Wallis said the experience was not quite what he had hoped.
"It was not emotionally fulfilling, but the lady was very pleasant and very understanding. I do not know whether I would do it again. I would much rather find a girlfriend, but I have to be realistic."
The article I think testifies to how our society sees sex. They see it as some ultimate goal in life. It is the be-all, end-all of existence. And our media culture, education system, etc... just reinforces this belief in the young. It's one reason why people can't fathom celibacy for priests and nuns. But, this one quote above shows the meaninglessness, the passionlessness, and the real danger of modern society's opinion of sex. It takes the true beauty of it away, in experiencing it in marriage (a holy union) as two become one. A marriage act.
But I'm starting to sound preachy...um...*hands his soap box to Karen and posts this comment* :)
I also think that the nun was wrong in her logic in the article. If the boy had said he wanted to "Murder someone" before he died, would the nun have provided a victim for him? Or if the boy had said he wanted to sleep with a married woman? Or rob a convenience store? It's as if British society has influenced the religious there to think, "ah well, this is how it is in society and we just gotta accept it."
I don't think you can draw conclusions about all of society's view on sex based on this story. A dying man in a hospice hiring a hooker is not particularly representative of the average person or how they conduct their sex lives. You can have beautiful sex outside of marriage.
How, pray tell, does the education system reinforce the belief that sex is an ultimate goal?
in my own opinion...lastremnantJanuary 27 2007, 20:26:21 UTC
I was using this case as one bit of evidence. I think it's very true when you look at society's view of relationships that it is solely based on sex and it divorces it from marriage. Sex represents a union between man and woman where they become one, so it is meant to be within marriage. It also produces a child as a result of that union, representing two becoming one. I think the modern view of sex tends to dehumanize it, corrupt it, and truly take the beauty and passion out of it by treating people more as objects or drugs rather than as truly spiritual and beautiful human beings. The objectification of women is one result of it as well. The body is not seen as a gift within the act but as something to use. Sex should be part of marriage. It is not just "one facet" of every relationship. There is a reason for sex and I think society has lost that view of it. And that is why so many are involved in meaningless, passionless sexual relationships. The truly romantic has been divorced from it. I don't think you can have "beautiful sex"
( ... )
Re: in my own opinion...neutronJanuary 27 2007, 21:00:38 UTC
Most of your arguments are being made from a religious perspective, and marriage has a much greater meaning in the religious sphere than it does in the secular one. For me, marriage is a legal status, and confers nothing on the relationship that was not already there. I don't need marriage to have passion and beauty be a part of my sex life- I assure you that they're there. It's also ridiculously unfair to suggest that all people having sex outside of marriage are dehumanizing and objectifying one another because they don't happen to share your religious belief- there's a LOT of ground between a Catholic view of holy union and objectification and meaningless sex. You're not giving people credit for caring about one another
( ... )
Re: in my own opinion...lastremnantJanuary 27 2007, 21:45:10 UTC
I disagree that we are only animals. I think we are spiritual beings as well and sex is part of that spiritual dimension as well as physical. To say that animals have intercourse and reproduce as we do so we should behave as they do, would claim that we are exactly the same as animals when even our rational brains show us as something more. Many animals kill, but that doesn't mean that we should kill when we feel our personal space intruded upon. We have higher rational brains and have a spiritual dimension. Our purpose isn't just to reproduce and survive. I doubt if you ask a million people what their purpose in life is they would answer, "To reproduce and survive." :) That is not the thing that has driven society for centuries and even influenced your own scientific field to expand to where it is today. I think it is dehumanizing to call us exclusively animals divorced of rational thought and reason and a spiritual dimension. We are much different than the typical animal on this planet. The reason why the media focusses on sex (and
( ... )
Re: in my own opinion...lastremnantJanuary 27 2007, 21:54:49 UTC
Looking back on our comments here, I am not sure we should monopolize Karen's LJ with our discussion as it looks like it might go on and on with our back and forth comments. Let's move it to a community or email? Thanks! :)
Re: in my own opinion...neutronJanuary 27 2007, 22:08:16 UTC
Spirituality is a matter of opinion. You can't assert that humans have souls/spirits/etc without acknowledging that it's your opinion. There is absolutely NO WAY to know that aside from personal belief. Humans are actually NOT that different from other animals- beyond the capacity for recursive thought, there is little that separates humans from other animals, biologically speaking. Of course no person says their purpose is survival and reproduction, but it's implicit in our actions to both continue our lives and have children. Humans have greatly reduced evolutionary pressure now, and so we have time to pursue other avenues, but fundamental is survival and reproduction. If we lost those urges, we wouldn't last very long
( ... )
Re: in my own opinion...lastremnantJanuary 27 2007, 23:03:34 UTC
I am glad that you agree with me about the unreliability of using statistics. But I think you are totally missing the point of about the deeper meaning of sex. I hardly think that spiritual can be easily dismissed. The evidence of the spiritual in various cultures around the world testifies to its existence and there are numerous examples of the spiritual, even scientifically verified, so you should do some more research in that avenue rather than accepting what anti-God philosophers propose. To quickly dismiss the spiritual is the result of a very prideful way of looking at things, especially ourselves
( ... )
sorry for my long-winded reply to your comment. I tend to babble a lot when I get on a topic like this and go over the wide map with my thoughts, but I hope I explained myself better here. :)
Wallis said the experience was not quite what he had hoped.
"It was not emotionally fulfilling, but the lady was very pleasant and very understanding. I do not know whether I would do it again. I would much rather find a girlfriend, but I have to be realistic."
The article I think testifies to how our society sees sex. They see it as some ultimate goal in life. It is the be-all, end-all of existence. And our media culture, education system, etc... just reinforces this belief in the young. It's one reason why people can't fathom celibacy for priests and nuns. But, this one quote above shows the meaninglessness, the passionlessness, and the real danger of modern society's opinion of sex. It takes the true beauty of it away, in experiencing it in marriage (a holy union) as two become one. A marriage act.
But I'm starting to sound preachy...um...*hands his soap box to Karen and posts this comment* :)
Reply
Reply
How, pray tell, does the education system reinforce the belief that sex is an ultimate goal?
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment