?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Explain!

  • May. 2nd, 2005 at 7:14 PM
Over Stand
"Sex is highly overrated" he said. "Much more than other activities, like taking a crap".
Of course, "they" all turned and immediately looked at the girlfriend.

I still say "poor girl" for this one. Considering she still hadn't "done it".


This here statement was mentioned by a friend on her journal and a discussion followed. I said it was simply psychology. And was asked in reply, to "Explain?".

Since the post is not public, I've avoided mentioning the source of the quotes, but the thought is nevertheless an interesting debate to ponder over....



"Sex is highly overrated" he said. "Much more than other activities, like taking a crap".
Of course, "they" all turned and immediately looked at the girlfriend.


It projects the angle at which the idea of "Sex" as a form of coupling, is pointed toward in todays day and age. No matter how swift or sharp the graze might be, the fact remains that when someone mentions sex, it is first thought of as intercourse and later, other respectful dimensions are noted.

"Sex", when mentioned, no matter how candid or serious the discussion, delivers the impression of Sexual intercourse for Joy, as opposed to it being regarded as a natural process of genetic stimulation.

The statement, likening sex to taking a crap, says exactly that, sex is overrated in it's implication even though, just like taking a crap is a natural phenomena, so is sex. This abrupt statement would undoubtedly flash a psychological recollection in the audiences mind about "sex" as in a relationship.

When two people, with physical proximity established, are seen to be together, such as in a boyfriend-girlfriend relationship, in the general publics vision, becomes a similar relationship that is treated on par and intercourse as a mode of interaction and play rather than natural urges toward procreation tends to bend the internal semantics by which meaning is transferred to the audiences minds.

Should our friend have said "Sexual Intercourse" or even just "Intercourse" in place of choosing the word "Sex", the interpretation would have been phenomenally different. Chances are that eyebrows would have shot up among the audience, but they gazes would'nt have shifted to the girlfriend.

When someone refers to sex as being unworthy of the status it is given and likening it to a natural process such as crapping, it forms an alarming note in the audiences minds. They look at the female who is most likely to have had a known relationship with that individual on a basic level, with bewilderment assuming subconsciously that they are factors about the sex lives of these two individuals that force the man to regard sex so lightly and, in their opinion, berating it to the likes of taking a crap.

Taking the last bit, I shall re-quote so you don't have to refer above again:

I still say "poor girl" for this one. Considering she still hadn't "done it".


This statement proves that the statement made by the boyfriend above, is merely a speculation and not a forceful point being made. It's natural to suppose that the second statement following the first means that the events occur one after another....

But that is not always the case. As is here seen, the second statement is one of prevalence, where it stands as a continuous truth, perhaps lingering a good bit beyond the current moment, but being a fundamental factor of truth since forever. so it's a continuous factor that existed way before the issues that are derived from the first statement by the audience or the reader.

Hmmm.... I'm not confused, I'm just frustrated. Have I not made enough sense already? lol!

Kaydeeyoh!

Comments

tejapratap wrote:
May. 2nd, 2005 07:36 pm (UTC)
a casual statement
sex is highly over rated

is a cliched statement.

This statement proves that the statement made by the boyfriend above, is merely a speculation and not a forceful point being made. ....very much right.

if we look at the statement keenly, it actually doesn't reflect likening sex with taking a crap. it merely states that these two are biological activities and that the former is much talked about but the latter is not-so-common in the discussions. so no question of berating the progenic activity comes up.
if one can sense any kind of comparitive note in the statement, then prolly he is berating crapping, which is very essential by attributing it a lowest status (hehe....). There cant be a comparision between biological activities coz everything is imp for our existence.

it is first thought of as intercourse and later, other respectful dimensions are noted. why isn't intercourse respectful?? this is the key funda behind progeny!!!

funny thing is that,a casual statement is giving rise to debates.

angiasaa wrote:
May. 4th, 2005 08:17 am (UTC)
Re: a casual statement
Exactly! I find too many people tend to absorb too much of the television hype that's been forcefeeding our minds about 'sex' and 'opinions' that are way off key.

People tend to follow in each others footsteps all the time. So much so that in todays age, people are more likely to commit 'sex' related crimes than 'crap' related ones.... (Yes, there have been crap-related [unrelated to any sexual tendency] crimes that have been put on trial, and have lost)

It is obvious that the person relating those words is not likening the two things, sex-and-crap, but instead, is merely refering to the two as biological aspects of our incoherant lives. Perhaps, even trying to say that sex is as important as crapping, who can say for certain but for the guy who actually said those words. I have no idea who it was who said those words or I'd have carried out a little postmortem to clear up the intent of his statement. :)

why isn't intercourse respectful??

Sorry, error in my post.... I meant to say 'sex' in place of 'intercourse' there. :oP And you're right, without progeny, where would we all be anyway?
tejapratap wrote:
May. 5th, 2005 09:32 pm (UTC)
Re: a casual statement
i like the way u put the things man!!!

it gives the reader a pleasure that 'yes i understood something' after reading for a while.
angiasaa wrote:
May. 5th, 2005 11:14 pm (UTC)
Re: a casual statement
Thank you (I seem to be inclined to use this word with you over and over.).

Some people say I write too much. Some say I make no sense. Some say that they don't have the time, some say they could'nt care less. But at the end of the day, My motive is'nt to 'make' people read what I write, it's to make them understand my thoughts. I have the ability to think along multiple lines of thought simultaneously.

As logic would agree, I can't type as fast as I can think, and years of computer usage has trained me to be able to think in disassociation with my words. I can be typing something and thinking on a few parallel thoughts, possible things to say, other angles I might not have yet considered, all that stuff.

The key lies in being able to keep typing, come what may. And I am able to do that by involving myself with detail. I try to put my thoughts out as pictorially as possible. I want to be able to read my entries fifty, maybe seventy years form now and be able to feel the same emotions, think the same thoughts, smell the same breeze....

Therefore, my aim is to capture the flow of thought and the thought itself. The aim is'nt to fill pages, or to take the reader round and round in circles.... I'm just laying down pointers and cues to the reader so s/he might follow in the same lineage and see what I saw, the way I saw it....

I'm glad you see through the veil of ambiguous metaphors that I cloak my writing with. It's rare to find someone who can see through it all.

Thank you.
tejapratap wrote:
May. 6th, 2005 08:44 am (UTC)
Re: a casual statement
well, from now u need not use 'thank you' coz i'm kinda ur fan and there is no big need to acknowledge a fan in return....atleast this fan of urs dont mind. so no more thank you's.

yeah i can see ideas flowing and thats what make u go complex. by carefully disecting all complexitites and trying to follow the 'flow of thought' (i like this usage) of the author and finally discovering his intentions is a good experience to the readers....and i get that kinda feel when i read ur long scripts. i never felt they r very long coz they make sense and r well articulated.

I want to be able to read my entries fifty, maybe seventy years form now and be able to feel the same emotions, think the same thoughts, smell the same breeze.... ya...writing in detail alone helps to experience the same state even after a long time.


angiasaa wrote:
May. 6th, 2005 01:58 pm (UTC)
Re: a casual statement
Oh well, I'll cut down on my usage of that word. I just feel thankful to a lot of people. :) And I know of no better way to really express it.

As to calling yourself a fan, I'm of the opinion it's something to feel warmly about. In fact, it's addictive. lol! I find it very elating in a sense to see that word in my reference. There are a lot of people out there who are fans, but don't call themselves as such. :) It's kind of shocking to hear that (that one has a fan) about oneself.

Yes, I see now, why you read my journal.... It's interesting to speculate on the ways in which people interpret language in its written form, but it's very rare to find someone who actually reads what you write in as similar a form as you actually use to write it. I think that's rare and wonderful! :)

As to length, I've found that a lot of people are short on time. In fact, of late, I've been pretty short on time myself. It takes me a lot of concentration to read my friends posts because some of them are long and my mind starts worrying about some work (tension?) or another that's still left to be done. A lot of people simply see the size of some of my posts and skip them entirely, perhaps for the same reason, who knows!

But I'm okay, I don't write for the world, I write for myself.... And if there are some people who can spare the time to check on me, It's self-sustaining in a sense.

To detail! :)
shandeegoddess wrote:
May. 2nd, 2005 07:50 pm (UTC)
Haha. Great entry ;-) A good read :-P
Shandee ♥
angiasaa wrote:
May. 4th, 2005 08:19 am (UTC)
Hehe! Some things in life were meant to be torn apart and debated. lol!
subtle_blues wrote:
May. 3rd, 2005 07:58 am (UTC)
the fact remains that when someone mentions sex, it is first thought of as intercourse and later, other respectful dimensions are noted

and why isn't pleasure a respectful dimension? procreation is only the end result( nature's way).. neither is it the cause nor the purpose behind sex. atleast not when you start off..

SEX has become a highly pretentious word.. i donot know if this is a justified comparison but nonetheless this is what come to my mind.. When one says he beleives in GOD, whatever might be his personal vision of it, s/he is generalized into the "believers" community.. s/he is not welcome into the world of the agnostic or the atheist.. cause the word GOD has too many strings attached .. once you say u believe .. u are marked! It's a BLACK or WHITE world.. the grays are hardly recognized.
We hear the S word and lo our mind is filled with visions which are figments of our own versions of the word.. I could never have a "clean"(no strings attched) discussion about "sex" even with my fellow room mates.. anytime the discussion came up.. I could sense a hormone rush around the room!

comparing sex with crap... i can only quote my friend after one of his daily purges..

"fuck man! it feels better than Sex!"
:)
cheers!
angiasaa wrote:
May. 4th, 2005 09:05 am (UTC)
Golly! It's not about pleasure. When you see "sex", pleasure is not the foremost thought in your mind.... It's the kink in the tube that bends the thought. (The pun was unintentional, sorry!)

neither is it the cause nor the purpose behind sex. atleast not when you start off..

Ummm.... Not that I can claim to know anything about the rush of thoughts going on in a persons head when s/he starts off, but as I see it, when progeny enters the mind as an intended state of affairs, naturally, intercourse is instituted. Without sexual interaction, progeny is rare.... And the fact remains, in a lot of the cases, that pleasure from sexual intercourse is a secondary (why-not) phenomenon to the intent for procreation.

We hear the S word and lo our mind is filled with visions

There you have it! that's the problem not just with you, but with the countless billions swinging around the sun every year in orangutan frenzies! That's what the world's turned into. We can nip the problem in the butt if we decided to, but heck, who wants to anyways? That's the opinion we have these days!

"fuck man! it feels better than Sex!"

lol! I'm assuming you could vouch for the truth in that statement. Hahaha! I for one am not an authority on the subject, yet!

Kaydeeyoh!
ma7ur wrote:
May. 3rd, 2005 04:28 pm (UTC)
I'm not confused, I'm just frustrated.

dikhta hai!
alexli wrote:
May. 3rd, 2005 11:19 pm (UTC)
i read your entry but I didn't completely understand your main question
angiasaa wrote:
May. 4th, 2005 09:07 am (UTC)
:) There's no question as such, it's more of a debate withmyself. Trying to see why people behave the way they do. How much people tend to mistake reality and how they bend reality to serve their internal, mental needs....

In the long run, it always affects us.... If not tomorrow, it will affect us in the not-so-distant future.... We're all puppets.... And we know it, it's just that we're not willing to accept that as a fact yet....