Women as What They Are, Not as What You Want

Surfing a little through WordPress I have found an interesting blog, Manderson’s Bubble, in which the author writes about a lot of issues. Personally, I have been impressed by Women as What They Are, Not as What You Want posted on July 19, 2007, where bubbler speaks most of all to other men (but not only) concerning what he thinks about women.

 

Men, why is it that you must limit your view of women to that of solely sex organs, as symbols of your need? Why is it that the level of desire that you feel for a woman has no relation to your heart?

What a waste of time it is just to use women for sex, when they can offer so much more. Women are more than bodies—they are minds, they are voices, they are perceptions. They are more than anything that could be defined by your understanding, or by your desire, or by what you see.

Any father who loves his daughter knows this; any brother who loves his sister knows this; any son who loves his mother knows this: women are the bearers of the light. Respect this source and you may come to know true wealth.

Just to be around beautiful women is a delight, like breathing in rainforest air. Just to talk with them, to sit near to them, to be with them, to watch the way they draw in the currents of the unseen like magnetic birds in the sky.

You are infatuated with untouchable whores when goddesses walk beside you. You are fed porn airbrushed Hollywood dreams and blinded to the reality of beauty in your everyday life, all around you.

While you are wasting your time idolizing sexuality, the sensuous numinous world exists right here beside you. You don’t need to reach out for her. Breathe. Look within. Beyond need there is knowledge, and beyond knowledge there is love.

To love a woman, to love women, to love yourself. Honestly, I really don’t see why there is anything much more important than this.

57 Responses to “Women as What They Are, Not as What You Want”

  1. on July 20, 2007 at 11:12 am1 meghean

    You’ve written a beautiful piece about women and love vs. mere sex. It’s incredibly refreshing to hear something postive about women that doesn’t include her ass and what men would like to do with it. It is poetic idealism. Thank you.

  2. on July 20, 2007 at 1:18 pm2 Marsha J. O’Brien

    An ode to all women and worthy of congratulations for it’s beauty, and for your insightful thoughts. THANK YOU for all women – mothers, grandmothers, daughters, girlfriends, and wives! Ah, if it were only so…..

  3. on July 20, 2007 at 10:59 pm3 tuttysan

    Some guys are missing out, but many have found what you and they are a delight!

  4. on July 21, 2007 at 7:40 am4 Simonne

    It is beautiful (apart from the untouchable whores bit, no such thing when every woman, despite her experiences and hurts is truly the goddess), thank you so much for posting this.

  5. on July 21, 2007 at 1:04 pm5 Suyash Pendam

    A very well written piece of feelings… well people like you are very rare to find.. Man ..you are a perfect human..and even i haven’t read anything like this anywhere else…..i really respect your chivalry..

    god bless..
    take care

  6. on July 21, 2007 at 2:18 pm6 Hawk

    A great piece of writing. I thoroughly enjoyed your toughts. Thanks for sharing.

    Until later….

  7. on July 23, 2007 at 5:40 am7 Andrea

    Oh yeah, women are definitely useful for things other than sex. You know, cooking, cleaning, taking care of the kids.

    I keed, I keed. ;)

    Andrea

  8. on July 25, 2007 at 9:58 am8 maddelline

    I am amazed of your story…If all men were like you there will be no more pain in women hearts, no more frustration and sorrow…but then we would have lived in a perfect world…and such thing doesen’t exist….although thank you for your thoughts….

  9. on July 26, 2007 at 3:58 am9 jojoyuki

    well said! )

  10. on July 26, 2007 at 4:26 am10 helen

    are you single?

    if you are then it is a SIN!

  11. on July 26, 2007 at 6:52 am11 mao_simpleappeal

    lolz… not all men think that women are sex symbols… like me… hahaha! peace!

  12. on July 26, 2007 at 9:26 am12 Bill Howdle

    Very well put, I couldn’t agree with you more
    Bill

  13. on July 26, 2007 at 11:14 pm13 tightbunny

    i like having too much of men’s attention but they barely see what is expected by their naked eyes..

    excellent writing,nice post and such an eye-openner to the men of the world..

    giggles**

  14. on July 27, 2007 at 1:40 am14 sarfrazkhalil

    i agree with you in toto man.

  15. on July 28, 2007 at 8:54 pm15 kaliedoscopeeyes

    well. that’s a breath or fresh air. introspective and just outright sweet. a very touching piece. thank you.

