The Conspiracy Against Lovers: The Real Truth They Don't Want You To Know

reply to post by Eidolon23

Check out those chains. They look loose enough, don't they?

That is the central mystery of this Trump. But I guess you knew that (?)



So if we are going to discuss all of that then I suppose we are going to also want to bring in subjects like Tantra?

Here is what I think. If you look at a lot of the systems of spiritual development from around the world, sometimes they look, to me, like instructions for escape. Sort of like, "You have just arrived on Planet Earth and you are stuck in a Flesh Sheath; here is what to do".

When I look at them like this then it makes me wonder if the same system can be useful for understanding what it is that is being escaped from. So I guess the question then would be "What does Tantra help an aspiring couple escape from? Or just 'Tantra' like concepts even, which are and have been appearing more and more in couple's therapy across the nation?

X.

I read a thread on another forum recently about a phenomena known as "Tantra Induced Delusional Syndrome".

This stuff, it is very very volatile. Psychosexual TNT. People literally lose their minds. Or they turn into Sting.

But I have a hunch that Tantra is a cheap shortcut. Many sages have hinted broadly at the real path to union with the One, and some have come right out and told us. The closest we can come to the experience of divine union in this life is through falling in love.

At its worst, Tantra is just another way to hack the groin in order to induce a trance state, and at its best a way for couples to enjoy a serotonin cascade they associate with one another. Which is nice, but is maybe not the central point of Love.

reply to post by Eidolon23

But I have a hunch that Tantra is a cheap shortcut. Many sages have hinted broadly at the real path to union with the One, and some have come right out and told us.

Wow, OK, I see you don't go for the cheap stuff,

"Waiter!"

That our good is There is shown by the very love inborn with the soul; hence the constant linking of the Love-God with the Psyches in story and picture; the soul, other than God but sprung of Him, must needs love.

So long as it is There, it holds the heavenly love; here its love is the baser; There the soul is Aphrodite of the heavens; here, turned harlot, Aphrodite of the public ways: yet the soul is always an Aphrodite.

This is the intention of the myth which tells of Aphrodite's birth and Eros born with her.

Plotinus, Ennead 9, Sec. 6

www.sacred-texts.com...

Is this more to your taste my Paramour?

X.

Originally posted by Aeons

The only times people are being encouraged to use their human wiring, and its to make money and reject intimacy. How sad is that?

Not just sad, totally unsustainable.

The dismantling of the pair-bond might be good for business, insomuch as it destroys our main font of satisfaction, rendering us grist for the twin mills of the sex industry and fashion. It is a means of population reduction more effective than China's one child policy.

The chains are being tightened around our necks, and we are told that the choking sensation is what freedom feels like.

reply to post by Xoanon


Indeed. Cupid was once known as Eros-Phanes. And he occupied anything but a tertiary spot in the Pantheon.

The Orphics equated Phanes with the Elder Eros (Sexual Desire) of Hesiod's Theogony, who emerged at the beginning of time alongside Khaos (Air) and Gaia (Earth).

It is no wonder the sages tip-toe around this.

I found a great article while chasing that Helen Fisher information around,

Passion also heightens several cognitive functions, as the brain regions and chemicals surge. “It’s all about how that network interacts,” says Stephanie Ortigue, an assistant professor of psychology at Syracuse University, who led the study. The cognitive functions, in turn, “are triggers that fully activate the love network.” Tell that to your sweetheart on Valentine’s Day.


www.scientificamerican.com...

And this quote from Helen Fisher, I thought was really interesting as it turns the whole thing on it's head,

These systems are also connected. "Don’t copulate with people you don’t want to fall in love with," she half-jokingly tells her students, "because indeed you may do just that." Testosterone can kickstart the two love neurotransmitters while an orgasm can elevate the attachment hormones."

www.mcmanweb.com...

Originally posted by crayzeed
But no-one can give you the formula for love else the world would be a better place. I'm sorry if that's to clinical for you but love and sex are 2 different concepts. I do try to love every-one.

There are many types of love, it is an incredible faculty that way. In the OP I was referring specifically to the type of the love between a couple.

Love and sex are two distinct drives, yes. But would you agree that the romantic is inseparable from the erotic; and that both are contained in the experience of love in the conjugal sense?

Originally posted by Eidolon23
There are many types of love, it is an incredible faculty that way. In the OP I was referring specifically to the type of the love between a couple.

Love and sex are two distinct drives, yes. But would you agree that the romantic is inseparable from the erotic; and that both are contained in the experience of love in the conjugal sense?

Interesting question. Again it depends on the individual. In the vernacular, what floats your boat? I've always held that love is a combination of respect and lust. Lust isn't a bad thing but what creates it in the individual? What makes one interesting to YOU? Appearance? A persons empathy? Their caring? Their sexiness? Can't discount that one BUT, again, WHY are they sexy to you? It may have NOTHING to do with appearance.

These systems are also connected. "Don’t copulate with people you don’t want to fall in love with," she half-jokingly tells her students, "because indeed you may do just that." Testosterone can kickstart the two love neurotransmitters while an orgasm can elevate the attachment hormones."

www.mcmanweb.com...

I feel like this is another thing a lot of us have in common: we fall in love with people we are not well-suited to be with, because of an intense erotic connection. I know I was knackered this way once or twice. When the cracks start to show, we jump ship and wait for the next person who smells so right, but is otherwise so wrong.

