SEX, SOCIETY, AND THE WAY OF LOVE:

Reflections on Honor, purity and stability

Copyright 1997 by Love Ministries, Inc

Worthville, KY

 

Sexual energy and expression are among God's most beautiful gifts, given through nature. There is nothing at all "bad" or evil, unclean, or "dirty," about sex. It is as natural, and as healthy, as breathing or eating. The problem with sex is that it can so easily lend itself to misuse or even abuse. It can far too easily become a master rather than a servant, and the results then are always regrettable, and often tragic.

In order to be handled with karmic safety, sexual energy is like the energy of thought or that of speech. We all have both of these other forms of energy, but no one with any experience would suggest that thought or speech be allowed to run amuck without conscious ethical and moral direction. Thought is fine and good, and so is speech, but without direction, both can move in the wrong directions and get us into terrible trouble. The same thing is true of sexual force; it must be guided by a mind that is firmly rooted in a larger system of ethics and morality.

To allow this energy to run rampant, and to always have its way, is not "natural," but excessively perilous, from a karmic standpoint. Thus the Buddha and other great teachers, including Jesus, although they were tolerant and forgiving in sexual matters, warned of the ultimate perils in allowing ourselves to be dominated by these unpredictable energies. All great mystical teachers turned their followers away from "lust," not because it was always evil or unnatural, but because it led directly to the danger of the false path of sexual obsession or mastership.

Every experiment that you can imagine, and many that you probably cannot, have been attempted in this realm since the beginning of history, from extreme asceticism to extreme hedonism; ascetics were often extremely morbid about sex, and feared it, insisting on celibacy; hedonists, on the other hand, gave themselves over to every form of lust and considered sex just another way to have a good time. But sex is neither a monster of which to be afraid, nor a mere toy to be trivialized.

Both groups had areas wherein they were not far from the target; ascetics recognized the enormous and real power of sexuality, to be handled with care; and hedonists knew that sex should not always be too serious that it could serve as a relief from stress and tension, and be healthy and playful as well. But each group simply went too far, to the extreme.

Why is sex so dangerous? Because it contains the potential ability to cause great damage and harm to other living creatures, violating the basic mystical principle of harmlessness or non-injury. For the ideal of not harming other creatures does not apply only physically, but mentally and emotionally as well. Also, in modern times, sex contains the potential of passing STD's, which can cause irreparable and horrible physical harm to another.

Sex is like fire; fire can be used to warm your hands, or to burn down a city, if it is out of control. So, how exactly is sex to be handled safely?

Many cultures throughout the world have evolved systems in order to handle this force in a safe manner, while allowing for full expression and freedom within this context. The institution that has arisen, in China, native America, Africa, and most other cultures, as well as the Western European, has involved some form of marriage. One purpose of marriage is clearly to contain and to channel the excessive energies of sex, to "de-fuse" it and to make it socially safe, as well as to keep it honorable.

Since we still have this pattern in society today, it is this pattern that the wise and spiritual being wants to incorporate into his or her life. Marriage serves as a convenient and publicly recognized social guarantee that sexuality will remain monogamous. Further, whether the marriage be formal or informal, it keeps sexuality in the realm of the sacred. Today, when almost nothing seems sacred, when the tendency is to turn everything into a kind of selfish game, when only what "I want" has any value, it is refreshing and balancing to see that those with truth and real love still wish to express love in a sacred manner. Monogamy is the factor that makes sex sacred; it elevates sex from a meaningless and trivial "game" or "recreation" to a true sacrament, which it really is.

Further, and just as importantly, a vow of monogamy allows one to share a special type of love with a certain special person. We who believe in universal love, who advocate it, must necessarily have a marker or identifier of the special love in our hearts for our selected and special life- or love-companions. The most obvious mark is the most spectacular: We reserve sexual sharing to an honorable sacred act of communion with ONLY a special and chosen love-companion.

For sex, in order to be of the highest quality, must be a sharing not only of bodies, what one writer has called a "feeble pulse in the genitals," but a sharing of lives, hearts, minds, and, ideally, of souls.

Also, sex is a concentrated, most intense dose of love; as such, it can be the most healing of all activities. Not only does it have healing effects on the cardio-vascular system, as a form of physical exercise, but also on the immune-system, especially when it is an act of honor and purity, in the context of a higher love. For any relationship that is serious enough to involve sexual sharing is serious enough to involve mutual monogamous commitment. Good sex is also psychologically life-enhancing.

Today, Western society is very ill, and can no longer serve as any kind of guide for the individual who seeks to lead a life of impeccable honor. It has become not only vapidly materialistic and stupidly patriarchal, but at the same time has become sex-drenched and sexophobic. Much of this complex of social illnesses has arisen due to the influence of Calvinism, general Protestantism, and Catholicism, all of which have strongly sex-obsessed and sexophobic factions. (Remember that whenever anyone is sexophobic, chances are very strong that he/she is also sex-obsessed, and probably cannot stop thinking about sex.)

In this confused society, bewilderment and rage often surround sexual issues, for people are still afraid to confront sexual issues openly and honestly. Even those who believe in the strong ancient traditions of monogamy might be afraid to mention this, for they might seem "out of step" with the "crowd."

But a rational sexual attitude implies that we need be neither terrified of nor obsessed by sex. Instead, we seek to handle it with reason and compassion and love, as we do all other major issues in life. That is why truly spiritual people do not make such a "big deal" over sex as do some right-wing sexophobics; for the truth is, those who rant and rave about the "evils" of sex are as obsessed with it as any satyr or nymphomaniac.

But Jesus, as one prime example of a spiritual man's approach, was not so sex-obsessed. In fact, he seemed to be somewhat gentler and more tolerant with those who were guilty of sexual traversions than those who self-righteously declared themselves to be "closer to God," or "holier" than other people. Among those with whom he had regular association, at any rate, the scriptures make clear, were "prostitutes" or "harlots."

This Jesus was able to do because he was free of the dominance of lust. The ancient mystical text says, "He may safely walk among evil who does not desire evil in his heart." Also, having found inner balance, Jesus was free of the "somophobia," or fear of the body, that infects modern Western society. And, once again, those who fear the form of the body most are those who seem obsessed with it.

They might even suffer from a kind of "physical dysphoria," or have uncontrolled bad feelings toward the entire material universe including the material body. This is bound to affect self-image, for those who hate the body with such rabidity inevitably are inhabiting exactly the kind of body that they hate. A large part of their soul-expression, in other words, is physical; and they cannot simultaneously hate this aspect and love themselves. Thus, self-love is completely dissonant with sexophobia or somophobia.

Specifically, a fear of breasts and penises haunts people almost as if they viewed these natural organs as deformities, as something of which to be ashamed. And, of course, we do not want to swing to the other extreme, and join those pathetic creatures who are overly proud of, or obsessed with, their endowments. Instead, the middle way is one of pacific acceptance, or a placid and serene embracing of that which is normal-- without becoming either hypnotically bound by it, or fleeing from it.

Some have well-founded anxieties that the force of sex can have disastrous personal and social consequences; but others are troubled by the existence or fact of sexuality itself, and it is these latter who are suffering from a kind or mental or emotional illness. Granted, that it does not take much to destroy the childhood innocence of seeing the body as a precious and beautiful gift of nature, to transform one into an angry and ugly sexophobic. But once one has reached a certain level of self-awareness, it becomes incumbent upon him/her to seek to regain the childlike or artistic appreciation of the body and all its members as beautiful works of divine art, gifts of the universal Mind, sources of potential guilt-free and honorable pleasure.

It is so easy to fall from this childhood state of grace because in our society the body is regarded as something secret, or dirty, that is to be always hidden, as if it were too monstrous to behold, too ugly to be seen. Some adults even want to convince themselves that their children are sexless; and there is in Christianity a stupid and baseless myth that, in the higher orders of being, angels are also sexless.

