Image by worak
No and Yes
I’m not sure if there is sexual energy – or rather I’m sure of two different things.
1. It doesn’t make any more sense to talk of sexual energy than it does of ‘food energy’.
Our energy is directed to meeting our needs (for water, air, touch, kindness, resolving an intellectual dilemma and so on). Does it make sense to say that our energy is different depending on the satisfaction we seek? I don’t think so.
2. When we are feeling healthy and energised there does seem to be a sexual tinge to our experience.
It does seem to me that our sexuality is part of our health. [One qualification – some people seem quite happy to live their lives without one or any sexual partners. This is something I think I need to understand more.] I don’t mean that when healthy we are on an obsessive quest for sexual partners, I do mean that we are able to respond sexually. Our health seems to have a sexual dimension or some kind of sexual flavour.
My guess is that the energy we use to meet our various needs is the same. Sexuality is one of our needs.
“Sexual Energy”
Why then is there this concern for sexual energy – its healthy satisfaction and (sometimes) its re-direction to other ends?
My guess is that this is an unmet need. I think our culture is hostile to our sexuality.
This seems absurd. Sex is used to sell everything and the discussion of sexuality is far free-er than it was even in my childhood. (I think the change was made in response to AIDS, but that’s another topic.)
However, if our sexual needs were met I doubt that it would be so successful at selling stuff. I think this shows that our sexuality is unsatisfied (that unmet desire is the norm).
There are other factors too. Our lives tend to be lived by clock time, rather than in accord with our body’s rhythms of desire and satisfaction.
The complimentary opposite to this hostility is obsession. The hostility is compensated for by dreams of license and indulgence.
Meeting our Sexual Needs
My guess is that our sexual need is a lot less genital than we feel in our more frustrated or obsessed moments: that intimacy and sensuality are much more part of our sexual desire than all those ads or movies let on. Missing a time of sexual enjoyment with our partner may be disappointing or frustrating, but we usually can cope with it. And the ways we cope (vigorous exercise, gentle touch, working on a project, a warm and luxurious bath . . .) show the dimensions of our ‘sexual energy’ that go beyond the genital.
My guess is that we don’t have a specifically ‘sexual energy’ but that we have sexual needs and desires. My guess is that this need has dimensions in addition to physical release (just as our ideal meal would probably include friends as well as delicious food). My guess is that talk of ‘sexual energy’ is so common because our sexual need is rarely satisfactorily met.
If you liked this post you might also like,
Re-directing Sexual Energy (?)
Would you like to feel less stressed?
Could you do with more joy in your life?
The answer is living authentically. Buy the book or sign up for the course now from my Living Authentically website.
No related posts.
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
“However, if our sexual needs were met I doubt that it would be so successful at selling stuff. I think this shows that our sexuality is unsatisfied (that unmet desire is the norm).”
This is a powerful point that you make. Those Puritans sure did a number on us Americans. What’s you excuse?
Seriously though, I remember the chapter in Think and row Rich on transmuting sexual energy. My thought then and now is why would I ever want to do that? That desire or lust if you will is such a powerful force to be enjoyed.
Australian Christianity was very influenced by evangelicals – similarly uptight to Puritans (John Wesley opined that children would play – however much you tried to stop them). So that’s Australia’s excuse!
I’m for enjoyment, rather than transmuting, too! Thanks for your comment Tom.