Vice List - part 2

On a different note ... I've been feeling particularly horny as of late ... again. And in as far as there are different ways in which I'm feeling particularly horny, this is a type of horny that doesn't translate into creative energy. It's more like ... rolling around on the floor touching my sensitive spots wanting someone to squeeze my nipples and fuck me in my pussy type of horny.
Rarely I get the occasion to then also go and masturbate - as ... it's also not really the "I really want to masturbate" type of horny.

It's more like a vacuum - that, in the ways it triggers my physicality - is, as shouldn't be too shocking, a craving for passivity. And it may be a good setup for this second part. Where, I feel like there are some things I could still go on to write about - but they're also somewhat vague and not really all that present in my consciousness - and so I'd need something more profound to really write off on.


This setup does thereby however take me like ... to a totally different side of the topic. One that, to me at least, has little to nothing to do with what I was writing about in the first part - though some might ... fill their own vice lists with this kind of stuff.

But then the question to me, or so: The one I would throw into the discourse, would be: But why?


It might strike some people as extremely odd ... how I could square some kind of insatiable sexual appetite with ... God or Godly things; Regardless of how often I might have written about it. I suppose ... there are plenty of angles from which this can be addressed ... though I for the most part am curious of how this [insatiable sexual appetite] comes into 'being' - or so, as an "inspiration" (third/second interview).
The ordinary criticism one might get hung up on would extend from a distrust over "the source". Like, how can I tell you that these invisible things within me come from the invisible God - if both, the beginning and the end of it, remain invisible?

A general 'bullet point answer' happens to be individuality. When expanding the topic enough, there are very broadly inevitable ... things that have to be reconciled with the living God. And that ... is one of those things that one ought to start disclosing for themselves; On basis of their own - until they "get there" ... well ... where we can communally tie things together. Which, yea, isn't all about 'insatiable sexual appetite'. I'm relatively sure about that.

Now, that may not be an immediately satisfying answer ... but if I told you that God told me so ... it wouldn't really change ... much. I mean, I guess I can see how it might do something for someone - but I'm also ... somewhat cautious of ... entering that whole "God's word" space of dogma. Well, mostly because I had to learn that it's really silly. I mean, if you want to take me by my word - well, do it! By those that are actually ... there.
To really just say: How? How could I give an immediately satisfying answer?
Though that's also beside the point now, isn't it?


Now I'm sure however that we've all heard the kinds of why's that people would bring up. Something something ... fall of civilization ... something something ... immorality and demons. But what if I told you, that this "God" is really just a figment of your imagination; As evident by the many ways in which various cultures throughout time and space would conceptualize this "God". Now, we in the west or more to the point: Christian cultures - have a lot of Christian material to bias our conceptions of who or what God may be. But ... well, that's ... maybe too advanced of a topic for now.

So, maybe a different example: Let's say you lived nearby a prison; And you heard that a really vile serial killer escaped from there. Everyone would agree, I'd say, that you'd be justified to feel scared. There are a lot of pre-conceived ideas that have long since become biases ... that are perfectly legit and healthy in this situation. And religion works in a similar way. If you've grown up Christian and learned that all the good you have is in some way, shape or form a consequence of that faith - contrasted to the wickedness and the iniquities of non-christian spaces - you would associate 'demons' to being like harbingers of doom that would attempt to corrupt the cohesion of this goodness that you enjoy; Such that anything which would or could conceivably corrupt this cohesion would be understood to be of demonic origin.
All that would however be an understanding that is stranger to actual life in an actual city. Like so is it just unreasonable to expect the kind of cultural and social cohesion one would experience in a rural environment to happen in a city. At the very least in as far as there's a multiplicity of beliefs that would first need to come to terms with one another. Yet would each belief take a shot at being the dominant ideology; Which would subsequently lead to many little sub-cultures that might co-exist without ever coming in contact with each other. What one so might see as "a corrupting, demonic force" is really just ... a consequence of the size of a city, in terms of population, and the emergent diversity - in absence of the proper tools to have any kind of meaningful, unified cohesion.

