Does anyone know anything about a repressed libido?

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by johncmcleod
Maybe there is some credibility to what Ted Striker said,

Food and hitting it is always a solid combination.

[Tassadar500]

Originally posted by Jaguar
Yea, some people develop attractions by that age. It's not really anything out of the ordinary.

I realize, it was the same way with me.

[johncmcleod]

First off, don't women like to be put on a pedestal? Like to be treated like goddesses? I think I started doing that because some told me that it is good to treat girls like that, so I made it a point to myself that when I did get a girlfriend I'd do so, and in my imagination that is how I treated women. So maybe that is why I started doing that.

There is no such thing as a platonic couple. If you want non-sexual relationships with just a feeling of closeness between the two, that's what friends are for.

In every couple, physical contact and sexuality plays an important part. And the woman, considering she's a human being too, needs that physical/sexual contact for her own well-being as well.

Having a libido is perfectly natural, healthy, and good. People who have sex often with their loved one live happier and healthier lives. If you medically suppress your libido, you'll be unable to make a woman happy on the long run.

I think that is BS. You can have a great, romantic relationship that is platonic but beyond friendship without sex. A lot of people wait until they are married to have sex. You can't say their relationship until their marriage was not romantic, not valid, and not as valuable as a sexually active couple. Most sexually active couples don't have loving relationships anyway. There is nothing wrong about not having sex. You can be romantic and intimate without doing it.

Here is something I wrote:

Why the Libido is Bad and Should be Eliminated Through Medication
by John McLeod

First off, there is no good in having a libido. It is only an evolutionary mechanism that exists because during prehistoric times, it was necessary to have this desire so we would procreate. This is not necessary in our times, however, because if one can have the desire to have children without the libido. If one decides to make this choice, that person could stop taking the drug for that one night. People argue that because having a libido is normal, therefore it is good. This is illogical. Normalcy does not make something good. Lust exists because it is an evolutionary mechanism that is no longer necessary. It is just like greed or jealously. Lust and greed are two normal, natural desires (that are considered immoral by any religion, by the way) that we have because of evolution. But that doesn't make them good. There is only harm from them, though they are a normal part of our chemistry. All I am proposing is to get rid of lust. If I could get rid of greed, I would too, but there isn't medication for that. But I digress.

Anyway, the libido is unnecessary for relationships also. People can have great romantic and intimate relationships without sex. This is supported by all of the people who waited until marriage to do it. It can't be said that there relationships were not as valuable or valid. Most of those relationships were much more platonic, and they chose each other because they fit together best. That is why the divorce rate during times when people waited until marriage to have sex was much lower. They didn't choose their mates for lusty reasons, they chose them for solely the right reasons (how well they fit together, etc.) And importantly, there is a difference between sex and intimacy, which is why there is no need for the libido. Now one may argue that sex releases endorphins and hormones that make you happy, but this is false. All it does is bring you pleasure, which is not correlated to happiness. In fact sex will make you want to seek pleasure, which is an incorrect way to live. But more on that later. But if for some reason you still want to have that pleasure filled lifestyle, you can always take drugs that release endorphins and hormones. And it would be better to do so. It is better to use an object for your pleasure than to use a person. Each person deserves to be treated with dignity and respect, and should not be merely an object for pleasure.

Now that we have established that there is no good to come from a libido, why it is a negative aspect of human nature must be discussed. The libido is an entirely selfish desire. There is no love in lust. The two are entirely separate things, which is why eliminating lust will not harm love. Relationships are supposed to be entirely platonic. They are supposed to be two people that love and care for each other and truly wish each other happiness. The libido is entirely different from this. It is an entirely selfish desire. Both males and females have it, so they want to feel sexual pleasure. It has nothing to do with the other person. Though some may claim it is about 'expressing affection for the one you love' this is bull****. It has nothing to do with that. That is simply another name for the desire to ****. So the problem with the libido is that it throws another dimension into the relationship that is not selfless, it is selfish. No matter how you act upon this desire, no matter how much you care about the other person, no matter how selfless you are in having sex, the fact is that you have this selfish desire, and you want it. There is no getting around this. It is a selfish desire that does not involve the other person at its core. And this differs from the other aspects of a healthy relationship, which is why the libido is not a good thing to have.