  16. on July 29, 2007 at 8:03 pm16 Aice

    Hi this is a very nice post you got
    i really liked it

    really hope the man i be with will have that Insights ^_^

    more love with men like you

  17. on July 29, 2007 at 8:03 pm17 Aice

    this is my link on wordpress blog ^_^

  18. on July 30, 2007 at 1:42 am18 dylanjones

    I came by accident on your post – but there are no accidents – as I was exactly at this crossroad, and just needed to read this as a consecration to what I have just been clearly shown and have experienced very lately. Thank you!

  19. on July 30, 2007 at 6:04 am19 ezigo

    Thanks for your romanticism. This is a beautiful peace of poetry. But reality is not that harsh. Men are not that ignorant (although to a certain extent they are) and most of the times women are the ones who drive the men to think this way.

  20. on July 30, 2007 at 5:43 pm20 Stuart Hobbes

    .

    Thank you

    http://stuarthobbes.ebloggy.com/

    .

  21. on August 1, 2007 at 9:13 am21 imogen

    very well written.. thank you for this. )

  22. on August 2, 2007 at 3:34 am22 The Secret

    Beautiful! Thank you.

  23. on August 3, 2007 at 8:00 am23 The Reason You Come

    Thank you for sticking up for women. Didn’t expect those words from a man.

  24. on August 3, 2007 at 8:34 pm24 bebenibadoodles

    heartwarming! thank you for appreciating the real purpose and intent of womanhood. i hope more men would come to realize that we are more than just sex toys and trophies that they can boast around with when they are with their friends. cheers to you!

  25. on August 4, 2007 at 10:53 am25 mayuri

    thanks from a woman!!!
    beautiful lines!!!

  26. on August 5, 2007 at 5:04 pm26 dovelove

    I agree with Simonne on the “untouchable whores” part. I was lovin’ it until that ugly reference jumped off the page. That was kind of a knife in the heart you’d just caressed. WTF is a “whore”? Something less than human? What about a whore-dude? Same thing? Why no ugly name for the type of guy you’re describing? I’d respect a woman who feels there’s no other way to feed her children than to sell her precious body…over the heartless jerk you’re describing. If we’re going to give wicked labels, I’d like to see him have one )

  27. on August 5, 2007 at 6:04 pm27 bubbler

    I think you’re getting a little hung up on the word “whore” too much in the sense as a derogatory slur towards all women. I meant in more in the sense of “a person considered as having compromised principles for personal gain.” Furthermore, I was attempting to bring to mind the image of what masculine society idealizes and objectifies as a woman–and this is what I meant by an “untouchable whore”—because this object, this image, this symbol is not a woman, it is man’s idea of a desirable woman. Does that make sense?

  28. on August 5, 2007 at 6:47 pm28 dovelove

    “…towards all women”? Oh. So, it’s just putting the appropriately-titled women in their place? Um yeah, we’re getting hung up on it like African-Americans get “hung up” on being referenced by the “n word,” I s’pose. No. They’re both vicious labels, that no human being should be called. You seem like a very decent guy, and I’m sure you mean well. But your own brainwashing by this society is coming through with that wicked reference to female human beings. Perhaps you should address this issue within yourself, sit with how you feel about THOSE types of women…and your apparent collective judgment of them. Consider referencing THOSE types of women in this way: “You are infatuated with fantasy images when goddesses walk beside you.” Ya’ see, there’s absolutely no reason to make this cruel reference to make your point. It’s just a hatred/fear of women that’s slithering out of your subconscious. Those fantasy images of women greatly contributes to this fear of women in men…we hate that which we can’t grasp or comprehend. This society has taught and continues to teach men that we are merely a fantasy, less than human… Women are an enigma to men, and they’ve been taught to fear/hate the female aspect of themselves intensely. Even your “goddess” reference continues this idea that women are fantasy beings. We are precious, and worthy of that “goddess” reference (each of us, no matter what our life choices are), but we are very real, very human, and THAT is what men need to learn. The first step toward that is for men to accept, embrace their own femininity…and be loving and not judging toward the “whore” within themselves )

  29. on August 5, 2007 at 7:09 pm29 dovelove

    By the way, look around, we’re all “whores” in this society by your definition…

    “a person considered as having compromised principles for personal gain.”