So, also, as everyone wants to be heard 'properly' - everyone needs to be listened to accordingly. And now you tell me if you have the capacity to do that!
On the off chance that the answer is no - you might feel inclined to just hold on to yours; As - once you understood the basics of Christianity, Islam, Buddhism and what ever the heck else there may be - you may yet have only scratched the surface of developing a 'proper' understanding of any of it. Next to your very own biases.


What I'm trying to get at is, that some sense of 'corruption' isn't really a good ... answer. I mean - one of the few things that Jesus did really speak clearly about is money. Money, according to Jesus, is ... corrupting. As per how institutions work however - large Churches end up, nearly by happenstance, accumulating money. And as per how we live our lives, we cannot really ... criticize that. So, what happens is 'complacency'. In a broader sense, the issue is that 'corruption' - the kind that would get you scared - is a symptom of change. Changes that cannot be reconciled with your way of life 'as is'. What can however be reconciled are 'different' ways of the same kinds of beliefs - so, Christians can get along with other Christians ... give or take - as the underlying biases the congregations hold share certain commonalities; And if one of those now happened to 'worship money' - they could fit in without anyone really ... 'noticing' that corruption having, with that, just been kicked into overdrive. I mean, the corrupting influence of money may have been there all along - inevitably - but not in a way that could be dealt with outside of becoming an Amish. But "next thing you know" you're all about voting for the worse capitalist politics imaginable (because, per chance, some "god fearing Christians" taught you that socialism is everything you should be afraid of).

So, to summarize: If you make an argument on corruption - be careful that the corruption you mean isn't merely the result of an unwillingness to change. An unwillingness that would shut you out from Godly growth.


Too complicated?

Well - there is; And everyone engaging in heated debate should get around to it eventually; What is called: 'false equivalence'. If I said: "All [your religion] are so evil because they believe in [something you don't (think/know you) believe in]" - you'd call that a false equivalence. The reason this would come up so often is, that we deal with these ideas in a sense of approximations that are probably mostly based on distant impressions. So, if you learn that AIDS is related to homosexuality and heroin - you're left with the impression that homosexuality and heroin are related. The reasons why either of the two is related to AIDS are however vastly different. AIDS and Heroin are related because people who share needles also share specks of blood that can carry AIDS - And AIDS and Homosexuality are related because AIDS is also a sexually transmittable disease. But Heroin and Sex ... are also things that straight people can do. Too complicated?

The thing is that there are many ... flaws ... with this world - and there probably is some statistic that hints at a vice that you're guilty of. Now, depending on your cultural identity - you learn to justify those. If you think you're good and righteous, you'd think that you're above it or that it's unfair to accuse you of such guilt. If you're ... dependent on crime you'd probably be more likely to call yourself evil - or somehow else recognize that crime as a necessity.

Is that a false equivalence?

Well - speaking of 'insatiable sexual appetite' ... there certainly are a lot of things that are wrong with 'sex' - and so it would be wise to isolate sex to only happen in safe spaces. Say, marriage. With that, you have a counter to 'insatiable sexual appetite' - which would by that understanding be the definition of an 'unsafe space' - thereby discounting for the possibility of living 'insatiable sexual appetite' within a safe space. While arguing for the 'safe space' is basically ... one of the primary things I do. Though, sure, I don't write a lot about STDs.


One of the main things I want to highlight here is, that ... well ... "it's complicated". To say, if you want a simple, quippy one liner as to why 'insatiable sexual appetite' is not a vice - it's really the first thing to know. It is a really good first thing to know about a lot of things. Thus, a really good first thing to know ... full stop.

Overall, I think, you should be weary of 'simple answers'.


'Complicated' is here also just a way of saying that there's lots of detail and nuance that is difficult to keep track of - with the implied 'wisdom' to raise the bar for the quality of what you're willing to accept. And that is the foundation for developing a solid realm of empirical knowledge.

Where - one is to note that I don't merely expect you to take what I have to say for empirically given; But that I believe that with enough caution spent on these fundamentals we'll get to common grounds eventually.


My truths are really just my truths. And how they develop among likeminded people ... that is yet to be seen. And how we approach each other across the fault-lines ... is technically even further out. We can at first approach each other on the individual basis, for sure - but would we thereby have little to nothing to speak of beyond that.
So - speaking of myself as a Whore is really just a fantasy - devoid of any real life context. The one most relevant thing thereby is to understand that I have "cultural inclinations", we might call them, that relate to my sense of well-being. And a lot of the negative expectations people would have in face of it - I'd say - can be associated to capitalism.

