6 ms·

Sex is not the be all and end all of living an awesome life. Just because blind nature created you rife with the instinctual passion of desire does not mean you

by sridca 8y ago

Sex is not the be all and end all of living an awesome life. Just because blind nature created you rife with the instinctual passion of desire does not mean you have to live as a slave to it. Channel that desire into hobbies that are actually interesting to you, and enjoy life. Sex, intimacy, relationships, marriage and the like do not automatically guarantee you happiness, as perfectly illustrated by this masterpiece: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0147612/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0147612/

papermill 8y ago
Sex, food and shelter are necessary conditions for an "awesome life" for most people. You could argue they aren't sufficient and you need more ( like spirituality, community, etc ), but it's disingenuous to dismiss it as an unnecessary condition that you could distract yourself with hobbies. Response to (sridca): Yes, I'm well aware of the difference between need and desire. But you can't have an "awesome life" if your major desires ( food, shelter and sex ) aren't met. Also, I said sex is a necessary condition for most people to live an "awesome life", not all people. You misread that part. And by most people, I mean everyone barring the exceptional minority with physical or genetic ailments. Can you live without sex? Sure. Can you live an "awesome life" without sex. I highly doubt it. But people are willing to rationalize anything I guess. Food, sex and shelter are pretty much our biological imperatives. Not sure how you can live an "awesome life" without your basic natural desires being met. But if you are happy living a sexless life, then all the best to you. This is a difference of opinion that we are just going to live with.
- sridca 8y ago
  Do you know the difference between need and desire? Can you comprehend how desiring sex is different to needing food and shelter? It is true that most people, as you indicate, are apparently unable to live an awesome life without sex in horizon. But that does not automatically make sex a "necessary condition" for an awesome life. > Not sure how you can live an "awesome life" without your basic natural desires being met. A desire, unlike a need, is not set in stone. Aggression is a "basic natural" instinctual passion too; does that mean you are rendered incapable of living an awesome life without going about killing your fellow human beings? It is clear that you are not "well aware" of the difference between a desire and a need.
  - zaroth 8y ago
    You’re arguing pedantry and missing the point. Sex is not a need like food and water, you could say the same thing about any degree of human contact whatsoever. And yet we know that humans isolated from other humans generally do not turn out well and sexual isolation is a very significant milestone on that spectrum.
    - sridca 8y ago
      The difference between a need and a desire is not a minor detail (which is what the word pedantry would indicate). Let me explain it for you. need /nēd/ circumstances in which something is necessary, or that require some course of action; necessity. de·sire /dəˈzī(ə)r/ a strong feeling of wanting to have something or wishing for something to happen. The very first thing to do is separate out needs from urges (desires): unless one is living as a hermit off nuts and berries deep in a remote forest one needs one’s fellow human beings for a whole raft of things (I need a shopkeeper to sell me goods as much as a shopkeeper needs me to sell goods to for example) and the most fundamental needs amount to five survival essentials ... air, water, food, shelter (if protection be necessary), and clothing (if the weather be inclement). The fact that you fail to thoroughly appreciate this makes it unsurprising that you bizarrely place the condition of not engaging in sexual acts (an act of desire) with your fellow human beings to be nearly on the same level as living without being in contact (an act of need) with them.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
      - zzetsumei 8y ago
        I'm no wordsmith but isn't it instinctual for humans to want to reproduce? The testosterone level in men are far greater than in women. I would say it's a biological "curse" but also a necessity for the continuation of the human race. It'd be wonderful if you could just train yourself to ignore the testosterone impulses nagging for a release but it seems impossible to me. Speaking as a male in his late 20s, I've got fulfilling hobbies such as working on my car, biking, exercising and programming with friends. However none of those scratch the biological itch to have physical intimacy. I am actually quite offended you'd ask of me to deny my desires and to call me selfish for wanting to to pursue what is ingrained biologically in me. There is nothing to be gained from setting my bar low for what I want in life.
