“You’re not the kind of person I would normally be attracted to. I mean, you’re a little full of yourself.”
“More than a little.”
“And you’re also not my usual type. You’re not as tall, not as rugged. You’re not as built, not as athletic. I usually go for guys who are more aggressive…”
“…But I still think you’d be really good in bed.”
The above, as always, comes from a recent conversation.
They say that everything in life is about sex, except sex, which is about power. It would make life a tad less contentious if everyone could agree on who said it first, but I suppose not everyone is capable of doing a quick Google search to see that it was Oscar Wilde, not Frank Underwood, who penned the original quote.
Millennials, am I right?
My dinner companion that evening was, sadly, not Oscar Wilde. Indeed, he was quite a bit less talented, though no less gay. He was also far less flamboyant, but I think this sprung merely from his utter inability to be anything more than mildly interesting or unconventional.
Decent chap, though. Worth heading down with to the local pub with for drinks and burgers. Honest chap. Authentic one. You know the type. One of those people who wouldn’t know how to be dishonest even if he tried. That was probably why, without even trying, I soon had him admitting that he would totally have sex with me if I was interested in that sort of thing.
People will always trip over themselves to spill their guts to you. It’s kind of funny, really. By the way, if you ever want to ensure that your secrets are safe, cultivate a reputation as an honest and open person. Only the very clever will ever suspect anything.
There’s a certain type of person who believes it to be the height of good conversation to share exactly what they think of you and then have you do the same for them. I can’t say I’ve understood this urge. I’ve never exactly been all that interested in what people think of me. I’ve always placed far greater weight on how they actually treat me. Besides, people will always let you know what they think of you. They just rarely say it. If you have to ask someone directly what they think of you, all that you’re doing is admitting that 1) You’re vain and 2) you lack the ability to read their body, face, tone, choice of words, little tics, reflexes, and all the other subtle ways they reveal themselves.
But as always, I digress. Back to sex.
Homosexuality is interesting from an intellectual point of view because it often manifests itself as a sort of reductio ad absurdum of male sexual instincts (here is where I will give a hopefully unnecessary reminder that this blog has always operated under Glanton’s Law).
High emphasis on physical appearance. Strong drive for casual sex. A not infrequent tendency to view anyone and everyone within your target group as a potential sexual partner, without necessarily taking into account their sexual orientation.
My friend even seemed confused by the idea that you could be sexually attracted to someone for reasons other than their bodies. Needless to say, it was an amusing reaction from someone who had just admitted to me that he wanted to have sex with me because of my personality.
It’s always amusing to stumble upon the limits of someone’s self-awareness.
The human psyche is layers upon layers upon layers upon layers. Most people have no idea how deep they really go. That doesn’t mean they have all that many layers, though. Most people don’t. They just aren’t good at diving deep.
What was I talking about? Oh yes, sex. How amusing that I am so easily distracted by the thought of it, and yet trying to keep a blog post about it on track is so difficult.
Is this really about sex, though?
Is anything I ever write really about what I say it is?
Interesting documentary. I recommend watching the whole thing if you have time. Here’s a choice quote worth digging into:
“For the most part, males display, females choose”.
For the most part. Is this true of humans? Not usually. Usually, human females are the ones adorning themselves in order to appear more attractive to the male of the species. The equation, however, cuts both ways when it comes to certain markers of status, such as muscles and material demonstrations of wealth and power. Display status markers, observe as females choose you by giving you the opportunity to initiate the mating dance. Everything really is better when you’re high status.
The best part about this documentary, however, is the bit when it tosses out the idea that certain types of sexual selection can lead to extinction of the species when the females get too invested in choosing attributes that are harmful for long-term survival. This is amusing at first, and then, like a bad aftertaste, it hits you that there’s no reason why humans would be exempt from this. The chills set in when examples of this, both historical and contemporary, start to come to mind.
It almost leads one to believe that restricting female mate choices in a system in which fathers and husbands rule over their wives and daughter might have some merit. It also leads one to the conclusion that if patriarchy constitutes a type of social engineering, then clearly not all forms of social engineering are necessarily harmful and/or leftist in nature.
I wish I had some snappy conclusion to finish this off, but I don’t, so let’s go with that old Nietzschean maxim:
The degree and kind of a man’s sexuality reach up into the pinnacle of his spirit.
–Beyond Good and Evil, §75
A man’s entire personality is expressed in his sexuality, and a man’s entire sexuality is expressed in his personality. That is probably something worth digging into at a later time.
And hey, because this post was about sexuality, more aesthetics.
This is a habit that is probably killing any pretense that might still have existed of my being a “respectable” neoreactionary blogger, but it’s too much fun not to whip it out every once in a while.