Nudi-sex as a valuable remedy

Dear friends,

nowadays, I have been composing a text about the nudi-sex (= sex performed on the nudist beaches, open-air) and how to develop cultural applications from it. There are several of them and no serious scientific organization runs any research about this phenomenon.

[We know (almost sure) how and why this taboo was born. Retroceding, we can say: What is (or is not) science, it is decided in the USA. Medicine is a science. Medical doctors are of one social stratum with the priests. The fundamentalist priests in the USA said that the religious morality is THE ONLY way to combat HIV/AIDS (and the rest of the churches dare not say anything else). - And so, even the apparently safe sex culture in the Central Europe is not a topic for science, in spite of the fact that without any religious moral standards – and what is more: even against them - it brings excellent results.]

I think it will not be proper to release the observations about the nudi-sex outside my control to those who suffocate the safe sex with its better relax and sexual self-realization: the churches and the above mentioned medical persons who – undercover – work for them.

While all of us must "buy" the medical services (under their "product" marketing strategy, a strategy inconsiderate to us as customers) and while a vast majority of us bear a religious background, inseparable from our family-history, the differentiation consists in the question "How ACTIVELY are you engaged in the today's churches and medicine?" I mean mainly their reluctance to adjust their doctrines and step back from the obsolete and therefore dangerous chapters of these doctrines.

I insist in my rule to offer for free what can help to curb HIV/AIDS. Yet, it is just the essence of the establishment organizations not to assign any support to an alternative. And so, my marking out that the social forces which harm with their outdated doctrines should face a "cultural subculture" (a subculture profoundly cultural!) - so just this assertion is my relevant contribution to the HIV/AIDS-combat. The awareness that they should not harm any more – which is my essential contribution - I can promote (within the social networks) for free, since the fair and honest persons will support me, also for free.

What is more, I am afraid that the persons active in the churches and medicine would twist my honest aims and enjoy  then their monopoly of the presence in the public media.

And so, even before working out the applications of the nudi-sex for the systematic safe-sex organization (in the present time) and for the (future) construction of the complex sexuarium, I must find the people who would personally declare that they are not actively involved in the risky strategies of churches and medicine concerning the social approach to sexuality.

pavelgkozak (FB)

Concretization and perversion

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Elements of pleasure

I pricked my ears at the Euro-sexology Congress in Prague 2006.

http://www.europeansexology.com/congress.htm

In the end there took place a free discussion, yet still in the main conference-room, audience normally sitting. I put up my hand and motivated erection without Viagra. I said, there are about five methods which (the more completely applied) hardly will fail to induce erection by a healthy, well slept man.

A few persons asked me to tell the five methods. So, I begged them if they can guarantee me the copyright. They gave me a little smile, even an understanding one. And it is everything.

What does ensue from this little-big event?

For first, it is evident that pills are preferred both to erection and to the HIV/AIDS cure. They are preferred to this physical inducing (not speaking about "therapy" by a healthy man), as well as the safe-sex practices, instead of developing pills. It is one of the ethical failure of our civilization, near the argument of H. Arendt, we spoke about recently, here.

http://sexuarium.blogspot.cz/2013/06/the-banality-of-evil-by-h-arendt-and.html

For second, I remember my strange feeling (abash, somehow traumatic, yet fully logical and legitimate) when I was working at a music-agency and I learnt that a nice concert cannot take place due to the lack of money for the bus to take the orchestra to the music-hall. In the economy-mix, the fuel for the bus is one indispensable ingredient.

The musicians imitate the common jobs not to play for free. In the Music Marketing textbook from the USA, they say concisely that "musicians can play for free on such a party, where also the waiters are working for free". In this context, I must study more in-depth what is the idea of the Pirate Party?

In addition, let us understand what is specific for the musicians are full-time practising and that they are often used to be quite unpractical persons concerning the other spheres of life, well, even naïve ones. So their case is not of Father David Bauer ilk. A rank-and-file musician is not able to "win a couple Olympic medals as a hobby", because s/he is not able to read in Ancient Greek as Bauer was able, which is evident from his graduation and even ordain.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bauer_(ice_hockey)

Though I have the background and gift to write not only about sex, but also about the conditions around it and about the ethical standards of society, and even about the entire civilization, I was also assimilated to the corporate culture of the orchestral musicians. (I was waterproof against the Communist regime as an orchestral player.)