Because of this selfishness, relationships can have major problems. Some people have a strong libido and then become too focused on the physical aspect of a relationship, which will eventually ruin it. Relationships are supposed to be platonic, not simply a means of getting pleasure. When someone (usually it is a male) becomes too focused on the physical, the other person becomes a means of getting pleasure (which is dehumanizing), rather than an equal partner in a platonic relationship. When both people are too focused on the physical, the relationship will definitely fail, for a relationship is not supposed to be about the physical, it is supposed to be platonic. Physical relationships exist because of pleasure, not because the two people are the best for each other. And if only one person is too focused on the physical, the relationship is doomed in a worse way. A disparity in the relationship such as this will cause it to fail, and the person more emotionally involved will get hurt. This is because the person too focused in the physical views the other person more as a means to get pleasure, which means the former will have an easier time dumping the latter. The latter, who is more emotionally attached will get hurt by this because she (or he) viewed the other person as an equal partner, and getting dumped will hurt a lot. So because the male usually is more concerned with the physical, the female usually is the one to get hurt. Which is why we see so many examples of this happening in our world today.

The libido also makes any relationships with the opposite sex much more difficult. It ruins romantic relationships more difficult (firstly because of the reasons discussed previously) because sex tends to mess up a relationship and makes things awkward, and on top of that, it can get messed up when can't please the other physically. The libido also ruins relationships when one person cheats on the other. Another problem with the libido is that it causes anxiety for those who can't act on it (like me). So much anxiety and feelings of inadequacy could be eliminated if it is eliminated. And the libido also makes friendly relationships with the opposite sex more difficult because of that drive in the back of the mind. Rather than a friendly relationship existing simply for platonic reasons, there is always that physical aspect that distracts from this. The relationship may exist for alternate reasons, and these reasons are there no matter what. It also makes the relationship more difficult and awkward because it is difficult to always stay friendly when you are attracted to someone. A simple explanation would be to 'go beyond friendly' but for me that is impossible. The libido can ultimately ruin friendships with the opposite sex because someone might get attracted to the person in question, and then the awkwardness and anxiety that comes from this eventually destroys the relationship. Because when this attraction occurs, there are two things to do. It can be acted upon (which is selfish and a poor way for choosing a mate, and I can't do it anyway), or it can be repressed. This causes anxiety and will ruin the relationship

And anyway, the drive of the libido itself is what causes most relationships, which is very problematic. Much of the time a relationship happens because two people are attracted to each other. But this is flawed in itself because it is not a good way for two people to become involved this way. A relationship is supposed to be platonic, it is supposed to be about two people who fit together well coming together. But relationships don't happen this way, they are usually driven by lust, and in the end, the two people find out that they don't go well together, they break up, and they get hurt. If there is no libido, the people can get together solely based on who they get along together, a better criterion for relationships. Our very system of finding mates is flawed. And because the libido is there no matter what, lust is an influence on how they start, and the only way to get rid of this system is to get rid of the libido.

Which brings me to my next point, which is that the libido is there no matter what. Everyone has this drive, and no matter how well they can cover it up, it is still there. That is why though people may have good control over it, these harms listed above will exist to a certain extent. Because everyone has the libido, and so everyone has some of these problems to a certain extent. The only way to eliminate them is to eliminate the libido.

Having a libido means you want to feel that pleasure, and this supports the Hedonistic, Epicurean lifestyle and philosophy that most people live their life by. Most people equate pleasure with happiness, which keeps them from true happiness. All spiritual leaders and anyone with good ideas on how life should be lived would agree that living a life seeking pleasure leads to unhappiness. This is because happiness comes from how you balance and center yourself and how you view the world around you. It isn't about getting pleasure. Pleasure seeking disrupts this. Once you get the pleasure you seek, you'll just want more. So you'll always be pursuing it, you'll never be satisfied. As the great Bryson Nitta once said: "Don't seek pleasure and avoid pain. But don't avoid pleasure and seek pain." So I can't avoid pleasure either, so the only logical way to detach myself from it is to just eliminate that desire completely. Then I won't pursue or avoid the pleasure. But all of this logic clearly become apparent when sex is observed. Sex lasts a couple of fun minutes. But there are 1,440 minutes in a day. A couple of good minutes is nothing towards gaining happiness. What about the other 1,300 minutes a day (if you do it a lot)? Sex does nothing for the majority of your time. In fact, it makes it worse because you spend most of your waking minutes pursuing those few good minutes. And seeking the pleasure only leads to unhappiness and dissatsifaction.

