they and their wives don't even have sex anymore with those being in their early 50's.
As for the moral issue, some feel that real intimacy happens when two lovers are really devoted to each other.
Another aspect of cheating, could be the game of it being exciting and doing it in secrecy around ones partner, especially where ones have drifted away from each other,possibly, could hold some measure of intrigue.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
