> I want to qualify this basically correct description. I want to say: the
> impulse of *pornographic* sexuality is to the obliteration of the other,
> etc.
>
> Is that the only kind we have? If so, then we should all kill ourselves. I
> haven't killed myself yet. Either I'm being inconsistent, or I know or
think
> I know something that the pornographer doesn't, or thinks s/he doesn't, or
> is in the business of denying.
>
> - Dom
>
>
In the course of a conversation about eroticism , and the arousing power of
some volgarities in bed
(like insults) I once asked to a colleague of mine , lecturer of Philosophy
of Religion, what did he think
a protestant priest would whisper in the ear of his
beloved holy wife (the catholic do not have wives, only lovers) while mating
to give her pleasure.
He said: "Don't know. I guess he might say I love you."
No way, I replied , she would never have an orgasm this way.
So, we reached the conclusion that even priests might have to use strong
erotic language and practises
of some kinds to keep the partner content.
Erminia (sorry, am I being too explicit? It is because of the late hour,
midnight)
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|