    How many of us work at jobs we hate, companies whose actions and products we don’t respect…companies that we know are polluting/destroying our world? How many stand up for co-workers and neighbors when we see them being unjustly treated …

    A man who lies to get sex from a woman (includes a helluva lot of men) is a whore by your definition. Money is just the middle man. We all compromise ourselves to get what we want, this society tends to push us to that.

    So all the characters in your elaboration are “whores,” why single any one them out as being so…because she happens to be a woman?…and her choice of exchange happens to be her sexuality. That’s a horror because this society has taught us that it is. But it’s no worse than any of the whoring the rest of us do in compromising ourselves, as we believe we must, to survive.

    In my view, the real horror is a government that feels it owns a woman’s body to the extent that it can imprison a woman who chooses to sell her own body in this way. Whether her choice is “moral” or not, is not relevant. We’re talking about freedom here, and a woman simply doesn’t have it…not to the extent that a man does. Write a fine elaboration about that and you’ll get brownie points from me ;)

  30. on August 5, 2007 at 9:04 pm30 bubbler

    I think you have already understood what my intention was behind my post. That you are getting riled about one single word and critiquing me as a person (”brainwashed”) because I used that word is frankly ridiculous. This is my writing, these are my words, and these are my thoughts. You have no right to tell me what to think or what words to use. I am not going to “edit” my piece, and I am not going to water down my language simply because it might be misinterpreted.

    And yes, you are finally getting my point when you say that most of us are whores by my definition. Exactly. What kind of world do we live in where we value money over each other? I am not singling out women; note that I advise men to “look within” at the end of my post. I am advising that for the very reason that femininity and empathy exists within men just as well as women. This concept is not foreign to me at all, and I think you are jumping way too far to conclusions about me and about what my intentions were in writing this simply because of one single word, which I still do not back away from using.

    Let’s not create senseless argumentation out of a single word, when I think we are agreeing on the fundamental values that are important in life.

  31. on August 5, 2007 at 9:11 pm31 bubbler

    By the way, I’ve already written on the “brownie point” exercise you gave me. Go here for that.

  32. on August 6, 2007 at 4:37 am32 dovelove

    First of all, I’m not arguing, I too am expressing my views. Or do you require that all your comments be solely for flattering you? ) Second, I’m not telling you to do anything, note my wording “consider referencing.” Also take note that I clearly stated that I felt you were a decent guy… I don’t lightly make such comments. I do feel you are very well-intentioned and appreciated very much what you were trying to say. But I still loathe the term “whore” and don’t appreciate when it is used to zero in on a certain type of woman. You even make the statment that it was not meant to be a slur “towards ALL women,” which implies that it is meant to slur certain women. Perhaps again you didn’t quite say what you meant? Okay. Again, I’m not arguing, just expressing my thoughts, just as you ) I’m quite calm in expressing myself here…and I never reference my opponent as a decent guy when I’m truly arguing ;)

    Oh, also, regarding the brainwashing. Perhaps I didn’t express myself properly on that point. I beleive we have all been and continue to be brainwashed by this society. Advertising, which we are continually bombarded with, teaches us what we should and shouldn’t be, brainwashes men into believing that women are a fantasy…burns into our brains that we are less valuable if we don’t buy this and use that… be this, be that…that we are simply nothing without THEIR stuff… Yep, you are brainwashed, and so am I. Realizing that is crucial to “de-programminig” ourselves and taking back our power from this mega-controlling society. So, no, I wasn’t just pointing at you as being brainwashed. It’s something we’ve all got to some degree. And even those of us who feel we’re healed of it in certain areas can still have that “stuff” in our subconscious. For example, it’s been shown that even people who loathe racism can show racist tendencies…how could anyone not do so, be so, growing up in such a racist world? The thing is we need to realize we have all this crap in our subconscious that may go directly against what we consciously believe about ourselves…and again realizing it is the first step toward healing it. Peace ~ Dove

