lessdaomorebum

I went back to it a day later because one of the mods PMed me about my post. I have no way of knowing who did what, but what you say is absolutely, positively not accurate.

his: http://www.thedaobums.com/topic/41910-energy-transmission-and-sharing-a-debate/page-13#entry709164 mine: http://www.thedaobums.com/topic/41910-energy-transmission-and-sharing-a-debate/page-13#entry709172 His edit is reflected in my quote, days after I quoted him.

I am not talking about today's post. I am talking about a post from days ago.

Hello moderators: I now see your forum changes quotes to reflect people's edits. Liminal Luke very deviously edited a key passage in one of his posts that makes it look like he didn't say what he said. And that has changed in my quoting of him, even though I quoted him before he changed this! Poor form.

Even in the first two paragraphs of the post above you are primarily judging others you don't know. Do you even realize this? Stick to your own problems. I am not angry at you. I am not bullying you (as taomeow suggests) or attacking you. I am disagreeing with you. That is why is I suggested you leave the internet: you, an individual, clearly have issues that prevent you from rational discourse and need to address that. As previously stated, I am posting in opposition because you are talking about sexuality, a subject with most people are not even fully comfortable talking about with their lovers. If you said "I think people who like the color blue have past trauma" or other problems, I would not have even posted anything. I am sure lovers of the color blue feel no shame and are not embarrassed about their enjoyment of that range of the electromagnetic spectrum. But with sex, with views such as yours which echo society's, many people will doubt themselves because it is such a secret topic that they are not used to talking about it or thinking about it (i.e. not fantasizing about but thinking about). I am not giving mental health advice. Again, I have known more sexually 'modest' people who are screwed up than vice versa. Sexual repression is a powerful force for evil. That is nearly universally accepted in the social sciences. Congenial vibe? I have said please and thank you, have not insulted you in what taomeow refers to as ad hominem. I have disagreed with you and have pointed out where I see you as attacking others (moralizing).

No, but I am not really sure what you are asking, and of course this thread is already too graphic for some. The sensations, not limited to the back, though I suppose originating there, I would say are a way of letting off steam. My meaning is that they can happen long before orgasm. I suppose I would say they are much more noticeable when I am stationary. Not something I ever jotted down notes on! I guess when the body is in motion such subtle feelings are likely to get lost. Hmmm . . . will have to think about this in the future. I should add that it is not like these are strong or always present feelings. I know there are various schools of thought and lots of vocabulary about this sort of thing. However, I am mostly ignorant of the terms, as well as the opinions about what these sensations mean, how one should or should not deal with them, whether they are (energetically) healthy or not, etc.

If you want gentleness, then you need to be gentle. The things you wrote can influence others, just as you feel influenced by what is written here. That is what I am trying to get you to understand You are speaking from experience. So am I. I have known some wonderful women who are 'sluts'. Honest, kind, some with loads of formal education and bigshot jobs. But they all hide their slutiness, most of them not because they think it is bad (sex is not like gambling or alcohol or drugs!) or because they are acting out due to some sort of problem they have, but because they fear people out there telling them they are bad. Yes, some are also screwed up, but I have known an even larger number of screwed up good girls. Some people become doctors because they want to satisfy their parents, impress their peers, or make a lot of money. Does that mean that studying medicine is a bad thing and people become doctors because of past trauma or whatever else we want to make up? I don't think so. If you are speaking from your personal experience, then clearly do so (you didn't originally), but please do not assume other people come to the same place by the same route or from the same point. I had a whole thread on feeling chi where I said I don't feel chi. Most people there thought their experience must be my experience. Many were very condescending and judgmental, even saying things contrary to what I had clearly posted (telling me I hadn't practiced enough or needed to do a certain exercise). I said I don't feel it (though some disagreed with that in a well-meaning way that I understand). I genuinely suggest you should consider withdrawing from the internet until you have a better sense of self. It is not my responsibility to treat you in a special way when you are saying things that I know from personal experience that many find hurtful. In spite of what one person suggested above, I am not the bully here. I spoke to you (LL) because you were the one speaking. Again, you must take responsibility for your own words and actions when you say things such as: "People have astral sex with strangers for the same reason that they have physical sex with strangers, for the same reason that they might gamble or eat chocolate chip cookies or buy too many shoes: because sometimes, when life has really knocked you around, fragmentation feels safer than integration." "I´m willing to shake hands with almost anybody who cares to, and am much more selective about who touches my genitals. There are people who don´t make this distinction, people who allow anybody to touch them any ole way. To me, that´s sad." You can't look at a collection of shoes or a bag of cookies and say with certainty why it exists.

