CAN YOU SEPARATE SEXUALITY FROM BEAUTY?

Mapleleaf, occasionally, (very occasionally) I have seen a man who is so stunningly handsome that I wondered what it would be like to be with him; but in reality, beauty has nothing to do with true sexuality. As others have said, sexuality is a quality that is part of a person's character, intelligence and sense of humor. It is a mental experience, not just physical.

Physical beauty is something that should be looked at like Michalangelo's David. It is like art. I would hate to be beautiful
in that way.

I think young people are more impressed with physical beauty. After a few years, we come to realize that it has very little to do with sexuality.

Don't you love to see very old people who still turn each other on? They have true beauty.

It is so sad that teachers can't touch their students. Our need for touch is so basic that I worry that children will grow up missing an important part of trusting and being human.

Fresh, summer peaches, that is the nectar of the Gods and Goddesses. Yummmmm.

Diane, well said. I am finding that some members are especially gifted in writing, even to the point of expressing my thoughts. To me, you are beautiful.

I've been separating the two all my life.

And it's only been in recent years that I've come to terms with MY perception of my own beauty and sexuality. Take me or leave me ~ I do care what other people think, but no to the point (anymore) that it plays a part in how I see myself.

I TOTALLY agree and weigh in with Setanta on this,
beauty is a collection of so many, many things....
surface beauty is really nothing in comparison, is
it?
Where I ALWAYS see a constant conflict is about
women & kids & sexuality - is in the ways that
women begin to alter their sense of self-sexuality
due to the bith/presence of their children. I don't
know what this is like for THIS generation...but I
grew up with some "be a perfect mom" concept
but THIS concept left NO room for just plain old
womanhood, and natural sexuality. A very ancient
instictive behavior perhaps.

OH & YES, if I look into the mirror and I
don't like what I see (frequently) - it will come
out in my outer life in some way - causing grave
difficulties in my private life. The most likely way
for me, would be to "punish me" for not being thin
as a model, sleek as a leopard, gorgeous as a cover
girl, or EVEN AS HOT LOOKING AS I WAS 15 YEARS
AGO! What would this have to do with my own
innate sense of sexuality? It would destroy it
and leave it lying belly up in the river...that's what!
That I DO base too much importance on my
appearance, and I am doing it to myself.

I avoid mirrors like the plague, babs. (Except in the morning when I have to go out in public ~ don't want to scare anyone!)

Pictures, too.

Yes.

Very definitely. I see beauty in many people, but have no sexual attraction what-so-ever. I'm pretty ugly physically, so who am I to judge sexual beauty? My wife is all I want and need as a friend, companion, sexual partner, and to share a life together. c.i.

C.i., I have seen the picture you posted on Ravens. You're as close to beautiful as a man can be to this man's perception.

Good to hear, Roger! I was sad to hear CI describe himself that way. CI -- Quit picking on yourself!!!

Awe shucks, roger, now you've embarassed me!
Thanks for the compliment, but I know what I look like. I've lived with me for 67 years! I don't fret none, though, because I'm the end product of all of my ancestors. Can't do anything about that, can we? c.i.

Mapleleaf, that is the nicest compliment I can imagine receiving. Thank you! My image of you is the same. One of the greatest things about the internet is that we develop relationships without the usual distractions of physical appearance. I can't think of a better way to build a friendship.

Babs, I know exactly how you feel. I have felt the same way and will feel that way in the future. We grew up in a generation in which girls were expected to be pretty. Our self-percetion was based on how we looked--it was as if our futures depended on our appearance.

As I have aged, it has taken me a long time to accept myself the way I look. Sometimes I slip and hate what I see in the mirror, the wrinkles, lines and changing body; yet, when I regain my sanity, it feels so good to be me and to know that I am loved for myself.

Roger, what you said about c.i. is exactly how I feel, but it was so nice to hear if from a man.