  33. on August 6, 2007 at 9:02 am33 bubbler

    I am not asking you, nor anyone else, to flatter me. I am simply asking that you not insult me, which I felt you were doing. You are certainly free to express your views, however, does it have to be in a manner that denigrates my own views, such as by stating that I am brainwashed? Be aware that when you use language in such a way as, “Oh. So, it’s just putting the appropriately-titled women in their place? Um yeah . . .” just as one example, that sounds aggressive and challenging to me, so I felt the need to respond in a like manner. So instead of actually responding to the content and ideas in your comment, I instead ended up furthering the confrontational language.
    Anyway, to get back to crux of this discussion, to my usage of the word “whore,” if you look at the context in which I used it, I am not demeaning prostitutes or strippers nor any other woman that either chooses or is forced to sell her body for money. I was referring to this consumerist vision of women that we are fed (by male dominated media and economy) all over billboards, magazines, movies, etc. We have these idealized, airbrushed ideals of perfection, tempered by stick thin heroin chic models, that real women who are not perfect are not like. This image is destructive not only towards women and their self-image, but it is also destructive to men who desperately seek to find this untouchable, unreal woman out there, and will reject women in their lives in search of this unachievable barbie doll. I think my use of the word in that context is appropriate, when you understand that I was not denigrating women, I was simply attempting, in the starkest manner possible, to demonstrate what kind of unreal image men hold within their minds. Men want whores, they don’t want women. That is the dichotomy I was going for, using a denigrating word of what is not real to open our perspective to the natural beauty that all women actually possess everyday, all around us. OK?

  34. on August 6, 2007 at 10:03 am34 dovelove

    Um, yeah, ok, lol ;) Just kidding. Okay, I get ya’ on the “um yeah,” I admit that was kind of a jab. And although I do see what you’re saying, what you’re trying to convey, ya’ might wanna take note that I wasn’t the only one that had a problem with that reference. Simone also spoke up. And where there are two people who speak up, you have to know there are others who didn’t. Say whatever you please, but if your objective is to honor women, to help them heal, to teach men to hold them in higher regard, then you’re being counter-productive in that endeavor by using this term. It doesn’t matter what you meant, it’s how a lot of women will take it. I understand…and yet I’m still offended by its usage. It’s a repulsive word, right up there with the “n word.” Both of which hurt people just in hearing it verbalized, because of its primary connotation…because they are particularly unique words that have long been used to reference human beings as something less than human. And again, I get that this is why you wanted to use that term. But hopefully you see my point as well.

  35. on August 6, 2007 at 11:07 am35 bubbler

    I do, and I appreciate your commentary and perspectives!

  36. on August 7, 2007 at 3:18 am36 themusicologist

    often what we say is a reflection of how we feel. i’m not suggesting that bubbler has the problem first postulated but surely one should speak for themselves and not for the whole of mankind.

    bubbler are you a father, are you a brother or are you just speculating?

    love is how we feel and not what we say..and for me it sounds like a preacher preaching a sermon.

    don’t get me wrong this is not a criticism but a critique.

    I notice that most of the comments are from women, which is no surprise, but in all honesty the same type of generalisation could be used against women and their need for financial security. How many rich men do you know that have trouble finding a woman?

    so talk about love and romanticise and ladies please correct me if i’m wrong but in the words of James Phelps love,
    (in this age), seems to be a 5 letter word (M.O.N.E.Y)

    music is a more effective tool for communicating feelings than words. if you are interested check me at http:/themusicologist.wordpress.com and see for yourself that not all men have the problems you seem to suggest.

  37. on August 7, 2007 at 10:15 am37 bubbler

    To say that “music is a more effective tool for communicating feelings” is completely reductionist. Music is a certain form of communication, with its own particular strengths and weaknesses, just as written communication and verbal communication and physical communication each have their own respective strengths and weaknesses. To state that any one is more superior than the other is facile, simply because you are better at one than the other.

    I can play music too, but I sure as hell can’t say what I said in this post by playing my drum. Certain things can be said via music, and other things can be said by words. And if you are not one of those men with the hangups that I am suggesting (which I think hangs over the head of all of us in this culture, which is why I was “sermonizing” about it), then good for you, but you seem to have some other hangups here:

    If you think that love has anything to do with money, than what in the world do YOU know about love?

    If love is about feelings, then why can’t I communicate these feelings in words, if that is indeed what I feel?

    I wrote this post, and yes this sermon, to the man within myself that still is influenced by my cultural values. So in writing this to the man within myself, I wrote it to men in general. So as opposed to this being someone “speculating” or a preacher just preaching to other people, see this as me speaking to what is within myself that is within all men.

  38. on August 7, 2007 at 10:24 am38 bbZuSh

    I think every man in the world has got to read this. Certainly those who think that it’s only appearance that counts. That’s quite something you’ve written here. Beautiful… Thanks for sharing your thoughts…

    -N.