People believe that the few good minutes of sex during the day make you happy, but you are only happy for those few good minutes. Happiness comes from how you view and live your life for all the 1,440 minutes in the day, not from the sporadic pleasure you get occasionally. Now because of the sex drive, it makes it harder to live by this philosophy, because you have such a strong desire for pleasure. It is the strongest desire, and it is the one tangible pleasure I still have. If I can eliminate it, I will be so much more detached from pleasure and so much closer to becoming truly happy.

Now you may be thinking, okay, he has sufficiently proved that the libido is bad, but why not just ignore it? Why put yourself on medication that will eliminate it? The answer is simple. Whether or not the libido is ignored, it is still there. I try to ignore it, and I have conditioned myself over the years to be as nonsexual as possible, but I still can't help it. I still have the desire. I try not to think about sex, but sometimes I just can't help it and I imagine ****ing women. I either imagine ****ing the ones I know, which is creepy and wrong and most importantly makes interacting with them very difficult. Or I image ****ing hypothetical women. This helps (at least subconsciously) contribute to the cheapening of my view of relationships with women to a more lusty, less platonic level. It will make me view women more as pleasure-objects and less as people to have a relationship with. Thinking about it will exacerbate my pleasure seeking attitudes, and it also objectifies women. You may tell me that I should masturbate, but all of the problems I listed would be multiplied by masturbating. Even if I looked at porn it would still cheapen my view of both sex and women to a lusty level and would objectify women. And whether or not I masturbate, whether or not I ignore my desire, it is still there. All of the problems I have listed in this letter because of having a libido will still be there because I have one. I can try to release it through masturbation, but I will still have it in my interactions with females, and all of the problems will still occur. And anyway, if I masturbated I wouldn't be able to help it but think about girls I know, which would make me even creepier.

And on top of all this, if you have a libido, it must be expressed. If I was good with the ladies, I could follow my lusty desires and release the energy in the form of romantic relationships (which would be shallow and would still have all of the problems I've talked about). But I am not, so that leaves masturbation, which we have established would be a bad idea (especially for me). So what happens when the libido is not expressed? The energy gets pent up inside and causes nervousness and anxiety. I don't express my libido, so I am a high-strung nervous wreck who is jumpy as hell.

And finally, eliminating the libido will lead to good. Not only will it destroy the anxiety that comes from its repression, it will destroy all of the anxiety with the opposite sex. No longer will there be the anxiety that comes from not being able to perform what is desired, or the awkwardness that comes from interacting to someone who is desired sexually. All relationships will be better. All relationships with females will be entirely platonic and won't exist because of the natural, selfish desire to **** her. All relationships will be much easier, because that desire won't be there. The anxiety that comes from not being able to act on this desire or from repressing it will no longer exist.

And having no libido will help romantic relationships. They will be entirely platonic. Never again will a relationship be ruined for things such as: getting too involved with physical aspect, impotence, infidelity, etc. And removing the libido removes the lusty, selfish part of the relationship. It will make the relationship entirely platonic, which will make it better in the long run. And most importantly, it will force people to choose their mates solely for platonic reasons, for better reasons. They will choose each other never because of lust but purely because they fit together best. This is a much better method of choosing mates. If this method had been used, there would be little divorce.

And eliminating the libido will eliminate the greatest pleasure driven desire-sex. Conquering this desire (which can be only achieved by completely eliminating it, when it isn't eliminated, it gets pent up, causes anxiety and troubles with relationships, and because it still exists the pleasure seeking drive is still there, even when people try to repress it, which is unhealthy, they still think about sex) will be a great step in beginning to live a non-Epicurean lifestyle that is not based on the pursuit of pleasure. Without this greatest desire, people will have less pleasure to pursue, and will become more detached from pain and pleasure, and will be more focused on living a lifestyle that maximizes happiness. One that is about centering yourself correctly, one that makes all 1,440 minutes of the day happy minutes. And if the libido was eliminated from everyone, think of all of the rape and molestations that won't happen. Sacrificing the desire to have sex is worth it to save all of them.