- rofo1 8y ago
  > Also, I said sex is a necessary condition for most people to live an "awesome life", not all people. You misread that part. And by most people, I mean everyone barring the exceptional minority with physical or genetic ailments. Strong disagreement here. Sex is not necessary. It's way overblown, and anyone that has regular sex (or the potential to get it) will concede that point. It's definitely not worth the drama that usually follows it. Food is necessary, cause without it you will die. Shelter is necessary, cause without it you will die as well (eventually, not immediately) Sex it not necessary. In fact, I was always confused and flabbergasted by the lengths people will go to to get it. It's remarkable - it's probably evolution at work, but still never ceases to amaze me. People will tolerate the most insane things I've ever witnessed just to put one reproductive organ into another. If an alien race was watching this, they'd die in laughter. Also, the obsession with sex that modern cinema, newspapers (think scandals etc.), indirectly facebook/instagram, on every billboard hot naked women are selling you something (hot naked women cleaning service, hot naked women car wash/sales/etc.) cannot be healthy. Just cannot be! I don't understand this obsession at all. Don't people have literally anything better to do? Do people really have this much free time? OT: I'm glad to see this topic on HN cause the human bonding in general is a very interesting topic. Wish we could discuss it more, cause it feels like we, as a society, just go with the momentum instead of sitting down and thinking long-term consequences of what we are doing. It's almost shameful and definitely looked down upon to suggest traditional values and roles, even though those traditional values were result of thousands of years of various attempts. Surely the previous generations weren't all imbeciles that couldn't conclude what works and what doesn't. I think it's safe to say that what we are doing now cannot work long-term.
  - sridca 8y ago
    Yes. If it were not for the suffering engendered all this obsession with sex would be highly amusing. And personally as someone who favours individualism -- despite having grown up in a culture where arranged marriages are the norm -- I would not go back to "traditional values" especially as there is no indication whatsoever that traditional societies were any more authentically happier than we are today. The only way forward is individual autonomy (mentally, emotionally not just economically).
  - 8y ago
tomp 8y ago
Having money isn't everything. Not having money, is. Same with food and sex.
- sridca 8y ago
  > Having money isn't everything. Not having money, is. Apparently what this pithy aphorism means, for those like me that have never heard before, is that[1] when you have money it is easy to say that there is more life than just being wealthy, and that when you have no money your financial situation negatively affects your entire life. > Same with food If you have no food to eat it will not be a matter of it affecting your life, as there won't be one to live in the first place (beyond the number of days of living off body fat). This is what the word "need" refers to. > and sex. If you are saying that not engaging in sexual intercourse with one's fellow human beings negatively affects one's entire life (as if it is a fact, and not one's own feeling), and as sex is not a need like food, it can be safely said that your pithy aphorisms are of no use whatsoever to anyone looking to critically ascertain the facts of the matter instead of blindly following whatever is the latest belief being promulgated by the masses. [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/comments/9og6vu/having_money_isnt_everything_not_having_it_is/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/comments/9og6vu/havi...
enraged_camel 8y ago
Sexual intimacy is one of the "pillars" on Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.
- sridca 8y ago
  And? Is everything Mr. Maslow said to be taken as incontrovertible fact?
  - enraged_camel 8y ago
    No, but perhaps your refutation should be something that is a bit more in-depth than "you don't need to have sexual intimacy in your life to be happy and feel fulfilled."
    - sridca 8y ago
      > your refutation See my comments on the distinction between need vs desire in this thread. > should be something that is a bit more in-depth than "you don't need to have sexual intimacy in your life to be happy That's correct. You can feel happy doing a variety of things, such as hobbies, work, dining out with friends, etc. Your not engaging in sexual intercourse does automagically stop happiness in tracks. > ... and feel fulfilled." Nothing in the dictionary definition of the word "fulfilled" -- "satisfied or happy because of fully developing one's abilities or character." -- indicates necessarily having sexual intercourse.

by sridca 8y ago

papermill 8y ago

Sex, food and shelter are necessary conditions for an "awesome life" for most people. You could argue they aren't sufficient and you need more ( like spirituality, community, etc ), but it's disingenuous to dismiss it as an unnecessary condition that you could distract yourself with hobbies. Response to (sridca): Yes, I'm well aware of the difference between need and desire. But you can't have an "awesome life" if your major desires ( food, shelter and sex ) aren't met. Also, I said sex is a necessary condition for most people to live an "awesome life", not all people. You misread that part. And by most people, I mean everyone barring the exceptional minority with physical or genetic ailments. Can you live without sex? Sure. Can you live an "awesome life" without sex. I highly doubt it. But people are willing to rationalize anything I guess. Food, sex and shelter are pretty much our biological imperatives. Not sure how you can live an "awesome life" without your basic natural desires being met. But if you are happy living a sexless life, then all the best to you. This is a difference of opinion that we are just going to live with.

sridca 8y ago
Do you know the difference between need and desire? Can you comprehend how desiring sex is different to needing food and shelter? It is true that most people, as you indicate, are apparently unable to live an awesome life without sex in horizon. But that does not automatically make sex a "necessary condition" for an awesome life. > Not sure how you can live an "awesome life" without your basic natural desires being met. A desire, unlike a need, is not set in stone. Aggression is a "basic natural" instinctual passion too; does that mean you are rendered incapable of living an awesome life without going about killing your fellow human beings? It is clear that you are not "well aware" of the difference between a desire and a need.
- zaroth 8y ago
  You’re arguing pedantry and missing the point. Sex is not a need like food and water, you could say the same thing about any degree of human contact whatsoever. And yet we know that humans isolated from other humans generally do not turn out well and sexual isolation is a very significant milestone on that spectrum.
  - sridca 8y ago
    The difference between a need and a desire is not a minor detail (which is what the word pedantry would indicate). Let me explain it for you. need /nēd/ circumstances in which something is necessary, or that require some course of action; necessity. de·sire /dəˈzī(ə)r/ a strong feeling of wanting to have something or wishing for something to happen. The very first thing to do is separate out needs from urges (desires): unless one is living as a hermit off nuts and berries deep in a remote forest one needs one’s fellow human beings for a whole raft of things (I need a shopkeeper to sell me goods as much as a shopkeeper needs me to sell goods to for example) and the most fundamental needs amount to five survival essentials ... air, water, food, shelter (if protection be necessary), and clothing (if the weather be inclement). The fact that you fail to thoroughly appreciate this makes it unsurprising that you bizarrely place the condition of not engaging in sexual acts (an act of desire) with your fellow human beings to be nearly on the same level as living without being in contact (an act of need) with them.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - zzetsumei 8y ago
      I'm no wordsmith but isn't it instinctual for humans to want to reproduce? The testosterone level in men are far greater than in women. I would say it's a biological "curse" but also a necessity for the continuation of the human race. It'd be wonderful if you could just train yourself to ignore the testosterone impulses nagging for a release but it seems impossible to me. Speaking as a male in his late 20s, I've got fulfilling hobbies such as working on my car, biking, exercising and programming with friends. However none of those scratch the biological itch to have physical intimacy. I am actually quite offended you'd ask of me to deny my desires and to call me selfish for wanting to to pursue what is ingrained biologically in me. There is nothing to be gained from setting my bar low for what I want in life.
rofo1 8y ago
> Also, I said sex is a necessary condition for most people to live an "awesome life", not all people. You misread that part. And by most people, I mean everyone barring the exceptional minority with physical or genetic ailments. Strong disagreement here. Sex is not necessary. It's way overblown, and anyone that has regular sex (or the potential to get it) will concede that point. It's definitely not worth the drama that usually follows it. Food is necessary, cause without it you will die. Shelter is necessary, cause without it you will die as well (eventually, not immediately) Sex it not necessary. In fact, I was always confused and flabbergasted by the lengths people will go to to get it. It's remarkable - it's probably evolution at work, but still never ceases to amaze me. People will tolerate the most insane things I've ever witnessed just to put one reproductive organ into another. If an alien race was watching this, they'd die in laughter. Also, the obsession with sex that modern cinema, newspapers (think scandals etc.), indirectly facebook/instagram, on every billboard hot naked women are selling you something (hot naked women cleaning service, hot naked women car wash/sales/etc.) cannot be healthy. Just cannot be! I don't understand this obsession at all. Don't people have literally anything better to do? Do people really have this much free time? OT: I'm glad to see this topic on HN cause the human bonding in general is a very interesting topic. Wish we could discuss it more, cause it feels like we, as a society, just go with the momentum instead of sitting down and thinking long-term consequences of what we are doing. It's almost shameful and definitely looked down upon to suggest traditional values and roles, even though those traditional values were result of thousands of years of various attempts. Surely the previous generations weren't all imbeciles that couldn't conclude what works and what doesn't. I think it's safe to say that what we are doing now cannot work long-term.
- sridca 8y ago
  Yes. If it were not for the suffering engendered all this obsession with sex would be highly amusing. And personally as someone who favours individualism -- despite having grown up in a culture where arranged marriages are the norm -- I would not go back to "traditional values" especially as there is no indication whatsoever that traditional societies were any more authentically happier than we are today. The only way forward is individual autonomy (mentally, emotionally not just economically).
- 8y ago

tomp 8y ago

Having money isn't everything. Not having money, is. Same with food and sex.

sridca 8y ago
> Having money isn't everything. Not having money, is. Apparently what this pithy aphorism means, for those like me that have never heard before, is that[1] when you have money it is easy to say that there is more life than just being wealthy, and that when you have no money your financial situation negatively affects your entire life. > Same with food If you have no food to eat it will not be a matter of it affecting your life, as there won't be one to live in the first place (beyond the number of days of living off body fat). This is what the word "need" refers to. > and sex. If you are saying that not engaging in sexual intercourse with one's fellow human beings negatively affects one's entire life (as if it is a fact, and not one's own feeling), and as sex is not a need like food, it can be safely said that your pithy aphorisms are of no use whatsoever to anyone looking to critically ascertain the facts of the matter instead of blindly following whatever is the latest belief being promulgated by the masses. [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/comments/9og6vu/having_money_isnt_everything_not_having_it_is/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/comments/9og6vu/havi...

enraged_camel 8y ago

Sexual intimacy is one of the "pillars" on Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.

sridca 8y ago
And? Is everything Mr. Maslow said to be taken as incontrovertible fact?
- enraged_camel 8y ago
  No, but perhaps your refutation should be something that is a bit more in-depth than "you don't need to have sexual intimacy in your life to be happy and feel fulfilled."
  - sridca 8y ago
    > your refutation See my comments on the distinction between need vs desire in this thread. > should be something that is a bit more in-depth than "you don't need to have sexual intimacy in your life to be happy That's correct. You can feel happy doing a variety of things, such as hobbies, work, dining out with friends, etc. Your not engaging in sexual intercourse does automagically stop happiness in tracks. > ... and feel fulfilled." Nothing in the dictionary definition of the word "fulfilled" -- "satisfied or happy because of fully developing one's abilities or character." -- indicates necessarily having sexual intercourse.