  39. on August 7, 2007 at 12:18 pm39 profeministmale

    Let me get a high-five, there! There’s nothing inherently wrong with sex. It’s fucking great. But, when women are viewed merely as a vehicle for one’s sexual pleasure, then it’s no longer erotic, but rather, misogynistic.

    As I’ve always said, “Loving a woman’s ass isn’t really loving her. Loving someone requires that you see them as human beings first.”

    There’s nothing wrong with loving someone’s ass, but if it’s the only thing that you love, there are definite problems with that.

    I just ran across your post, but I am quite impressed already.

    Marc

  40. on August 7, 2007 at 1:22 pm40 profeministmale

    Oh, and dude, you’re quite a deep and thoughtful guy. If you don’t mind, I’ll add a link to you on my page.

  41. on August 7, 2007 at 7:37 pm41 criminyjicket

    Just to be around beautiful women is a delight

    awesome….ummmm….a question…what if i find ufly women to be delightful? Maybe a big fay one with a mole on her forehead, and a few chin whiskers…

    is that ok too? or is it just the hotties were talking here?

  42. on August 7, 2007 at 7:52 pm42 Xatia

    if men think just like you are..the world is such a better place )

  43. on August 7, 2007 at 8:12 pm43 bubbler

    Criminyjicket: you’ll note that the whole point of the post is to question conventional notions of beauty (sexual) and raise awareness that all women are beautiful, for qualities other than masculine valuations of their bodies. They are beautiful for their insight, for their perspectives, for their vision. So to be around beautiful women. . . this is really simply to be aware of the women who are around you.

  44. on August 7, 2007 at 8:18 pm44 bubbler

    Profeministmale: thanks for adding my link to your page. I definitely would agree that there is nothing wrong with appreciating a nice ass on a woman. As you say, just so long as we don’t let that dominate our broader perspective and prevent us from seeing their whole humanity. Cheers!

  45. on August 7, 2007 at 8:33 pm45 criminyjicket

    oh..i get it…so i can devalue males now…cool

  46. on August 7, 2007 at 8:47 pm46 bubbler

    Huh? Want to provide the thought process behind that little snide comment?

  47. on August 8, 2007 at 3:41 am47 criminyjicket

    well, i have to devalue someone, and if women are out, maybe i’ll devalue cats. actually i’m not sure why this post hit me so wrong. Maybe it’s just that I can’t understand a thought process that assumes men think of womens asses before their minds….especially coming from a man.

  48. on August 16, 2007 at 2:00 am48 themusicologist

    bubbler,
    apologies for delay in replying..

    a quote

    “after silence that which comes closest to expressing the inexpressible is music” – Aldous Huxley –

    a great wordsmith I think you’ll agree.

    also for me personally Love has NOTHING at all to do with money and your comment is a good example about the fragility of words. If you read it objectively what was said was love in this age seems to be of no more importance than money.

    security seems to be very important for a lot of the women I know and by security I mean financial. Again..ladies correct me if I have read it wrong..how many of you out there would commit yourselves wholeheartedly to a pauper?

    “Why can’t I communicate these feelings in words?” I’m sure you will agree that a good education is a prerequisite and as this is not universal therein lies the answer.

    If this is what is within you then would it not be more effective to make this clear?

    I, for one, don’t share your cultural values or the western belief system so we will have to disagree. I suppose my point is that music doesn’t have the baggage of such values and is, I believe much more objective than words alone. If one can’t speak English, (or any other language) for example that would stop verbal communication dead in it’s tracks where as the universal language, (music), doesn’t have such boundaries and can be enjoyed and felt by everyone.

    musicology #12 http://themusicologist.wordpress.com/
    is a demonstration in the power of music to communicate a message….everybody needs love. let me know your thoughts and thank you for the debate…most appreciated

  49. on August 16, 2007 at 10:03 pm49 bubbler

    Words are based upon sound, just as music is. In fact, words and music are essentially intertwined. To write, to speak, is to create a rhythm, to combine and contrast sounds.

    The words themselves are not so much important as what is behind them. The feeling. The intention. The perspective. Words are a form of creation, expression.

    To state that one form of expression is superior to another is a very shallow perspective, when in fact at root all forms of expression come from the same source.

    As to your point that music is more “universal,” I’m not sure that I necessarily agree. Music too expresses cultural values and belief systems, and it takes education and understanding to comprehend different musics. As an example, to a Westerner who listens to gamelan music from Bali for the first time, all they might hear is cacophony and competing rhythms.