Still, the most sexophobic parents always monitor their children for signs of masturbation, even though no single act could be considered more natural. (Baby boys have been known to have erections while still in the womb!) As a matter of fact, while this subject is being considered, it should be brought out that there are two types of masturbation: first, there is a destructive, negative type, which represents the obsession with or control by continuous dominant lust; this is recognized by most people. But the second kind of masturbation is rarely recognized: It is the natural, liberating freeing of normal sexual energies. It is marked by the fact that, while a powerful experience, does not distort other areas of life, does not force the person involved, or try to dominate the mind day and night. It is a much more moderate practice, and, if experienced as positive and healing, might truly be so. It should bring with it a sense of joy and fulfillment, as well as of pleasure without guilt.

Such natural masturbation is often that which comes into the lives of children. But, far too often, children who begin to have questions about sexuality are ignored, neglected, or misdirected. Far too commonly, parents have their own serious hang-ups and are terrified of discussing the issues, as if they were unclean; parents who react with embarrassment give the strongest messages that sex is a dirty and unnatural subject, and implant in their children the idea that they are themselves dirty because they have sex-organs and sexual feelings. The experiences of countless fundamentalists who have taken this position demonstrate clearly that it is not only an unproductive path, but that this reaction has catastrophic results, that possibly irreversibly wreck the lives of their children. For these kids must enter puberty not only ignorant and lonely, but also with a hideous self-image, which cripples the hopes of any normal social interaction. Often, because puberty is a time of natural rebellion and personal boundary-construction, kids will rebel sexually, because they know the open secret that this is the one thing of which their parents are most terrified.

Some are also haunted by the ignorant myth that female sexuality stands against the civilizing influence of "male" cultural patterns. In some "Christian" circles, female sexuality is said to be the "original sin" in Eden, and thus the source of all human misery. No wonder that people who embrace such horrible beliefs can never have a good time sexually.

Far from being "satanic," however, female sexuality is pristine, wholesome, and holy. Among the ancients, some had the good common sense even to celebrate it, as in the goddess-religions, in the religions of Greece and Rome, the beautiful mysteries of Venus and Aphrodite were regularly celebrated.

In a twisted and phobic kind of mental illness, "Christian" leaders often called for celibacy, as evidence that the lower nature had become mastered by the higher. It is true that people who are enlightened are not dominated continuously by the sex-drive; they might, in fact, have less sex-drive than the "normal" person. But neither do they abandon it entirely, anymore then they abandon eating, sleeping, and other biological functions. Mandatory celibacy represents a ridiculous extreme, and is not embraced by those who seek the Middle Way of balance. Generic puritans, generic inquisitors, and other madmen in religious history represent the sexually obsessive nature of the sexophobic imperatives; interestingly, Judaism has its own historical parallels in its obsession with circumcision.

The twisted view appeared fairly early in Christian history. By the time of Augustine, who lived only about four centuries after Christ, sex was seen as leading away from God, as being antitheistic. Nearly fifteen centuries later, Sigmund Freud, who suffered also from a kind of sexomania-sexophobia, said that sex should be prohibited for "only fun," in order to encourage procreation. In Victorian England, in fact, it was considered healthier for a man to have sex with a prostitute than with his own wife.

Sex has always been an irresistible magnet for unbalanced and psychopathic minds, such as Freud's. Until recently, the admission of even using birth-control was seen as akin or analogous to the proclamation that one was morally lax or unrestrained. By the time of the birth of Freud, things had gone so far astray that female sexual pleasure itself was seen by many as a kind of "perversion." They could not realize that it was their own attitudes and preconceptions that were perverted. Extremist, absurd religious leaders even went so far as to denounce the "evil pleasures" from the pulpit. (In some extremists sects and cults, such as Jehovah's Witnesses, the females are still seen as being "subject" to the men, "as unto the Lord." This results in some fairly wild absurdities and terribly lop-sided relationships, as well can be imagined.)