Originally posted by intrepid

I've always held that love is a combination of respect and lust.

Boom. You are bringing your A-game to this, man.

And that is the problem. All lust, no respect these days. When you hear men and women talk about each other, I think that's the overriding area of concern: we talk mad crap. It's worse than donkeys vs. elephants. There's so much distrust, and disgust, and blame. Not just as individuals, but as an entire society.

Love cannot exist where there is no respect.

reply to post by intrepid


I would tend to agree with you, but I think that it can be processed the other way.

Love into Lust. Lust as an expression of love.

Is is all about "smell" and looks and the right biology?

Then how come I can fall in love with someone I've never met? The human mind - so fascinating.

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by intrepid

 

I would tend to agree with you, but I think that it can be processed the other way.

Love into Lust. Lust as an expression of love.

Is is all about "smell" and looks and the right biology?

Then how come I can fall in love with someone I've never met? The human mind - so fascinating.

You are an effing magician.

Because I have been totally poleaxed by that very phenomenon, to the extent that I haven't even been able to formulate that question. How? I would have deemed it ridiculous and irrational, but no longer have that luxury.

I don't know. I only know that it is very much possible, and that the erotic can be transmuted into something very strange and pure under these highly peculiar conditions. So no. It's not all about who smells like "The One".

reply to post by Eidolon23

The sticky thing is that they have a point. That is how we used to function, and to a great extent still do. But we've sprouted some new wiring since, and although the old wiring still asserts itself it doesn't mean that we should go back to the cave because it's hard to be Human.

Yeah, OK. I can't argue with that. I tend to get a little excited. I get the impression that you are at least familiar with Sex at Dawn. Listen, I just do not think that we are bonobos. Bonobos are cute and all and they have their whole economy of sexuality going on like we do but we are not apes. I know that you know that but I get really backed up by the ape thing, so just for the sake of saying it,

What makes us Human and very different from the bonobo, in my opinion, is our ability to narrate our lives and our creation. The thumb only follows as function follows form, the thumb is a logical accessory to our ability to narrate.

This is what makes us human. And gives us an escape from what would be called our animal nature by giving us the ability to narrate our way to a place where these complex areas of the brain can be accessed and harnessed and brought on line.

To be either be in romantic love or in a devoted monogamous relationship brings so many more of these advanced properties of our brains on line. It reminds me of the saying,"It takes more muscles to frown than to smile". You know what? It's not rue. It is the reverse. Just like it is harder to do the right thing most of the time than do the lazy not so good thing. Smile vs. Frown

Romantic love and committed monogamy require more of us and by trying our best to be more, we develop in to stronger individuals. And that spreads to all the right people.

X.

Originally posted by Aeons
I would tend to agree with you, but I think that it can be processed the other way.

Love into Lust. Lust as an expression of love.

Is is all about "smell" and looks and the right biology?

Sure it can imo. Smell, like appearance are subliminal messages to people and those are different for everyone. What about a sense of humor? I fell in love with this girl about 5 years ago. Granted we had similar interests but she said that "this hockey player" was her boyfriend and I asked, "When do we inform him of that?" she replied, "He doesn't need to know." That was it for me. It was a connection. Unfortunately I was married at the time.

reply to post by Eidolon23


I dis-agree. the erotic can include the romantic but not necessarily. The erotic can be devoid of the romantic. All of this can be interpreted with what ever a persons make up is ie. upbringing, religeon and a host of other personality affecting experiences one has. That's why it's near impossible to define love because what's love to one person is quite something else to another.

reply to post by intrepid


"If I love you, what business is it of yours?"
-Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Originally posted by Eidolon23
Because I have been totally poleaxed by that very phenomenon, to the extent that I haven't even been able to formulate that question. How? I would have deemed it ridiculous and irrational, but no longer have that luxury.

I don't know. I only know that it is very much possible, and that the erotic can be transmuted into something very strange and pure under these highly peculiar conditions. So no. It's not all about who smells like "The One".

edit on 28-1-2012 by Eidolon23 because: But smelling right doesn't hurt.

I've gotten to know most of the people I've loved online - not by intent, just because that has been the primary mode of interaction between the people in my extended coteries.

It has afforded me the luxury of getting to love someone for what they are, and them to start to love me before they get into the field around me and start going chemical ballistic. Or for a couple of them to not have the chemical wash to get to know me online after meeting me in person through common friends/activities.

I can literally say that someone loves me for my mind, and the big boobs are just icing.

reply to post by intrepid


But the way love shows up on an MRI is very consistent from person to person.

Meaning that while the factors that lead to love may vary, the way we experience love itself is perhaps universal.

Originally posted by Eidolon23
But the way love shows up on an MRI is very consistent from person to person.

Meaning that while the factors that lead to love may vary, the way we experience love itself is perhaps universal.

That's my point. What makes a person love another? It varies.

Damn, science and love. Those two should never interact. It's like military intelligence.

reply to post by intrepid


Science is merely a window into understanding what lies inside.

Knowing that a street map might be possible to create isn't the same as having a map to navigate your personal thousand universes.

How much of what you love in another is you loving yourself? That's the question I always roll around in my head. Is this just some variation of self-love? I want it not to be so, but I can never get a handle on it. Its my personal slippery fish of love.