Now by taking in this information, there are several ways one can act upon it. What I will do is put myself on the medication until I am married. This will ensure that our relationship is one that exists for solely the right reasons. If I have sex, I will become infatuated with the female in question, and I won't know if we are truly in love and my judgement of whether or not to marry her will be clouded. If I don't do it, it will ensure that we are getting married solely because we fit well together. I will encourage her to also take medication for eliminating the libido. Whenever we want to procreate, we will simply take ourselves off the medication for that night. Now other people don't have to be as extreme. I'd recommend either stopping the medication once the couple is married, or, if they aren't married and decide they are ready for sex, to discontinue the medication for the nights in question.

[Heerscher]

Do you REALLY believe losing your libido will do you any good? Maybe you should repeat for yourself a couple of times what you just said.

"I want to repress my libido medically"

"I think sexual desire is evil"

"I want to repress my libido medically"

"I think sexual desire is selfish"

"I want to repress my libido medically"

"Since I believe it is impossible for me to have sexual relationships with woman, I want to repress my libido medically"

"I want to repress my libido medically"

Are you feeling it?

Some thinks don't have to be argued in a rational way since they are crystal clear by themselves. One of those pieces of complete natural and self evident human wisdom is: having sexual relationships with woman is natural, and the desire of men to have those kind of relationships is not, in any way, evil or selfish.

Don't think of yourself as being different then your fellow human beings. Discover how easy it is to connect with woman, just by being a nice and confident fellow.

[Cyclotron]

Hear, hear. Sexual desire is not evil, and certainly confronting that desire won't make you "creepy" or a bad person - in fact, once you face it, you will be a much healthier person.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by johncmcleod
First off, don't women like to be put on a pedestal? Like to be treated like goddesses?

The women I got to talk about it with find it fun for a while, but horribly creepy if it lasts long.

And personally, I've experienced being put on a pedestal (back when my ex was in love with me), and I've found it very unsettling. As a human being, I have my flaws, and I feel like I'm deceiving someone when I'm put on a pedestal.

[Spiffor]

John:

I used to think in similar terms when I was a virgin. I thought the sex hampered the purity of a selfless relationship.

But since then, I've understood that sex can be a selfless act. With my ex, my favourite moment during the sex (which begins with the foreplay) was when I felt her reacting to my cuddling, when I gave her pleasure. It felt as good as giving her a gift, or as going out under the rain to bring her the umbrella she forgot.

Besides, you say that sex and love are entirely separate. For a great many people, it is simply not true. Many women will feel much less when they have sex with a stranger than with a man they love. For a woman, sex is really about love. And love wouldn't be complete without it.

I've met only a few women who had a relationship where the man couldn't have sexual relationship with them (in one case, because the man put her on a pedestal). They were very frustrated about it, and the relationship failed.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by johncmcleod
First off, don't women like to be put on a pedestal? Like to be treated like goddesses?

It's not whether some women like it or not, but whether this is conducive for a healthy romantic relation.

The answer to that is no.

Originally posted by johncmcleod
First off, there is no good in having a libido.

I think this is at least 95% of your problem. For some bizzare reason you think having a libido is evil, warped, unclean, etc. I thought only religious wackos would have such an unnatural view.

The difference between a platonic relationship and a healthy romance is there is a lot of passion in the latter. This passion is induced by sexual attraction to a large part. It is a vital component. You don't have romantic love without it.

A woman loves it when the man she loves finds her irresistable in every way, and it is very exciting for her.

[DaShi]

He is on the right course. He must eliminate all desire: sexual, material, emotional, etc. Only through this can he ever hope to achieve a higher state of being.

[Sphinx871]

Originally posted by johncmcleod
First off, don't women like to be put on a pedestal? Like to be treated like goddesses? I think I started doing that because some told me that it is good to treat girls like that, so I made it a point to myself that when I did get a girlfriend I'd do so, and in my imagination that is how I treated women. So maybe that is why I started doing that.



I think that is BS. You can have a great, romantic relationship that is platonic but beyond friendship without sex. A lot of people wait until they are married to have sex. You can't say their relationship until their marriage was not romantic, not valid, and not as valuable as a sexually active couple. Most sexually active couples don't have loving relationships anyway. There is nothing wrong about not having sex. You can be romantic and intimate without doing it.

