Endless Ends

[Apisto42]

The ethics of fantasizing.

This came up in conversation the other day and I'm still mulling it over. Specifically, fantasying about an ex.

It could fall under the umbrella of fantasying about strangers or celebrities, which, as long as one is not moving into the stalker category, seems . . . not too problematic.

I suppose, it might depend on the terms the relationship ended.

Amicable. A general moving on due to the possibilities being exhausted. Then, possibly not an issue.

But, what about relationships that haven't ended on those terms? What are the ethics of fantasizing about someone who might actively not want to be . . . an object of affection?

That situation seems more questionable.

True, strangers or celebrities might not want to be fantasized about, either, but - previous partners are people you know/have known. There is a relationship there. You would have intimate knowledge, and more of an ethical obligation.

Is this too fastidious a line of thinking?

I'm not sure . . . .


S'okay. I live in a state of perpetual confusion.

Hm. I have fantasized to a memory of particularly good sex with an ex. It’s my memory.

Maybe not what you’re talking about though. I did make a comment a couple weeks ago that it kinda gave me the ick to fantasize about celebrities so with that acknowledgement:

If you had a sexual relationship in the past, I do not see any problem with an occasional fantasy (though I throughly appreciate @AngelicaS1780 points). We’re human, with memories. It’s okay to remember good things, exciting things and be turned on/grateful/happy.

It’s actually helpful in some ways to fantasize about different endings to examine how you might have done things better with the experience you’ve gained since that relationship ended.

 

[chris_ss]

The ethics of fantasizing.

This came up in conversation the other day and I'm still mulling it over. Specifically, fantasying about an ex.

I did this, not recently, but many times before, especially after a sad break up. It's not something I am proud of, but I don't see something I would be ashamed either.

I am assuming that question is to fantasize by just yourself, we would all accept that sharing it with someone else is insane and totally off the table.

But then, first, that's kind of a consoling for myself by remembering happy moments with someone. Second, those memories belongs to me as much as the other person. So, who can take them away from me?

Finally, I don't feel like doing it, if I know/find out that she is with someone else. Not because I forbid myself due to some ethical principals, but I just don't feel like anymore. In time, we grow into this mindset where past is past I guess.

The other angle is a black mirror episode that some may recall about this matter, but I will not get into that, since it is a bit ugly.

 

[Endless_Night]

It’s okay to remember good things, exciting things and be turned on/grateful/happy.

I like this.

It’s actually helpful in some ways to fantasize about different endings to examine how you might have done things better with the experience you’ve gained since that relationship ended.

Also this, in abstract. But I'm not sure that I see how it relates to sex.

But then, first, that's kind of a consoling for myself by remembering happy moments with someone. Second, those memories belongs to me as much as the other person. So, who can take them away from me?

Excellent point, and one that had not crossed my mind.

Finally, I don't feel like doing it, if I know/find out that she is with someone else.

I think this might kill it for me.

 

[AngelicaS1780]

If you had a sexual relationship in the past, I do not see any problem with an occasional fantasy (though I throughly appreciate @AngelicaS1780 points). We’re human, with memories. It’s okay to remember good things, exciting things and be turned on/grateful/happy.

This is pretty much how I feel about it. I also think there's a huge difference between an ex being someone you were with... oh lord... 35 years ago and someone with whom you've just ended a relationship. I have some incredibly sexy memories from my college days and have no qualms about recalling them from time to time.

 

[Endless_Night]

Okay. And since I seem to be on a mentally wandering roll -

Why did intellectualism fall out of the definition of being manly?

(Muscles and I discussed this somewhere back in the thread, I think.)

It used to be an integral part* of the meaning, but somehow seemed to have been pushed to the background in favor of physical pursuits and prowess. Not that those things aren't relevant, but surely do not exist as the whole.

Outright aggression seems to have jumped to the fore, as well, which interests me not.

I don't mean merely cerebral or general intelligence. What about emotional intelligence, and practical/creative intelligence?

You know, someone who can fix a burst pipe. Do math equations in their head. Discuss the simplicity yet weightiness of Blake's verse. Extrapolate societal changes and their impact on genetic drift.

All at the same time.

Okay. Maybe not all at the same time.

But, why isn't a well balanced intellectualism considered a prerequisite for manliness anymore?

I don't get it. It should be.

I leave out Social Intelligence. Not because it's not valuable, but because it's not something I really understand.

*I know this because much of my reading is books 75+ years or more.

 

[LadyLascivious1]

The ethics of fantasizing.

This came up in conversation the other day and I'm still mulling it over. Specifically, fantasying about an

This is a fun one to consider!

ex.

It could fall under the umbrella of fantasying about strangers or celebrities, which, as long as one is not moving into the stalker category, seems . . . not too problematic.

I actually never fantasize about celebrities. There’s nothing there that does it for me. I need some connection or spark.

I’m way more likely to conjure up someone entirely fictional based on a story I read. Or maybe even an idea/dream I had. On occasion there’s a missed connection type scenario and I might fantasize about that playing out differently.

I suppose, it might depend on the terms the relationship ended.

Amicable. A general moving on due to the possibilities being exhausted. Then, possibly not an issue.

Most of mine fall into this category.

But, what about relationships that haven't ended on those terms? What are the ethics of fantasizing about someone who might actively not want to be . . . an object of affection?

Even if the ending isn’t ideal, it doesn’t negate great fucking sex. I can think of at least one example where it took a bit for us to get past some hurt feelings.

That situation seems more questionable.

True, strangers or celebrities might not want to be fantasized about, either, but - previous partners are people you know/have known. There is a relationship there. You would have intimate knowledge, and more of an ethical obligation.

Is this too fastidious a line of thinking?

I'm not sure . . . .


S'okay. I live in a state of perpetual confusion.

After contemplating this, I exclusively fantasize about great sex with people I still have very positive or generally positive feelings for. I’m not going back to emotionally charged situations, average sex, or trying to rewrite history.

I think about the really hot sex that I’m pretty sure we would still high-five each other over. There’s a reason I’m remembering it - it was so good it can still get me over the edge, it was hot and I’m fantasizing about taking it a step further, it’s such an arousing memory that it plays incredibly well as part of a different fantasy.

I don’t feel bad about it at all. They’re my experiences and happy memories and they certainly aren’t harming me or those who were involved. I’m fine if I pop up in their fantasies sometimes too. And it’s not out of the question that there are a few that we both reach for the same memory at times. It kind of makes me smile.

I’m also fairly confident if I asked them about it, none of them would mind that on occasion they still get thought of fondly in that way.

 

[LaisDeMarieDeFrance]

If I tell a man I'm a serial eater and he responds with his favorite cereal, it's a boner killer.

 

[LadyLascivious1]

Okay. And since I seem to be on a mentally wandering roll -

Why did intellectualism fall out of the definition of being manly?

(Muscles and I discussed this somewhere back in the thread, I think.)

It used to be an integral part* of the meaning, but somehow seemed to have been pushed to the background in favor of physical pursuits and prowess. Not that those things aren't relevant, but surely do not exist as the whole.

Outright aggression seems to have jumped to the fore, as well, which interests me not.

I don't mean merely cerebral or general intelligence. What about emotional intelligence, and practical/creative intelligence?

You know, someone who can fix a burst pipe. Do math equations in their head. Discuss the simplicity yet weightiness of Blake's verse. Extrapolate societal changes and their impact on genetic drift.

All at the same time.

Okay. Maybe not all at the same time.

But, why isn't a well balanced intellectualism considered a prerequisite for manliness anymore?

I don't get it. It should be.

I leave out Social Intelligence. Not because it's not valuable, but because it's not something I really understand.

*I know this because much of my reading is books 75+ years or more.

I have almost zero interest in what tends to currently define masculinity or femininity.

I grew up in a household like you are describing: intellectual brilliance, emotional maturity, stellar communication, creativity, sense of humor, practicality, kindness, and self reliance all defined wonderful humans of both genders.

So it’s what I expect in all my close relationships (platonic or otherwise) with either gender.

 

[AmberLGreen]

If I tell a man I'm a serial eater and he responds with his favorite cereal, it's a boner killer.

What is his favourite cereal?

 

[LaisDeMarieDeFrance]

What is his favourite cereal?

I don't know. But if it's not Peanut Butter Captain Crunch, I have no use for him.

 

[AmberLGreen]

Okay. And since I seem to be on a mentally wandering roll -

Why did intellectualism fall out of the definition of being manly?

(Muscles and I discussed this somewhere back in the thread, I think.)

It used to be an integral part* of the meaning, but somehow seemed to have been pushed to the background in favor of physical pursuits and prowess. Not that those things aren't relevant, but surely do not exist as the whole.

Outright aggression seems to have jumped to the fore, as well, which interests me not.

I don't mean merely cerebral or general intelligence. What about emotional intelligence, and practical/creative intelligence?

You know, someone who can fix a burst pipe. Do math equations in their head. Discuss the simplicity yet weightiness of Blake's verse. Extrapolate societal changes and their impact on genetic drift.

All at the same time.

Okay. Maybe not all at the same time.

But, why isn't a well balanced intellectualism considered a prerequisite for manliness anymore?

I don't get it. It should be.

I leave out Social Intelligence. Not because it's not valuable, but because it's not something I really understand.

*I know this because much of my reading is books 75+ years or more.

I do think intellect is still considered manly. Maybe the way society is ever changing means we don’t see it as much. In history, men were vocal, had the discussions on cultural topics, women weren’t necessarily allowed to speak outside of their women’s circle. Men overshadowed women in this way and therefore the intellect was visible. Now, there are more sharing of roles so the intellect shows differently. Also, intellect is very broad. As you listed, there are many forms of intellect and differing degrees of it depending on individual people.

The brutish type of man is a big turn off. I was raised by a single father and I have six sisters so there wasn’t any type of that behaviour in our home (even my four brothers were never that way).

People see different things. I have a friend who always goes for the brutish man, another that considers a man crying as weak, one who isn’t the brightest crayon in the box and is put off by intellectual talk. They all see manly as something different.

When I watch things on TV, I do see more of the emotional intelligence coming in to play in male characters yet they can still fix a dripping tap and make the kid’s packed lunches. They are being shown as more well rounded

 

[Magesthicc]

Okay. And since I seem to be on a mentally wandering roll -

Why did intellectualism fall out of the definition of being manly?

(Muscles and I discussed this somewhere back in the thread, I think.)

It used to be an integral part* of the meaning, but somehow seemed to have been pushed to the background in favor of physical pursuits and prowess. Not that those things aren't relevant, but surely do not exist as the whole.

Outright aggression seems to have jumped to the fore, as well, which interests me not.

I don't mean merely cerebral or general intelligence. What about emotional intelligence, and practical/creative intelligence?

You know, someone who can fix a burst pipe. Do math equations in their head. Discuss the simplicity yet weightiness of Blake's verse. Extrapolate societal changes and their impact on genetic drift.

All at the same time.

Okay. Maybe not all at the same time.

But, why isn't a well balanced intellectualism considered a prerequisite for manliness anymore?

I don't get it. It should be.

I leave out Social Intelligence. Not because it's not valuable, but because it's not something I really understand.

*I know this because much of my reading is books 75+ years or more.

While I believe that societal influences, especially social media (today), play a fundamental role in this lack of appreciation for male intelligence, I want to share something my father told me years ago that has stayed with me ever since.

He was a Baby Boomer and had to raise a Millennial (me). He always repeated, as a form of self-criticism, that his generation failed in countless ways when it came to raising and teaching ours. Again, my lack of knowledge about other societies might influence this; I was raised far from the US, so I don't know if it would apply here or in Europe.

We were spoiled, overprotected, and taught that everything is within our reach simply by wishing for it.
Humor, kindness, love, and affection were never lacking in my home, but the concept of effort, of facing the consequences of our mistakes, of taking responsibility, was weak. Mom or Dad was always there to save the day.
For my father, it was easier to solve problems himself than to teach me. It was simpler to leave me in that invisible bubble of ignorance than to let me try and fail, try and learn, try and succeed.

Personally, growing up and maturing was arduous, not because I lacked basic necessities, but because I wasn't given the opportunity to explore in time what tools and characteristics I possessed to face the real world. We grew up in a bubble, and that bubble burst.
We are now facing a world that demands much more from us than we imagined or were taught.

What I wanted to get at is that, I believe, the lack of male intelligence stems from the foundations of our homes.

Society and all its components only exploit this because it serves to further dismantle the social fabric formed by female and male intelligence working in constant tandem.

I hope I didn't ramble too much

 

[Apisto42]

Okay. And since I seem to be on a mentally wandering roll -

Why did intellectualism fall out of the definition of being manly?

(Muscles and I discussed this somewhere back in the thread, I think.)

It used to be an integral part* of the meaning, but somehow seemed to have been pushed to the background in favor of physical pursuits and prowess. Not that those things aren't relevant, but surely do not exist as the whole.

Outright aggression seems to have jumped to the fore, as well, which interests me not.

I don't mean merely cerebral or general intelligence. What about emotional intelligence, and practical/creative intelligence?

You know, someone who can fix a burst pipe. Do math equations in their head. Discuss the simplicity yet weightiness of Blake's verse. Extrapolate societal changes and their impact on genetic drift.

All at the same time.

Okay. Maybe not all at the same time.

But, why isn't a well balanced intellectualism considered a prerequisite for manliness anymore?

I don't get it. It should be.

I leave out Social Intelligence. Not because it's not valuable, but because it's not something I really understand.

*I know this because much of my reading is books 75+ years or more.

I’ll come back this. I’ve been pondering life, mortality, what is self, and how many times I can get off today while listening to an eclectic play list through my AirPods while cutting down invasive trees with my chainsaw.

I have thoughts.

 

[AmberLGreen]

I’ll come back this. I’ve been pondering life, mortality, what is self, and how many times I can get off today while listening to an eclectic play list through my AirPods while cutting down invasive trees with my chainsaw.

I have thoughts.

Do not let this lot know you have a chainsaw

 

[Endless_Night]

I actually never fantasize about celebrities.

Re another conversation had, I realized recently that while I don't fantasize about celebrities per se, I have fantasized myself into movies where I find the character an actor plays sexy.

*looks at sentence*

I have no idea whether that makes sense.

I grew up in a household like you are describing: intellectual brilliance, emotional maturity, stellar communication, creativity, sense of humor, practicality, kindness, and self reliance all defined wonderful humans of both genders.

That is so lovely.

I did not. Which may be why I am so fierce about this v being a must in any relationship that I am willing to maintain.

So it’s what I expect in all my close relationships (platonic or otherwise) with either gender.

 

[Endless_Night]

If I tell a man I'm a serial eater and he responds with his favorite cereal, it's a boner killer.

What is his favourite cereal?

I don't know. But if it's not Peanut Butter Captain Crunch, I have no use for him.

. . . . . . . .

I feel like this might be what reducing attraction to the lowest common denominator looks like.

 

[Endless_Night]

I was raised by a single father and I have six sisters so there wasn’t any type of that behaviour in our home (even my four brothers were never that way).

There was so much great stuff in your reply, but this my brain just imploded on the bolded parts and the rest fell right out of my head.

 

[Endless_Night]

Your whole reply was brilliant! Thank you for the peek into your personal experience.

What I wanted to get at is that, I believe, the lack of male intelligence stems from the foundations of our homes.

I agree that this must play a role, along with external societal conditions.

 

[Endless_Night]

I’ll come back this. I’ve been pondering life, mortality, what is self, and how many times I can get off today while listening to an eclectic play list through my AirPods while cutting down invasive trees with my chainsaw.

Do not let this lot know you have a chainsaw

No doubt this is an inside joke of which I'm not aware, but -

It's the whole "how many times I can get off" part in conjunction with the chainsaw that has me . . . umm, kinda concerned.

 

[Apisto42]

No doubt this is an inside joke of which I'm not aware, but -

It's the whole "how many times I can get off" part in conjunction with the chainsaw that has me . . . umm, kinda concerned.

It’s okay.

I had chaps on.

 

[LaisDeMarieDeFrance]

No doubt this is an inside joke of which I'm not aware, but -

It's the whole "how many times I can get off" part in conjunction with the chainsaw that has me . . . umm, kinda concerned.

Ok, good, it wasn't just me.

 

[Wand3rlust]

It’s okay.

I had assless chaps on.

FIFY.

 

[AmberLGreen]

No doubt this is an inside joke of which I'm not aware, but -

It's the whole "how many times I can get off" part in conjunction with the chainsaw that has me . . . umm, kinda concerned.

It’s Apisto. I just saw that as the norm

 

[Endless_Night]

It’s okay.

I had chaps on.

I'm curious as to how you think this improves the situation.

 

[Apisto42]

Okay. And since I seem to be on a mentally wandering roll -

Why did intellectualism fall out of the definition of being manly?

(Muscles and I discussed this somewhere back in the thread, I think.)

It used to be an integral part* of the meaning, but somehow seemed to have been pushed to the background in favor of physical pursuits and prowess. Not that those things aren't relevant, but surely do not exist as the whole.

Outright aggression seems to have jumped to the fore, as well, which interests me not.

I don't mean merely cerebral or general intelligence. What about emotional intelligence, and practical/creative intelligence?

You know, someone who can fix a burst pipe. Do math equations in their head. Discuss the simplicity yet weightiness of Blake's verse. Extrapolate societal changes and their impact on genetic drift.

All at the same time.

Okay. Maybe not all at the same time.

But, why isn't a well balanced intellectualism considered a prerequisite for manliness anymore?

I don't get it. It should be.

I leave out Social Intelligence. Not because it's not valuable, but because it's not something I really understand.

*I know this because much of my reading is books 75+ years or more.

I think politics, consumerism and mass media are mostly to blame. Money basically, which equals power.

If you take pre-1950’s literature as your baseline for “intellectual being a requirement of manhood”, who was producing most of it and writing it and who were they writing for?

But suddenly post 1950, the number of households with television shot up. Still, most adults and children had grown up reading the same books you’re reading now. So same expectations for a man to have had a classical education and therefore would be an intellectual (we’ll leave out posh entitled idiots for the time being).

As the generations move forward, more and more households have access to mass media, which gives advertising and huge new market. A common trope in media is the resentment of the poor man towards the intellectuals. So advertising and the type of media to appeal to the biggest market gradually capitalized on that resentment. The rise of the glorified poor idiot with no education but huge muscles.

Look at our education systems for the last 75 years. Smart kids get picked on, boy cries? What a little faggot. It’s not new though. It’s just been utilized to generate sales.

Here end’s my TED talk: Economics can explain changes in societal norms.