"And just look at these men here: their eyes says it – they know of nothing better on earth than to lie with a woman."
As I wrote in my post Sex and Nature's Agenda, the physical act of love, at least among heterosexual couples, is really designed to make babies and that the pleasure derived from it, even the mere thought of it, is really symptomatic of nature's agenda that we do perpetuate as a species.
It is true that for homosexual couples, sex can only be recreational for no procreation can be achieved naturally through man copulating with man or woman copulating with woman.
That sex be largely seen as a pleasant form of recreational release and discharge for many people is understandable and even natural, to a large extent, - given how sexualised human beings generally seem to be - but that perception should not detract from the fact that sex is there for procreative purposes just as eating food is necessary for us to self-regenerate.
- Sex - generation (of foreign life)
- Eating, drinking and sleeping - regeneration (of one's own life)
I personally detest the feeling of being prey to lust and value my current lack of a sex drive as offering me more mental space for higher and more spiritual pursuits. I'm glad to be over my lusty teenage and early twenties years, women for me being more dangerous and risky playthings, so to speak, than drugs.
In addition, sex can wreak havoc in one's relations with partners in so far as sex with someone often introduces various neuroses in interpersonal dealing that true friendship which has not resulted in sexual physicality will simply avoid from the get go and perhaps for that reason outlive sexual partnership in many cases.
I have also observed in my own personal life that while I may have had a great sexual connection with some partners, the spiritual connection left much to be desired and vice versa.
Yet spiritual connection is much stronger and wholesome than sexual connection, outliving it by a factor of at least one hundred to one, and the fact that one may lust after someone is no sure sign that that someone will be good for one's spiritual self - in fact the reverse is more often the case, in my experience.
So, as I wrote in Thoughts on Aphrodite, Venus and her son Cupid are very pernicious influences on mankind, making humans fall for people who, while possibly great erotic partners, will be most damaging life partners.
In any event the goddess of sexual love and her filial acolyte cause no end of frustrated desire and disappointment when, as is usually the case, sexual feelings for another are neither mutual nor reciprocated, let alone of equal intensity.
My general rule as regards women I find attractive is to resist and fight my lust for them - except of course if they happen to be pornography actresses I will never meet in person and whom I can safely lust over behind a computer screen - and establish first whether I am spiritually compatible with them in the first place.
Therefore, a friends-first approach is perhaps advisable, in so far as the essence of a successful relationship should be based on non-possessive, non jealous friendship with its capacity for mutual respect, lively conversation and humour.
For friendship gives the other the freedom to be entirely themselves and be true to their instincts without the need for interference or control, friendship being in its essence freer of attachment/abandonment issues than romantic/erotic relationships where one is invested emotionally and neurotically in another person for what we want them to be and how we want them to feel.
While having feelings for another is not always chosen or deliberate, I do believe that such feelings should be addressed carefully and not overly indulged in one's longing for romantic union with that other.
I think feelings of this nature can successfully be brushed aside through will-power when they are in fact conducive to personal neurosis stemming from a fear of rejection or loss and interpersonal conflict with the person one has feelings for or with the person one should have feelings for but doesn't.