After all, it is the essence of any civilization to starve persons who criticizes it. (The civilizations namely prefer to collapse themselves. - And, indeed, it is even not necessary to directly criticize: not to pay lip-service to the leaders and not to cooperate with the corruptive structures, it is enough to cause poverty of an individual.) So, my ability to write is not proper for earning money. Therefore, I am in a situation similar to the Communist regime when the difference was only that I was segregated as a non-Communist. The thesis that there is a freedom here, is not true, since it is evident that the Freedom of Speech includes the other Freedoms, namely the Freedom from Want.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Freedoms

In such moments one recollects if there is some other source of potential money, and if possible within the field one is focused on. Yet, one is also aware that if s/he gives it out for free, than remains without (one of) the last resources.

If this was the case of the no-Viagra erection, it follows that I preserve the know-how in hope to capitalize it.

The know-how is not that revolutionary. Or at least its four items from five... We can see this or that hint of the elements in porn – yet, why we cannot cure our erectile problems on as many places as flu? Simply, though the know-how does exist, the doctors were asking me to tell it and intuitively we know it is not implemented.

The case of no-Viagra is but pars-pro-toto for (probably) many inventions which may improve our lives and could not be realized.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pars_pro_toto

So, it is also not true that the free market environment ensures that all ideas of worth will be realized. We can see that this environment hits its limits.

If I have died between 2006 and today – even, if I die before I upload this text – the no-Viagra idea will be wandering, returning to Gods mind, as it was – if Plato's dialogue Menon is true.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meno

In my perspective HIV/AIDS, it is a case of ethics. It is the case of "to be or not to be". Even if the scientist are silence, (probably) by their taboo, it is my duty to suggest what was born in my brain – and for free, too.

The elements of pleasure are another case. They belong to the qualitative superstructure. There is no ethical imperative to improve your life, just as you do not feel obliged to pay an ice-cream for me now: you know, I can survive without it. Therefore, the pleasure rightfully can belong to the sphere of commerce.

Or, at lease, some civilizations consider pleasure a desired quality – while the "female genital mutilation" is aimed against the ladies' pleasurable experience. So, while African population proliferates, it is in spite of what the white civilization considers one of the life worths.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_mutilation

And so also you have been living without some qualities, among them you are swallowing Viagra (sponsoring so the farmaceutic industry complex), instead of having some pleasure even while coming to erection. (...if you suppose, erection that important – which is another item or my concept, maybe worth another text...?)

Now, it is evident for us why I maintain the inveterate subtitle of this project "Ethics and Aesthetics of Sexuality". They mean the two perspectives, both present here.

In my opinion we can gather money with the pleasure to sponsor our ethical duties, cannot we?

Yet, it needs to coordinate our abilities. The next essays will be about it.

And now hasten to upload this text, lest I die meanwhile :-)

Promises and responsibility

Besides the two improvements the sexuarium (even in its native state of "alternative to brothels") contributes to the sexual culture and to the ethical standard in general – namely, the decrease of STDs and pushing away the criminal subcultures – it can train people to take their own responsibility.

There are two sorts of "supervision" in our culture over the sexual behaviour, both not enough efficient: the marital contract (resp. the registered partnership) and the police control over the brothels.

The police is at a loss how to control the commercial sex, within the given tools and the social "production-possibility frontier".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Production%E2%80%93possibility_frontier

The partner contracts are not specified enough, and if broken apparently, the sue usually does not follow. Well known is the model situation of the Indian wives who stay at home, and so it is evident that it was their husbands who brought HIV from a prostitute.

Unfortunately, unlike paternity, in the case of STDs we cannot tell for sure from whom was contracted the infection. So, the more it is necessary to study the human psychologism: our relationship between the drive to sexual satisfaction and the willingness to act rationally and altruistically.

Nevertheless, it is not inherent in mankind to live in dirt and to break law. But if there are no sharp borderlines and the only solution of an insufferable situation, many persons resort to the risky strategy.

If we specify the acceptable sort of behaviour and ask directly straightforwardly if one is or is not ready to obey a given rule, the persons are taught their own real responsibility.

Let us take the most typical case, the (oral) registered partnership.

http://sexuarium.nethdd.eu/sexuarium-model.pdf

It is such a case in which the children do not enter the stage, yet the STDs threat. It is proper to ask anybody entering such a relationship (or a group of people) if they promise the others to confess any risky body-contact with a person outside the relationship. What should be accented, that s/he can stay in the relationship (or the group), not left alone – only that cannot enjoy the intimate contact for the period of incubation, till the his/her health is proved. Interim, s/he can enjoy the strict 100% safe behaviour.

For first, this question is specified and the requirement is not extremely severe. Anybody adult and psychically sane can decide whether to take part in such a relationship, under such condition. For second, it clears up the ethical perspective on sexuality – up today (deliberately, we are afraid) kept in dark – and train us in our responsibility in general.

The banality of evil by H. Arendt and the HIV/AIDS-combat

If there is some logical error which causes victims in the real visible life, and if quite many persons act as if they did not see the consequences, then we should scrutinize this phenomenon whether it is (or it is not) a case of the "banality of evil" about which H. Arendt wrote.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banality_of_evil

There is an evident error in the position of the religious fundamentalists that the only way of the HIV/AIDS prevention is the return to the Judeo-Christian morality. The fault is in considering a biological fact as God's punishment: in the case of punishment, the solution is penitence, of course, but in the sphere of biology - esp. if we are aware of the cause (and aware that "God knows everything, but s/he does not say it"), there can be several ways of improvement – some of them indifferent to religion, another (as a co-incidence) proving that the timeless religious rules should be amended.

http://www.sexuarium.eu/religion.htm

And if we abide to the religious prevention, why do the American fundamentalist preachers that their religion is the only one which can speak up?

Now, we approach the banality-of-evil question.

1. The medical persons prefer both bear the image of scientists, but also to be on good terms with the religion VIPs, both eminent representatives of the establishment. They do now want to irritate the churches with such and assertion, that there are other ways to prevention, some of them beyond the religious morality. - So, the medical persons marginalize the non-penetrative sexual satisfaction: they are far from promoting it as a fully safe sex. They remain by the proliferation of condoms – which even more corroborates the penetrative standard as "the sex".

2. What is or is not science, it is (or at least was, before the economy crisis) decided in the USA. So, even the the territories with quite a good situation of HIV/AIDS are given lessons from the USA – though it is well-known that Washington DC has a similar HIV-ratio as Uganda.

3. If the scientists (i. e. the medical persons) say what is the only (or vastly the main) sort of prevention, so also the other scientists say it is the only (or main) prevention.

What is the question, whether none of them got the same idea, that we have no proof that a biological fact is a punishment of God? And so whether there can be some other ways to prevention? Or, if mentioned, why the other sorts are so marginalized?

The scientists do not dare ask (and statistically investigate) whether in real the vast majority desires the penetrative standard – while it is well-known fact that Orient has the deep tradition of massages, independent of the pandemic. The penetrative standard is namely typical for the less educated and more religious territories. In the military service, too, we can observe that the common soldiers speak about sex as about intercourse, while the officers with the university degree evade mentioning anything, within such a milieu.

Since the non-penetrative standard is more suitable also for the therapy of dysfunctions (which is known from the Ancient Persia), it is probable that the medical person – contrary to Hippocratic oath – do not prefer to popularize some "spontaneous healing", losing their income by it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippocratic_Oath

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_remission

In this complex perspective, we should consider if Arendt was true about the banality of evil, or not (since there are also the criticizers of it)? Rather then speaking about a conspiracy – which is used to turn its advocates, usually without support (the more if some persons consider HIV/AIDS a deliberate genocide), to fools – we can speak about much more comfortable and profitable "silent conspiration of the common interests". Yet, the result is the same: persons dying in vain.