Can we stop here? You could have. You chose not to. This has been your whole attitude from the beginning. It's not about whether or not you and I agree, it is about honesty. You came here preaching your message against the supposedly promiscuous (of course with no definition given). Then you don't want to explain your views in a rational way. You have a belief system, like a born again Christian who tells me Jesus will come back to the earth someday. Some person here (one of the pantheon) sent me a PM saying I shouldn't make assumptions about intentions. Hooey. Long ago when I watched TV there was a commercial for A-1 Steak Sauce, recommending we put it on hamburgers because "What is hamburger? Chopped ham?" The commercial at least immediately gave its answer [edit: "No, chopped steak!"]. We all know what sex is (hence my sarcastic answer to only that part of what you wrote), so why would someone ask such a basic and obvious question? If we ask a question like that and actually wait for an answer, it is so we can take a standard answer and say "Oh, you are so simple. ___ is so much more than that!" This is commonly used by religious and New Age persons to stomp on the supposedly non-spiritual. Please notice that after denying what your intent was (perhaps only subconscious intent), you said that sex involves energy and expressly differentiated your view from mine. You walk down any street in America [edit: or anywhere else, including the PRC or Taiwan or Tibet or the Pleiades ] and ask 100 people what sex is. I would be amazed if even one person talked about energy in their answer. And in the very post you were replying to I pointed out that sex can have other things attached to it. Instead of asking me what sex is, you could have said, "I think sex is not just the physical act, but necessarily includes energy. Therefore, blah, blah, blah. What do you think of that LDMB?" What do I think? Well, even a chi numb person such as myself can feel a rush of chi[1] at the yongquan points shortly before and during orgasm, as well sensations up the back, etc, during the act. That could have continued a conversation. But from the beginning you had a point to make, which you made more than once in your posts: people who are promiscuous (no definition given, so I guess it simply means more sex than you[2]), have low self-esteem or issues from their past. It seems to me rather the opposite. People who can't function sexually (psychologically) have issues they need to address. Since preachers like you are ubiquitous and I don't fear public condemnation, I have for some years now called you folks out on your moralizing since the very nature of sex makes 99.9% of people afraid to publicly assert their sexuality, even on a quasi-anonymous forum. Because of my sarcastic answer to your question about what sex is, you chose to ignore the rest of my, dare I say carefully reasoned, post. [1] I use the term chi here to use TDB vocabulary. I don't know if it is chi or blood and nerve sensations. That is why I had a thread about chi because the chi-like sensations that I feel don't seem beyond nerve or blood sensations. I only entertain them as chi because others use that terminology for those sensations. I have yet to feel something, which some people claim to be capable of, that would make me say, "Oh, that absolutely can not be a nerve sensation or blood flow." Most people have delusional beliefs in god, lucky charms (or at least they eat Lucky Charms [edit: a nutritious breakfast cereal in America]), or whatever else. I am not a believer. I should have been born in Missouri. [2] Comedian George Carlin had a bit where he asked, have you ever noticed that anyone who drives slower than you is an idiot and anyone who drives faster than you is a maniac? Here is the exact quote.

Oh my god, are you uptight! I guess that's your excuse to not answer my other points. I am trying to keep things 'clean' here so as not to offend those who might complain. You really don't know what sex is? Sure, I believe that. Or you want to trap me into an answer that you disapprove of so you can reply that I am a shallow person of low character because I do not share your pseudo-spiritual belief system? Must be the latter since I have to assume you know what sex is. Sex is a physical act: anything involving the stimulating of one or both persons' genitals. Others might include things of a less involved nature down to kissing or holding hands. Sex may make you happy or feel in love or whatever else, but those things are not sex.