Here is something I wrote:

Why the Libido is Bad and Should be Eliminated Through Medication
by John McLeod

First off, there is no good in having a libido. It is only an evolutionary mechanism that exists because during prehistoric times, it was necessary to have this desire so we would procreate. This is not necessary in our times, however, because if one can have the desire to have children without the libido. If one decides to make this choice, that person could stop taking the drug for that one night. People argue that because having a libido is normal, therefore it is good. This is illogical. Normalcy does not make something good. Lust exists because it is an evolutionary mechanism that is no longer necessary. It is just like greed or jealously. Lust and greed are two normal, natural desires (that are considered immoral by any religion, by the way) that we have because of evolution. But that doesn't make them good. There is only harm from them, though they are a normal part of our chemistry. All I am proposing is to get rid of lust. If I could get rid of greed, I would too, but there isn't medication for that. But I digress.

Anyway, the libido is unnecessary for relationships also. People can have great romantic and intimate relationships without sex. This is supported by all of the people who waited until marriage to do it. It can't be said that there relationships were not as valuable or valid. Most of those relationships were much more platonic, and they chose each other because they fit together best. That is why the divorce rate during times when people waited until marriage to have sex was much lower. They didn't choose their mates for lusty reasons, they chose them for solely the right reasons (how well they fit together, etc.) And importantly, there is a difference between sex and intimacy, which is why there is no need for the libido. Now one may argue that sex releases endorphins and hormones that make you happy, but this is false. All it does is bring you pleasure, which is not correlated to happiness. In fact sex will make you want to seek pleasure, which is an incorrect way to live. But more on that later. But if for some reason you still want to have that pleasure filled lifestyle, you can always take drugs that release endorphins and hormones. And it would be better to do so. It is better to use an object for your pleasure than to use a person. Each person deserves to be treated with dignity and respect, and should not be merely an object for pleasure.

Now that we have established that there is no good to come from a libido, why it is a negative aspect of human nature must be discussed. The libido is an entirely selfish desire. There is no love in lust. The two are entirely separate things, which is why eliminating lust will not harm love. Relationships are supposed to be entirely platonic. They are supposed to be two people that love and care for each other and truly wish each other happiness. The libido is entirely different from this. It is an entirely selfish desire. Both males and females have it, so they want to feel sexual pleasure. It has nothing to do with the other person. Though some may claim it is about 'expressing affection for the one you love' this is bull****. It has nothing to do with that. That is simply another name for the desire to ****. So the problem with the libido is that it throws another dimension into the relationship that is not selfless, it is selfish. No matter how you act upon this desire, no matter how much you care about the other person, no matter how selfless you are in having sex, the fact is that you have this selfish desire, and you want it. There is no getting around this. It is a selfish desire that does not involve the other person at its core. And this differs from the other aspects of a healthy relationship, which is why the libido is not a good thing to have.

Because of this selfishness, relationships can have major problems. Some people have a strong libido and then become too focused on the physical aspect of a relationship, which will eventually ruin it. Relationships are supposed to be platonic, not simply a means of getting pleasure. When someone (usually it is a male) becomes too focused on the physical, the other person becomes a means of getting pleasure (which is dehumanizing), rather than an equal partner in a platonic relationship. When both people are too focused on the physical, the relationship will definitely fail, for a relationship is not supposed to be about the physical, it is supposed to be platonic. Physical relationships exist because of pleasure, not because the two people are the best for each other. And if only one person is too focused on the physical, the relationship is doomed in a worse way. A disparity in the relationship such as this will cause it to fail, and the person more emotionally involved will get hurt. This is because the person too focused in the physical views the other person more as a means to get pleasure, which means the former will have an easier time dumping the latter. The latter, who is more emotionally attached will get hurt by this because she (or he) viewed the other person as an equal partner, and getting dumped will hurt a lot. So because the male usually is more concerned with the physical, the female usually is the one to get hurt. Which is why we see so many examples of this happening in our world today.