How and why did these atrocities gain wide acceptance? First, men are often secretly afraid of women; secondly there were economic reasons for the adoption of these policies, and so some of the responsibility can be laid at the door of greed, as is so often the case. For, in older societies, things have to be passed to one's male heirs. Thus, the only reason for sex was said to be procreation, and the popular lie gained wide acceptance. In this grim view, there was obviously no room for healthy pleasure, or healthy lust.

This also gave rise to some weird idea about homosexuality. As late as 1867, it was a capital crime in England, because it could produce no offspring. And of course, predictably, this hateful stance was given religious support; as was often pointed out, Paul the apostle had more than a touch of homophobia, doubtlessly due to his primitive and conservative schooling.

Thus, historically, we ended up with the paradox that sex was almost never just sex; it always was loaded down with long-term goals, economic, moral, or otherwise. Sex was seen in almost a mechanical way, as a function with "realistic" and practical consequences. The fact that it elicited a plethora of complex emotional responses was all but ignored. Society, once again, adopted its usual motto: If the truth is uncomfortable, ignore it.

We now know that sexual activity that does not engage the entire Self, especially in the act and art of loving, is no real sex at all; it might be only a mechanical counterfeit. More recently, the seventies were times of dismal ignorance as well--this time, not ignorance of technique, but ignorance of deep meaning. This was the time during which "casual" or "recreational" sex was invented. The notorious "war of the sexes" complicated the picture further, and there was sexism on both sides. In the minds of many, a shallow biological view began to replace a more sophisticated psychospiritual option, and men reinforce the terrible image of creatures who could not "understand the depths and mysteries" of the sexual encounter. For far too many men, and not a few women, sex had degenerated into a kind of social game.

A deeper psychospirtual view, by contrast, understands that men and women are both blends of each other's energies, and both contain yin energies, or feminine patterns, and both contain yang or masculine components. No one is "purely" or exclusively male or female; in fact, the ideal being is one who can blend both energies into harmony or balance that is known as "psychological androgyny." In this state, men work to cultivate gentleness, tenderness, and sensitivity, while women work to cultivate assertiveness, independence, and strength.

In terms of the ancient hermetic views of the universe, not only tendencies and emotional feelings were ascribed to the categories of "male" and "female." For the ancient magician-sages did not see these as merely biological markers. Instead, they saw them as marking tendencies of mind and spirit or soul. Everything in the universe, from plants to planets, was divided into categories of yin or yang, including stones, flowers, minerals, and cities. There were four categories used: "Earth" and "water" were feminine; and "fire" and "air" were masculine.

Still, in average society, sex meant the biological function. So, it was a kind of reductionism to biology that oppressed people. In every society wherein there is extreme sexual suppression, that society must create outlets, for the sexual energy does not disappear simply because it is ignored; it has to go somewhere. The unhealthy outlet is pornography; in Victorian England, where a married woman's orgasm was considered "sluttish," a great center of pornography developed its own underground. But a more positive outlet for sexual social energy is humor; we see much of this in modern America. It is grimly disapproved of by the "ultrarighteous" fundamentalists, who secretly wish that the energy would simply fade away. But, then, nothing can really please them anyway, short of a society in which everyone is sexless. (At the same time, and in contradiction, one often feels as if their leaders would be as pleased by a society in which there were no moral restraints on themselves, but these restraints applied only to others. This is the old "preacher and the prostitute " scenario, now quite notorious.)

Gender roles, if not taken too seriously, and if not too rigid, can be convenient ways in which men and women learn to deal with each other not only sexually but socially. Augustine and Freud here made the same error: They assumed that everyone really wanted to be men. This is simply yet another example of patriarchally induced misogyny.

Sexuality, like love, has been abstracted in some minds where it is more attractive in fantasy than in reality. People who so idealize impersonal sex must be careful not to become enslaved to pictorial and other forms of pornography, which can be a terrible master.

Another dangerous extreme, which is equally antiagapic (against love), is the belief that men and women are so polarized that effective communication between the sexes is impossible. Usually people who embrace this damaging tenet do so because of bad experiences or poor relationships, and are often deeply bitter about bonding. Those who swallow the stupid line that men are from "Mars" and women from "Venus" are often expressing a serious but subtle prejudice just as destructive as any other form of bigotry or prejudice.

The truth revealed by biochemical and neurological studies, however, is that women and men share much more in common than they manifest as differences. Biochemically and psychochemically, they operate from basically the very same systems; thus, some men are more "feminine," and some women more "masculine." But in the average, men are from earth, and women are from earth. The need is to come together in communication, mutual respect, equality, and love, NOT to emphasize the differences in a destructive, divisive manner.

Nor are human beings alone in the possession of a strongly sexual consciousness. Studies show that cetaceans, elephants, and primates also share this characteristic. A strong, but not overwhelming, sexual appetite is, in both men and women, a sign of mental health and psychospiritual well-being, and should not be discouraged automatically, as is often the case with religious and social leaders, as well as a few in the psychological arts.

For sexuality is a good barometer of one's total psychology. One will tend to be judgmental, rigid, inflexible, or tolerant, open, and love-based, accepting other creatures as they are.

Further, a healthy psychology will focus on larger issues, and not get "hung up" in the genitals. Sex is only a part of an ongoing psychological world-view and a relationship-pattern. It says very much about how we relate to ourselves and to other living beings.

Here, religious fundamentalism can never serve as a reliable, objective guide. For it is itself the result of unconscious sexual hang-ups and misperceptions. Perhaps most importantly, extreme-right fundamentalism is always misogynistic; a deep, very hidden, secret hatred of women, arising from fear, always pervades these insecure philosophies, and is often reflected horribly in their "all-male" god-image. That is, they worship a god of cruelty, vengeance, jealousy, favoritism, insecurity, and hatred, who himself barely tolerates females, and who has been historically stripped of all the fine, redeeming, virtuous qualities of female psychology. This sterile, arid, uncompassionate deity, the "Jehovah-myth", has caused disastrous and immeasurable damage to the social fabric of our culture, and needs to be replaced by a God better suited to the twenty-first century AD rather than the twenty first century BC.

By strong contrast, the faiths that have venerated the life-force as positive and beautiful have tended to elevate the very best in psychology-- most importantly, love, tenderness, gentleness, forgiveness, compassion, and kindness. These more adult, mature faiths have emphasized that God is also Goddess, and have also held human sexual energy in a high and literal state of "veneration" (for this word shares a root with "Venus," the goddess of love and beauty).

So, the spiritually developed person sees sexuality, limited to its fullest and most positive expression in monogamy, as virtuous, not perverse. Further, the standard religious dogma that people need to be controlled rigidly by some church-hierarchy of priests, pastors, and elders is based upon the ridiculous assumption that all people are mentally and morally weak morons, who must have their most important and crucial spiritual decisions made for them by others; these others, these priests and elders, see themselves as superior, as the voice of God, undeniable and unquestionable.

Sexuality is often avoided by insecure people for the same reason that eye-contact is avoided: They do not want others to see into their souls. In real sexual sharing, most masks are completely stripped off. Here, there are no special uniforms or accoutrements to mark off one person as superior to another, and illusions fall away and dissolve.

In its highest and most pristine form, sex can be an expression of the most vivid and intense love. When it arises to the point of this kind of expression it is the most holy, most glorious, most fun and playful, most profoundly intense, experience imaginable. In this context, desire is not a barrier to the will of God, but an expression of it. For to desire with honorable sexuality is to live out the very will of Love in nature. And the will of Love is not only welcomed, but cultivated by the mystic.

As in all areas, meaning depends largely upon intent. That is why it is so dangerous to judge others in this area. Condemning people for behavior might be simply an excuse for turning them into objects, or as a refraction of self-condemnation. So, let us accept one another, and seek to live together in love and peace, allowing sex to be the one sacred area of life shared in a special manner only with a chosen love-companion. In this way alone, people have discovered, they can live together and work in harmony, breathing the spirit of love into all the activities of life.

 

**********************************************

Home · Products · Affiliates · Search