I will try earnestly to address your questions. What is sex? Go ask your parents! Tug vs shake? I don't like shaking hands. Seems like a silly custom. I like bowing. I do have certain parameters for who can give me a hand job, but the distinctions are based on my being a heterosexual male with certain subjective preferences in what he considers physically or psychologically attractive in a woman. I, to my own disbelief, have turned down hot women before -- because they were Debbie Downer types or obnoxious prisses. I can think of one woman I had sex with (on numerous occasions) who, had you shown me a photo of her, I would have said no to, but she was very aggressive in a gentle and flattering way, and very enjoyable in the sack. Then the question largely is is this female attractive to me? Or, if this female is not attractive to me, am I expected to reciprocate? The second question may sound odd or even inherently selfish to some, but it is not. Female friends, girlfriends, or lovers require much more emotional 'care and feeding' than any men I know. With a few exceptions (because I have known some 'very naughty' girls), I don't know any women who have an "I want sex right NOW!" attitude. All men I know have a NOW attitude toward sex, though I am sure on TDB there are those who are 'cultivating' and would say they don't. Fine. Point is that men and women tend to be different (Oh, god, I will be arrested now!). Society thinks I should listen to female friends, girlfriends, and lovers go on and on forever about their problems, but sex is 'dirty' so how dare I think I should get a tug or a hummer or the whole deal from a female friend. Some do, some don't. Over the years, out of self-respect, I have spent more of my time and patient ear with those who do because in general in life I have stayed further and further away from 'takers' (including in non-sexual matters). Of course, there all sorts of exceptions. For example, I went for a walk with a married friend yesterday. Even if she was attractive to me, I wouldn't have expected any manual happiness from her, but then again we see each other infrequently, again due to her marriedness. I consider married persons of both sexes to be in their own world, though I know some of them don't think of themselves that way. Will you hold hands with anybody? If you (hetero male?) and I meet in person tomorrow, we can sit in the park and hold hands, looking into each others' eyes? I doubt it. "There are people who don´t make this distinction, people who allow themselves to be touched any ole way by anybody. To me, that´s sad. Not because I think such indiscriminate people are hell-bent sinners -- I don´t think that -- but because I think something awful must of happened to them in the past, and that one of the symptoms of that something awful is promiscuity." You don't want to think of yourself as a moralist, but you keep moralizing To you it is sad. That's like when A says to B "I feel sorry for you" because of their attitude. Translation? "I disagree and feel morally superior." Have you had any personal friends or lovers who were 'sluts'? I suggest to you that 'good girls' have more issues than bad girls. They tend to be more psychologically dangerous and selfish. Why are they denying their sexuality? Sluts at least are sluts; that's already on the table. I would not marry a virgin, no matter how much I liked everything else about her.

Thanks for the thoughtful reply! Plenty of people who are "in love" have "bad sex" (that they don't like), or even an "unhealthy attitude" toward sex (using it to take advantage of their partner, not being giving, etc). I have been in public conversations with strangers (not about sex) where I have basically run away because I thought the other person was so weird, or in one case was too kind (long story) and I was embarrassed. People in "loving, committed" relationships can hurt each other emotionally either intentionally or unintentionally via sex, either the act or comments they make related to the act. There are also big differences about how the _average_ man and _average_ woman relate to and deal with sex with strangers. Here is something I wrote on another thread here on TDB this summer: As Dilbert author Scott Adams has said, "If men ruled the world, they could get sex anywhere, anytime. Restaurants would give you sex instead of breath mints on the way out. Gas stations would give sex with every fill-up. Banks would give sex to anyone who opened a checking account." (from The Dilbert Future, chapter 7, "The Future of Gender Relations"). BTW, I am being totally serious. Hence, my sincere and deep respect for 'sluts' and nymphomaniacs. I adore them. Lots of people nowadays are into hugging strangers. I hate that. Hugging is more intimate than sex for me. Sex can be purely physical for me (and also more than physical). Hugging can only be very intimate for me. When someone I am not intimate with hugs me, I feel like the huggers among you would probably feel if that person took their clothes off and then hugged you: creepy, too much. Crossing the street can turn out not so great or not even close to being seated with someone you don't know at a restaurant, but I still cross the street (for the same reason the chicken did).

Sex feels good. Anything in life is better with someone we know and like, but we don't moralize about doing other activities with strangers. Some restaurants might seat you with strangers if you come in by yourself. Is that a cause for moral concern?

I think that only software can solve this problem. If you can't have multiple, invitation only chat rooms, the problem can't be solved, IMHO. I have been in chat a number of times. Sometimes it was people engaging in a harmless but now banned energy practice. Other times it was random chat. Random chat threw me for a loop since the site is The Dao Bums.

Your wish is my command. Glad to make you laugh.

I have no idea what I am talking about, but it's not possible that you folks do either since there's so much different advice, so I agree with this guy: https://youtu.be/_VFxKiwKvYA?t=1h4m48s Cheers