The libido also makes any relationships with the opposite sex much more difficult. It ruins romantic relationships more difficult (firstly because of the reasons discussed previously) because sex tends to mess up a relationship and makes things awkward, and on top of that, it can get messed up when can't please the other physically. The libido also ruins relationships when one person cheats on the other. Another problem with the libido is that it causes anxiety for those who can't act on it (like me). So much anxiety and feelings of inadequacy could be eliminated if it is eliminated. And the libido also makes friendly relationships with the opposite sex more difficult because of that drive in the back of the mind. Rather than a friendly relationship existing simply for platonic reasons, there is always that physical aspect that distracts from this. The relationship may exist for alternate reasons, and these reasons are there no matter what. It also makes the relationship more difficult and awkward because it is difficult to always stay friendly when you are attracted to someone. A simple explanation would be to 'go beyond friendly' but for me that is impossible. The libido can ultimately ruin friendships with the opposite sex because someone might get attracted to the person in question, and then the awkwardness and anxiety that comes from this eventually destroys the relationship. Because when this attraction occurs, there are two things to do. It can be acted upon (which is selfish and a poor way for choosing a mate, and I can't do it anyway), or it can be repressed. This causes anxiety and will ruin the relationship

And anyway, the drive of the libido itself is what causes most relationships, which is very problematic. Much of the time a relationship happens because two people are attracted to each other. But this is flawed in itself because it is not a good way for two people to become involved this way. A relationship is supposed to be platonic, it is supposed to be about two people who fit together well coming together. But relationships don't happen this way, they are usually driven by lust, and in the end, the two people find out that they don't go well together, they break up, and they get hurt. If there is no libido, the people can get together solely based on who they get along together, a better criterion for relationships. Our very system of finding mates is flawed. And because the libido is there no matter what, lust is an influence on how they start, and the only way to get rid of this system is to get rid of the libido.

Which brings me to my next point, which is that the libido is there no matter what. Everyone has this drive, and no matter how well they can cover it up, it is still there. That is why though people may have good control over it, these harms listed above will exist to a certain extent. Because everyone has the libido, and so everyone has some of these problems to a certain extent. The only way to eliminate them is to eliminate the libido.

Having a libido means you want to feel that pleasure, and this supports the Hedonistic, Epicurean lifestyle and philosophy that most people live their life by. Most people equate pleasure with happiness, which keeps them from true happiness. All spiritual leaders and anyone with good ideas on how life should be lived would agree that living a life seeking pleasure leads to unhappiness. This is because happiness comes from how you balance and center yourself and how you view the world around you. It isn't about getting pleasure. Pleasure seeking disrupts this. Once you get the pleasure you seek, you'll just want more. So you'll always be pursuing it, you'll never be satisfied. As the great Bryson Nitta once said: "Don't seek pleasure and avoid pain. But don't avoid pleasure and seek pain." So I can't avoid pleasure either, so the only logical way to detach myself from it is to just eliminate that desire completely. Then I won't pursue or avoid the pleasure. But all of this logic clearly become apparent when sex is observed. Sex lasts a couple of fun minutes. But there are 1,440 minutes in a day. A couple of good minutes is nothing towards gaining happiness. What about the other 1,300 minutes a day (if you do it a lot)? Sex does nothing for the majority of your time. In fact, it makes it worse because you spend most of your waking minutes pursuing those few good minutes. And seeking the pleasure only leads to unhappiness and dissatsifaction.

People believe that the few good minutes of sex during the day make you happy, but you are only happy for those few good minutes. Happiness comes from how you view and live your life for all the 1,440 minutes in the day, not from the sporadic pleasure you get occasionally. Now because of the sex drive, it makes it harder to live by this philosophy, because you have such a strong desire for pleasure. It is the strongest desire, and it is the one tangible pleasure I still have. If I can eliminate it, I will be so much more detached from pleasure and so much closer to becoming truly happy.

Now you may be thinking, okay, he has sufficiently proved that the libido is bad, but why not just ignore it? Why put yourself on medication that will eliminate it? The answer is simple. Whether or not the libido is ignored, it is still there. I try to ignore it, and I have conditioned myself over the years to be as nonsexual as possible, but I still can't help it. I still have the desire. I try not to think about sex, but sometimes I just can't help it and I imagine ****ing women. I either imagine ****ing the ones I know, which is creepy and wrong and most importantly makes interacting with them very difficult. Or I image ****ing hypothetical women. This helps (at least subconsciously) contribute to the cheapening of my view of relationships with women to a more lusty, less platonic level. It will make me view women more as pleasure-objects and less as people to have a relationship with. Thinking about it will exacerbate my pleasure seeking attitudes, and it also objectifies women. You may tell me that I should masturbate, but all of the problems I listed would be multiplied by masturbating. Even if I looked at porn it would still cheapen my view of both sex and women to a lusty level and would objectify women. And whether or not I masturbate, whether or not I ignore my desire, it is still there. All of the problems I have listed in this letter because of having a libido will still be there because I have one. I can try to release it through masturbation, but I will still have it in my interactions with females, and all of the problems will still occur. And anyway, if I masturbated I wouldn't be able to help it but think about girls I know, which would make me even creepier.

And on top of all this, if you have a libido, it must be expressed. If I was good with the ladies, I could follow my lusty desires and release the energy in the form of romantic relationships (which would be shallow and would still have all of the problems I've talked about). But I am not, so that leaves masturbation, which we have established would be a bad idea (especially for me). So what happens when the libido is not expressed? The energy gets pent up inside and causes nervousness and anxiety. I don't express my libido, so I am a high-strung nervous wreck who is jumpy as hell.

And finally, eliminating the libido will lead to good. Not only will it destroy the anxiety that comes from its repression, it will destroy all of the anxiety with the opposite sex. No longer will there be the anxiety that comes from not being able to perform what is desired, or the awkwardness that comes from interacting to someone who is desired sexually. All relationships will be better. All relationships with females will be entirely platonic and won't exist because of the natural, selfish desire to **** her. All relationships will be much easier, because that desire won't be there. The anxiety that comes from not being able to act on this desire or from repressing it will no longer exist.

And having no libido will help romantic relationships. They will be entirely platonic. Never again will a relationship be ruined for things such as: getting too involved with physical aspect, impotence, infidelity, etc. And removing the libido removes the lusty, selfish part of the relationship. It will make the relationship entirely platonic, which will make it better in the long run. And most importantly, it will force people to choose their mates solely for platonic reasons, for better reasons. They will choose each other never because of lust but purely because they fit together best. This is a much better method of choosing mates. If this method had been used, there would be little divorce.

And eliminating the libido will eliminate the greatest pleasure driven desire-sex. Conquering this desire (which can be only achieved by completely eliminating it, when it isn't eliminated, it gets pent up, causes anxiety and troubles with relationships, and because it still exists the pleasure seeking drive is still there, even when people try to repress it, which is unhealthy, they still think about sex) will be a great step in beginning to live a non-Epicurean lifestyle that is not based on the pursuit of pleasure. Without this greatest desire, people will have less pleasure to pursue, and will become more detached from pain and pleasure, and will be more focused on living a lifestyle that maximizes happiness. One that is about centering yourself correctly, one that makes all 1,440 minutes of the day happy minutes. And if the libido was eliminated from everyone, think of all of the rape and molestations that won't happen. Sacrificing the desire to have sex is worth it to save all of them.

Now by taking in this information, there are several ways one can act upon it. What I will do is put myself on the medication until I am married. This will ensure that our relationship is one that exists for solely the right reasons. If I have sex, I will become infatuated with the female in question, and I won't know if we are truly in love and my judgement of whether or not to marry her will be clouded. If I don't do it, it will ensure that we are getting married solely because we fit well together. I will encourage her to also take medication for eliminating the libido. Whenever we want to procreate, we will simply take ourselves off the medication for that night. Now other people don't have to be as extreme. I'd recommend either stopping the medication once the couple is married, or, if they aren't married and decide they are ready for sex, to discontinue the medication for the nights in question.

All I want to know is, what field are you majoring in that leaves you with enough spare time to come up with this twisted ****? It would be better spent with a panel of psychiatrists to prevent a sex offender in the making.

[DRoseDARs]

Allow me to be the first to welcome you to the OT...



...DL

[Sphinx871]

Whatsa DL?

[DaShi]

A Settler.

[Sphinx871]

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by Sphinx871
Whatsa DL?

I'm just messing with you. DL = Double login, a tactic used by people trying to get around having been banned (permanent or temporary) for some reason or another, or by people wanting to post something but not wanting their regular login exposed, or by spambots.

It is highly suspect when someone who has just registered posts in the OT. This is a hazing ritual, you'll see it some more...