What Diane said.....me, too.

definitely YES Roger - well said indeed!
And I do agree with Piffka, that c.i. you must
not pick on yourself, it isn't kind or loving
and Heaven only knows, we need all of the
loving we can get & as often as we can get it.
Why are we always meaner to ourselves
that we WOULD EVER DREAM OF BEING to
another human being? Makes no sense.
I LOVED what you had to say Diane... WHY
can't we be more demonstrative in our
affection?? No doubt in schools, who knows
what parents would find to gripe about.
I think that the VITAL loving physical touch,
(just as it is for baby kittens), makes all the
difference between a feral cat and a loving
cuddling beloved family pet. So why should we
humans be any different. My family was so
"British in ethnicity" that any demonstration
of physical affection was not to be found, AND
I grew up with that "stiff upper lip" attitude
toward the world's pain, towards others pain
and towards my own pain - both emotional
and physical. How badly I have used and
abused my body & my health. Being a
pharmacist is sort of difficult with respect to
the fact that the pharmacy itself can't open
until there is a licensed pharmacist there on
duty. So ...for all the earlier years before my
store got busy enough to warrant having 2
pharmacists on duty and even 3 on a duty for
a day following a holiday, it was always just a
matter of tough it out. No matter how sick you
were, rarely could your boss get anyone in
there to relieve you...so unless you had to be
taken by ambulance to a hospital - you REALLY
were expected to stay under any circumstances
and regardless of how sick you may be.

babs, I didn't say I don't get any loving..... As a matter of fact, many people have been very kind to me throughout my life. There were times when I barely had pennies to rub together when a kind friend would come to the rescue. When I was going to college, I didn't have a car, but a co-worker would pick me up to take me to work. When I was in the US Air Force, although I was an enlisted man, many officers extended kindness to me. When I was stationed at Travis AFB, a colonel used to take me to the mess hall from our secured area some miles away from the mess hall. When stationed in Morocco, a major used to check out a jeep, and let me have it for the day. At Walker AFB, a major used to invite me over to his home for dinner, because he knew I missed eating rice. These are only the major ones I remember, but there are many more. c.i.

Steissd, are you home on leave? I remember some time ago you said that you had been called up by the army. I hope things are going well for you.

Your comments about our attraction to the opposite sex being a matter of instinct based on the ability to reproduce, is a fairly well known evolutionary concept that makes sense; but you always have to factor in the human brain's need for more than physical attributes. We are far too complex to be willing to settle for physical perfection when so much of our ability (and need) to love depends on personality, intelligence and mutual interests.

Perhaps that is why the human race has so many imperfections--throughout history, many of us went with the most interesting person rather than the most physically perfect.

Personally, I'd rather take my chances than be bored to tears.

I am really on my leave, tomorrow morning (Israeli time) I return to the outfit.
In current days choice of partner does not depend exclusively on his/her beauty (in another words, physical attractiveness stemming from alleged possibility to bring viable offspring). But in current days intellect is also one of the strong adaptive mechanisms enabling to provide well-being to the family; hence it can be compared to strength and endurance that provided success thousands years ago. Today it is easier to provide better future (hence, better viability) to the offspring by means of brain activities, rather than the muscular ones, therefore intelligent people increased their chances to find a decent life partner. But biological nature of humans remained the same: our subconscious prompts us of necessity to give our DNA chances to survive us.

steissd, It seems we have many difference of opinion on many subjects - including this one. I'm not sure what you're trying to get at by your comment, "Today it is easier to provide better future (hence, better viability) to the offspring by means of brain activities, rather than the muscular ones, therefore intelligent people increased their chances to find a decent life partner." The implications of your statement leaves me stunned. c.i.

I find Steissd's observations very much to the point, and wonder why anyone would object to the statements. He makes a good case for the past, and the present as well. The phrase "survival of the fittest" is hogwash, of course--if you survive, ipso fact, you are fit. Darwinian evolutionary theory refers to the breeding opportunity, not simply survival, and Steissd's comments on providing viable offspring are right on the money. I would add to his comments about the attractiveness of intelligence in modern humans that we have made our environment sufficiently safe that this factor has given us far more choices of a mate than was the case 2000 years ago.