So, per chance, to think of supply and demand in terms of business - rather than social dynamics we have to manage.
I mean, on the one side prostitution is a matter of sex-trafficking and whatever ill is associated with that; And on the other ... well, it's really just a fantasy at this point.
The challenge is however not in making prostitution work without kidnapping/exploiting/oppressing people - but in figuring out how our culture works; And that may at first not really have a lot to do with prostitution - outside of some kinky roleplay perhaps.


And so we come back to Individuality - as it should be. I mean, I'm under the impression that topics can be structured into super-topics; The highest order of which is the one where things first 'differentiate' themselves from THE ONE. And within these super-topics there are ... like ... super-concepts. So is Individuality one of - if not the first thing that differentiates itself THE ONE; As we ... are ... individuals. And so are matters of individuality ... inevitably bound to align with the super concept. As it were.
It's like ... what certain things boil down to - before they stop being a thing.

Community, I'd argue, is subsequent to Individuality. It is maybe not explicitly a consequence of it - other than that it is composed of Individuals - but whatever weight we want to ascribe to individuality has inadvertently an effect on community.
But also does what we demands we have on community have an effect on what we may make of our individuality.

In that sense - it isn't a given that my sense of individuality would be of any meaning or significance.
Further is Community dependent on a few things that ... are beyond our control. Thus imposing insurmountable demands on the individual. And one such thing is the diversity of ours. Which is a way of saying 'individuality' - but yea, individuality ... in effect ... is above community - in terms of the super-structure.


So - normality and naturalness; In this context ... cannot easily bypass the matter of diversity. And in as far as diversity clusters into bigger groups; Any one would have a say on what Community ought to be. Sure does God on top have the more final say to any of it - as He somehow has to deal with the whole - which in a way also speaks of the individual interest in God's support. Or lack thereof ... depending on how you learned to look at it.
But if we look at the earth as at a ball - there's the question of why you should be concerned with how people live on the other side of the Planet, for as long as they're not really threatening you. Well - but that's technically a different topic that takes us further into the mingling and mixing. As that is another big topic.

There is then, however, tolerance. Which, sure, begs the question of what we should be willing tolerate and what not - but ... as diversity is the default ... from which the concept of tolerance spawns ... there's a pretty solid baseline for what to make of it. And it is in this day and age where that has become THE relevant question at our species - where the sword which Christ delivered ... does appear to come to its conclusion. For prior ... matters of diversity were, although possibly at least somewhat relevant, not nearly as immediate as they are today. But today ... not only has the world grown closer together, but - for the most part - has it also left us without much else. How we go on from here - inevitably requires us to come to terms with it. And sure - at least hypothetically speaking - are there two propositions for how to go about it.
Full on indiscriminate war with the goal of ethical cleansing to establish a fascistic mono-culture to dominate the planet - possibly resulting in some sense of endless war, possibly our own annihilation but at least a whole lot of suffering until the end of time - on the one; And peace and love on the other side.

And if you can accept that I'm a hero in God's plan of Salvation ... you can see this as a call for repentance. A conclusion to the chaos ... as an offering for a way into a better tomorrow. I mean ... one of the most pivotal things to maybe understand about Christ's return is the reason why He left in the first place. As He said: He didn't come to condemn, but to save. So - it stands to reason that God doesn't have much of a reason to return; Until like ... the extent of salvation has been reached. So, it's an 'us' thing. Saying that only God knows the time may suggest that He knows how long WE will take to get there, which doesn't necessarily include everyone - but who knows (I mean, maybe there are actual NPCs)? - and that us knowing when that will be ... isn't really helpful. I mean, what were the odds that we'd just be sitting there waiting it out? And thus, in consequence ... not really getting there?!

The way I see it, we shouldn't expect 'the End'. We should ... just make the best of life. And maybe hope that once we're dead we're - either not required to return or ... able to return to a place that isn't THAT bad!


Maybe I'm particularly keen on that - though possibly I'm not the only one!


But yea ... I suppose, that's me being done for today.
Have a nice one! [Why am I internally screaming like I should keep going?]