Erotic Fantasy

December 4, 2018 General, Love & Relationship No Comments

This is not about any specific content. It’s about how to personally relate to that content, which should above all be content that relates to you.

People should be free as to the content of any private imagination.

It’s only by being free that you can get to know yourself, including your deeper self. Otherwise, meaningful things can remain hidden and unduly hardened.

‘Free’ also means: no guilt, no shame. No (self-)coercion.

‘Free’ also means: no chaos, no addiction (eventually). No irresponsibility.

Responsibility in this respect – your fantasy – is something that you alone can take and only in freedom. It is because of responsibility that coercion should be completely banned.

–– OK. So, responsible for what?

It looks like a vicious circle: responsible mainly for your freedom.

Now it starts to become interesting, because ‘your freedom’ is difficult to achieve. We already dropped coercion, but when do you know that something comes from yourself, from your depth, from who you really are, from what is integrated in your inner being?

When do you know that some fantasy is not driven into you through some single experience or ongoing situation that doesn’t belong to who you really are?

Will you not think back of it as “This wasn’t me, how could I even contrive such fantasy?”

How do you know that a fantasy belongs to you?

A simple answer: when you are able to think back of some fantasy with satisfaction and without shame or guilt. If you can do so while it also really feels to belong to you, then it probably does.

You can do the exercise again and again.

There is responsibility involved in trying to achieve this.

Then there is also responsibility involved in trying to do this ethically: not content-involved, but you-involved [see: “Ethics is YOU”].

It’s about YOU.

Imagination is always an occasion to communicate with your deeper self, to talk and to listen in freedom. No coercion. That’s primordial.

Only then can ethics become important. As it should, even, or precisely in your imagination.

‘Only imagination’ speaks of disdain for your deeper self.

To me, real ethics is always about your deeper self. Of course, that’s AURELIS: openness, respect, freedom, depth, and trustworthiness [see: ‘Five Aurelian Values’].

Irrespective of content.

How-to? Spontaneity. [see: “Spontaneity”]

The most difficult thing to achieve.

For instance: using porn may – though not necessarily – diminish your spontaneity if you let your imagination be invaded time and again by the porn. After a while, it’s not even your imagination anymore but the one of the porn seller. Not so good. Going further, you may become addicted to porn. A warning sign is needing ever more and harder porn.

That’s not an indication of self-respect.

Contrary to this, if you use porn as an invitation, it can let you come even closer to yourself

and to more and more multi-faceted pleasure

and multi-dimensional growth.

Eros is then genuinely what it always can be: a never-ending creation.

Please follow and like us:
Follow by Email

Related Posts

‘Here and Now’: the Fourth Time

This is the so called ‘here and now’ that takes place neither in the past, nor in the future, nor in the present. Three common times if you want: past, present, future. The fourth time hovers over the other three, as it were. At first sight it seems to be only about ‘now’ of course, Read the full article…

What is Not Coming from You, Flattens You

‘Flattens you’ in the sense of being apathic, without depth. ‘Flattens you’ in the sense of superficial. E.g. suppose a mother gives kisses on a sore place and she continues to ‘mother’ the pain with superficial attention for a long time -> she sensitizes her child for pain by not learning it how to deal Read the full article…

Whence Beauty?

To me, a world without beauty is hardly a world worth living in. Some tend to reduce beauty to an ‘evolutionary trick’ something like a mechanism concocted by nature only to lure us into existence and even more: keep us here… This reasoning may be correct. However, the ‘only’ is loathsome because it’s not the Read the full article…