    I am fully aware that music is a powerful medium, and I am not debating that point. What I am trying to tell you is that it is ridiculous to state that music is “better” at conveying messages than formulating words. I play music to express certain things. I write words to express other things. I speak words to express yet other things. These are all different forms of expressing different parts of myself.

    If love for you has nothing to do with money, and you recognize that this is the true nature of love, then why are you even bringing up the point about women seeking men who have money? Such is not love, no more than men seeking women because of their boob jobs. Those relationships are based on superficial attributes.

  50. on August 16, 2007 at 10:05 pm50 jfctoledo

    well, nice one!!! Godbless!

  51. on August 19, 2007 at 1:54 pm51 themusicologist

    lets go back to the beginning and your statement:

    “Men, why is it that you must limit your view of women to that of solely sex organs, as symbols of your need? Why is it that the level of desire that you feel for a woman has no relation to your heart?

    look at it..

    again, I find it amazing that you can speak for all men with such recklessness but on the other hand that’s words for you.

    also where did I use the words “better” or “superior” ?

    those are your words not mine.

    finally what i said was that the same type of generalization could be used about women seeking financial security.

    look before you leap.

  52. on August 20, 2007 at 10:54 pm52 bubbler

    OK, perhaps I leaped a little too far to conclusions with your statement that “music is a more effective tool” than words in communicating feelings. That sounded something like “better” and “superior” to me. I will just have to politely disagree with your views on that matter and let’s discontinue that debate, please.
    As for my “reckless” statement, I wasn’t speaking for all men, I was speaking to a certain mindset within men. And if you would claim to be uninfluenced by this mindset, then congratulations, but I don’t quite understand why you would take issue with me speaking about it and raising awareness of these problems. Yes, one could write another polemic directed specifically at women and their own particular problematic mindsets towards themselves and men: however, I am not a woman, and furthermore, the fact is that we live in a world dominated by masculine perspectives and values. So I see the primary concern as addressing these values head-on.

  53. on August 27, 2007 at 11:40 pm53 rhosie

    it is a great post….. hope all men think also that way……

  54. on September 21, 2007 at 2:30 pm54 Julie-Ann Blackmore

    I have read most of the comments in this blog and it seems to me like you are competing, as in a game of table tennis or such like to have the right to voice your own truths. Surely acceptance of everything and everyone just as they are is more conducive to bring about peace on earth rather than the need to be better than, more intelligent or whatever than. I cannot understand why women and men should have any disconnection from themselves as the whole afterall we are all from somewhere and who knows maybe that somewhere is where we are all from. In that respect men and women have to be equal, regardless of what anyone describes themselves as. Is it not that we are all just trying to prove our worth instead of accepting we all deserve to live here the way we each choose without fear of recrimination for our actions or our words? Is this idealistic or merely the world we seem to all be trying to create in one way or another?

    Keep up the wonderful flow
    Love Julie-Ann

  55. on November 9, 2007 at 5:19 pm55 martysue

    Who would have thought that such beautiful poetic words would evoke such controversy? Come on folks, let’s not be so critical of every single word. Look beyond, and see the beauty of the intended thought. These words are not all “perfect” but then neither are any one of us. Don’t you agree? And if there be anyone who thinks they are perfect, let them, please! come to the front and let all us take notes.

  56. on January 6, 2008 at 12:29 pm56 pamelablog

    Hi bubbler! I have really appreciated your post and created a link inside my blog. In my opinion, there are men (and also women) able to build a dialogue with bodies and even with the intellectual side of another human being but not with souls and perspectives. During life it can happen that someone is tired or doesn’t want to go deeper or “beyond sexual need” or superficial knowledge while he meets a person, and this is not a sin. If both agree, it could be only sex or something very similar. But when someone doesn’t look within, as you say, in any case of his existence, I think he is committing a sin first of all against himself. Because, to love a woman or another human being, necessarily you have to love yourself.

  57. on January 6, 2008 at 2:49 pm57 bubbler

    Thanks for the link Pamela! Certainly it’s not a sin solely to have relationships based on sex. However, at a certain point, basing all your perspectives of a woman (or a man) just on the basis of their body can become pathological, and even demean the very experience of sex by subtracting the deeper potentiality inherent in it: connectivity, sharing, and a recognition of bodies as hollow forms of something extending far beyond. Definitely, loving yourself is the key to rising above mere bestiality

  58. **************************************************************

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: