Là attitudes toward sex
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2015 11:39 am
Yes, there's a whole thread right there. But this is going to be a long answer, so I'm posting it separately. The first post is just what I've already posted, but I'm posting it again for completeness and context.
Biological Theories
Mainstream Là theories hold that both the substance and the form of the child issue solely from the mother. The mother’s sexual partner has no essential role in this process.
This raises two questions: why do women need to engage in sex in order to have children; and why do men desire to engage in sex, given that the children thus begotten are not truly theirs?
In answering the first question, Là theoreticians largely concede that coitus is generally a prerequisite of childbirth, although some theoreticians do continue to hold that this causal link is spurious, and that pregnancy may be possible in rare cases without sex (or where the only sex has been with women, animals, eunuchs, etc.). Popular belief agrees with this minority: while all agree that, all else being equal, sex makes pregnancy more likely, most believe that pregnancy is possible without sex on rare occasions. All agree, however, that pregnancy is impossible without prior rupture of the hymen, and most agree that prior penetrative sex of some kind, at some time in a person’s life, is likewise required.
In explaining the nature of conception, modern Là theoreticians employ the model developed several centuries ago by the monk Kulàrandrang the Birth-Sage, which likens the womb to fertile earth, and the egg to a hardy seed that opens itself to the earth only when subjected to fire. In the case of humans, this ‘fire’ is strongly associated with orgasm, which is therefore believed to be central to conception. The exact details are debateable. In general, there are two main schools: those who follow Kulàrandrang in seeing orgasm as the body’s release of heat and energy, which is then concentrated in the womb to produce an intense flash that opens the seed and results in conception (i.e. those who see orgasm as the cause of conception), and the more modern theoreticians (who have displaced but far from eradicated the older school) who believe that the woman’s experience of orgasm is only a sensation of the underlying phenomenon of conception, that the intense heat of conception is experienced by the woman as orgasm (i.e. those who see orgasm as the result of conception).
The problem inevitably then arises of orgasms that do not lead to conception. Kulàrandrang stressed that the germinating heat of orgasm could only open a seed that was ready and well-planted in the womb, and further that defects in the seed, or in the prevailing conditions in the womb, could lead to immediate failure of the seed. The modernists, on the other hand, question the unity of the orgasm-concept, suggesting a distinction between true conceptive orgasm and ‘apparent’ orgasm that mimics the appearance of conceptive orgasm to a greater or lesser extent (often assumed to be less pleasurable, although it is conceded that in some cases it is difficult to tell the difference). The two schools therefore take different approaches to infertility: the traditionalists stress the mechanics of the ovulatory cycle and medicines designed to increase the receptiveness of the womb and the fecundity of the ovaries, while the modernists emphasise the psychological dimension, warning that not everything a woman finds pleasurable is a true, conceptive orgasm, and enjoining the woman’s partners to greater efforts to mentally and physically please her. Needless to say, in practice most would agree on the importance of both aspects, to varying extents: even the traditionalists agree that conception is impossible without orgasm (they just believe that orgasms are more common and easier to achieve) and even modernists agree that the seed and the womb must both be healthy (they just believe that a higher baseline level of fertility obtains, and that most problems with conception, as distinct from later miscarriage, are not due to physical defects).
It is acknowledged by experts in the field that some women may conceive without experiencing orgasm – though this is considered rare. In these cases, it is believed that orgasm does occur, but is simply concealed from the mind, and hidden by the body. This may occur for either physical or psychological reasons. Most often it is believed to occur in cases of rape, in which cases it is theorised that the woman’s body sometimes refuses to show signs of pleasure, even to the woman herself, so as to maintain the woman’s dignity, and so as not to encourage or mislead the rapist. However, it is known that this common physical response (or non-response) does not occur in all cases of rape.
Turning to the male, there are also three theories to explain why coitus dramatically increases the chances of conception. The earlier, traditional theory holds that semen is an aphrodisiac, which both amplifies female desire and encourages female orgasm, particularly when injected into the womb. Kulàrandrang did not challenge this theory directly, but he further speculated that semen might contain certain nutrients that nurtured growth in the seed; some of his followers have emphasised this aspect to the extent of making it the primary function of semen, and the primary explanation for why conception was less likely without coitus. A third, later theory, while again not denying the aphrodisiac qualities of semen, does downplay them, and suggests that semen instead acts as a sort of solvent, helping to crack open the case of the seed. In recent times, the original aphrodisiac theory is favoured by hardline modernists, and by the populace at large, while the solvent theory has become the default view among the experts. The nutrient theory is held by hardline traditionalists, but recently has experienced a resurgence, due to new scientific experiments. Crucially, the nutrient theory, unlike its rivals, places the role of semen shortly after conception, rather than during conception; and certain indelicate but scientifically interesting experiments now purport to have demonstrated that injection of semen into the womb immediately after orgasm can result in pregnancy. As a result, this theory may now be considered the favoured option of those invested in cutting-edge theory, although these experiments are not without their critics – in particular, some believe that the women were simply undergoing an occulted orgasm on introjection, analogous to those that result sometimes in pregnancy in rape victims, perhaps as a result of the unnatural circumstances of the experiments. It must also be observed that most theoreticians are willing to consider that all three theories may have elements of truth in them, though the relative proportions of truth are still debated.
The next fundamental question asks why men are interested in sex. Women clearly have learnt that sex increases their chances of conception, and women are believed to have an inherent drive to reproduce. But as the man does not reproduce, why is he so keen on the whole business?
There are three main theories here, although on this question there is little disagreement per se – rather, the explanations are regarded as complementary.
The first theory is that sex is enjoyable, and sought out for its pleasure value. There are obviously many reasons why people might find sex pleasant, but the core of this issue is the mystery of the male orgasm: as the orgasm is a part of the female reproductive process, why do males appear to have them at all? The answer has two parts.
Firstly, it is often denied that males have orgasms at all. It is observed that the pleasure accompanying male ejaculation is brief and isolated, compared to the potentially enduring and/or rapidly repeatable orgasms of females (the question of whether multiple orgasms signify multiple conceptions (most of which then fail, possibly by immediate cannibalism within the womb), or are merely the experience of a single process of seed-cracking that in some women is prone to occur in distinct stages or waves, is a vexed one among followers of the modernist theory of conception); and most concede that the pleasure women appear to experience is far greater than that experienced by men. Male orgasm is therefore considered only a shadow or imitation of the real orgasm. Modernists further link this to the two types of orgasm experienced by women, suggesting that non-conceptive orgasms among both men and women are only imitations of true orgasm.
Secondly, the cause of these pseudo-orgasms is located in embryonic development. Some theorists argue that the male pseudo-orgasm is vestigial, an echo left over from the female embryo (all embryos are believed to begin female, and some then become male in the womb). The more common theory, however, is that the body of the mother intentionally, for the good of her sisters and daughters, imbues the male with a simulacrum of her own capacity for sexual pleasure, precisely in order to encourage men to have sex (including by deluding ignorant men into thinking that their share of orgasm may signify a significant role in procreation).
In addition to the man’s own pleasure, it is then believed that men are lead into sex by empathy and the desire to please: knowing not only how pleasurable sex is for women, but how important childbirth is to them, men are eager to serve them in a sexual function. Rape is often therefore considered the product of a mental disordering: a case of a means (sex) employed even in cases that contradict the proper ends (female pleasure) of that means. [Regardless of its possible psychological causes, rape is condemned for these reasons under the Là theories of aesthetics]
Finally, the male desire not only to have sex but to impregnate women is believed to, in part, be rational. This is because although the child is solely the product of the mother, in both substance and form, the child may develop in the womb in different ways depending upon its environment, including the moods of the mother – this is why children are not identical to their mother. It is widely believed that the mother, thinking frequently about her lover, actually moulds her child’s form in the womb, pressuring it to conform to features of its father’s form. Men therefore naturally wish to seduce women and help them become pregnant, as the child will bear elements of the father’s form – even though he has had no direct causal role in this resemblance. It is important to note that Là metaphysics stress the corporeality and transience of bodily substance, while animacy is considered unitary and without characteristics: it is form, therefore, that gives each thing its identity, and therefore for a child to have a similar form to a man is in a literal sense a sharing of elements of identity.
For these reasons, women who give birth to boys are often thought of as selfless or more greatly in love, because they have dwelt on the man so much in their mind that their child has become manly. However, it is recognised that the primary reason for boys is because they will grow up to be useful to women, and hence there are reasons other than love that may determine the sex of children. On the one hand, the need to propagate the female line is paramount (a woman so in love with her husband that she can produce only sons is a beautiful tragedy); on the other hand, it is observed that powerful men have more sons, perhaps because the woman’s body subconsciously is choosing to flatter the man.
Importantly, however, this element of fatherhood is not directly linked to conception. It is generally acknowledged that a woman is most likely to be thinking of the man who inspired her to conceive (women may not be aware they are thinking of him, of course – the Là believe that people may have many ‘subconscious’ thoughts they are not directly aware of without intense reflection); however, it is not uncommon for children to bear resemblance to other people. Often in stories, for example, a woman who has sex only with a jealous husband may bear children who appear to be the child of the woman’s true love, simply because she has been thinking of him. It is also acknowledged that women may be tormented by thoughts of those they are not in love with – it is therefore no surprise if, for example, a rape victim conceives a child who resembles the rapist. Moreover, although strong resemblance to the father is a sign of love, men do not generally take offence if the connection is less obvious: they instead will be flattered that the woman trusts them not to demand such superficial proofs of her affection. At least, most will say they are not disappointed. It is also worth noting that as the child continues growing, they may continue to be influenced, either by the thoughts embedded within their bodies or by their own thinking, by the men around them. Thus children often grow more like their father-figures, regardless of who was physically present with their mother when they were conceived.
Biological Theories
Mainstream Là theories hold that both the substance and the form of the child issue solely from the mother. The mother’s sexual partner has no essential role in this process.
This raises two questions: why do women need to engage in sex in order to have children; and why do men desire to engage in sex, given that the children thus begotten are not truly theirs?
In answering the first question, Là theoreticians largely concede that coitus is generally a prerequisite of childbirth, although some theoreticians do continue to hold that this causal link is spurious, and that pregnancy may be possible in rare cases without sex (or where the only sex has been with women, animals, eunuchs, etc.). Popular belief agrees with this minority: while all agree that, all else being equal, sex makes pregnancy more likely, most believe that pregnancy is possible without sex on rare occasions. All agree, however, that pregnancy is impossible without prior rupture of the hymen, and most agree that prior penetrative sex of some kind, at some time in a person’s life, is likewise required.
In explaining the nature of conception, modern Là theoreticians employ the model developed several centuries ago by the monk Kulàrandrang the Birth-Sage, which likens the womb to fertile earth, and the egg to a hardy seed that opens itself to the earth only when subjected to fire. In the case of humans, this ‘fire’ is strongly associated with orgasm, which is therefore believed to be central to conception. The exact details are debateable. In general, there are two main schools: those who follow Kulàrandrang in seeing orgasm as the body’s release of heat and energy, which is then concentrated in the womb to produce an intense flash that opens the seed and results in conception (i.e. those who see orgasm as the cause of conception), and the more modern theoreticians (who have displaced but far from eradicated the older school) who believe that the woman’s experience of orgasm is only a sensation of the underlying phenomenon of conception, that the intense heat of conception is experienced by the woman as orgasm (i.e. those who see orgasm as the result of conception).
The problem inevitably then arises of orgasms that do not lead to conception. Kulàrandrang stressed that the germinating heat of orgasm could only open a seed that was ready and well-planted in the womb, and further that defects in the seed, or in the prevailing conditions in the womb, could lead to immediate failure of the seed. The modernists, on the other hand, question the unity of the orgasm-concept, suggesting a distinction between true conceptive orgasm and ‘apparent’ orgasm that mimics the appearance of conceptive orgasm to a greater or lesser extent (often assumed to be less pleasurable, although it is conceded that in some cases it is difficult to tell the difference). The two schools therefore take different approaches to infertility: the traditionalists stress the mechanics of the ovulatory cycle and medicines designed to increase the receptiveness of the womb and the fecundity of the ovaries, while the modernists emphasise the psychological dimension, warning that not everything a woman finds pleasurable is a true, conceptive orgasm, and enjoining the woman’s partners to greater efforts to mentally and physically please her. Needless to say, in practice most would agree on the importance of both aspects, to varying extents: even the traditionalists agree that conception is impossible without orgasm (they just believe that orgasms are more common and easier to achieve) and even modernists agree that the seed and the womb must both be healthy (they just believe that a higher baseline level of fertility obtains, and that most problems with conception, as distinct from later miscarriage, are not due to physical defects).
It is acknowledged by experts in the field that some women may conceive without experiencing orgasm – though this is considered rare. In these cases, it is believed that orgasm does occur, but is simply concealed from the mind, and hidden by the body. This may occur for either physical or psychological reasons. Most often it is believed to occur in cases of rape, in which cases it is theorised that the woman’s body sometimes refuses to show signs of pleasure, even to the woman herself, so as to maintain the woman’s dignity, and so as not to encourage or mislead the rapist. However, it is known that this common physical response (or non-response) does not occur in all cases of rape.
Turning to the male, there are also three theories to explain why coitus dramatically increases the chances of conception. The earlier, traditional theory holds that semen is an aphrodisiac, which both amplifies female desire and encourages female orgasm, particularly when injected into the womb. Kulàrandrang did not challenge this theory directly, but he further speculated that semen might contain certain nutrients that nurtured growth in the seed; some of his followers have emphasised this aspect to the extent of making it the primary function of semen, and the primary explanation for why conception was less likely without coitus. A third, later theory, while again not denying the aphrodisiac qualities of semen, does downplay them, and suggests that semen instead acts as a sort of solvent, helping to crack open the case of the seed. In recent times, the original aphrodisiac theory is favoured by hardline modernists, and by the populace at large, while the solvent theory has become the default view among the experts. The nutrient theory is held by hardline traditionalists, but recently has experienced a resurgence, due to new scientific experiments. Crucially, the nutrient theory, unlike its rivals, places the role of semen shortly after conception, rather than during conception; and certain indelicate but scientifically interesting experiments now purport to have demonstrated that injection of semen into the womb immediately after orgasm can result in pregnancy. As a result, this theory may now be considered the favoured option of those invested in cutting-edge theory, although these experiments are not without their critics – in particular, some believe that the women were simply undergoing an occulted orgasm on introjection, analogous to those that result sometimes in pregnancy in rape victims, perhaps as a result of the unnatural circumstances of the experiments. It must also be observed that most theoreticians are willing to consider that all three theories may have elements of truth in them, though the relative proportions of truth are still debated.
The next fundamental question asks why men are interested in sex. Women clearly have learnt that sex increases their chances of conception, and women are believed to have an inherent drive to reproduce. But as the man does not reproduce, why is he so keen on the whole business?
There are three main theories here, although on this question there is little disagreement per se – rather, the explanations are regarded as complementary.
The first theory is that sex is enjoyable, and sought out for its pleasure value. There are obviously many reasons why people might find sex pleasant, but the core of this issue is the mystery of the male orgasm: as the orgasm is a part of the female reproductive process, why do males appear to have them at all? The answer has two parts.
Firstly, it is often denied that males have orgasms at all. It is observed that the pleasure accompanying male ejaculation is brief and isolated, compared to the potentially enduring and/or rapidly repeatable orgasms of females (the question of whether multiple orgasms signify multiple conceptions (most of which then fail, possibly by immediate cannibalism within the womb), or are merely the experience of a single process of seed-cracking that in some women is prone to occur in distinct stages or waves, is a vexed one among followers of the modernist theory of conception); and most concede that the pleasure women appear to experience is far greater than that experienced by men. Male orgasm is therefore considered only a shadow or imitation of the real orgasm. Modernists further link this to the two types of orgasm experienced by women, suggesting that non-conceptive orgasms among both men and women are only imitations of true orgasm.
Secondly, the cause of these pseudo-orgasms is located in embryonic development. Some theorists argue that the male pseudo-orgasm is vestigial, an echo left over from the female embryo (all embryos are believed to begin female, and some then become male in the womb). The more common theory, however, is that the body of the mother intentionally, for the good of her sisters and daughters, imbues the male with a simulacrum of her own capacity for sexual pleasure, precisely in order to encourage men to have sex (including by deluding ignorant men into thinking that their share of orgasm may signify a significant role in procreation).
In addition to the man’s own pleasure, it is then believed that men are lead into sex by empathy and the desire to please: knowing not only how pleasurable sex is for women, but how important childbirth is to them, men are eager to serve them in a sexual function. Rape is often therefore considered the product of a mental disordering: a case of a means (sex) employed even in cases that contradict the proper ends (female pleasure) of that means. [Regardless of its possible psychological causes, rape is condemned for these reasons under the Là theories of aesthetics]
Finally, the male desire not only to have sex but to impregnate women is believed to, in part, be rational. This is because although the child is solely the product of the mother, in both substance and form, the child may develop in the womb in different ways depending upon its environment, including the moods of the mother – this is why children are not identical to their mother. It is widely believed that the mother, thinking frequently about her lover, actually moulds her child’s form in the womb, pressuring it to conform to features of its father’s form. Men therefore naturally wish to seduce women and help them become pregnant, as the child will bear elements of the father’s form – even though he has had no direct causal role in this resemblance. It is important to note that Là metaphysics stress the corporeality and transience of bodily substance, while animacy is considered unitary and without characteristics: it is form, therefore, that gives each thing its identity, and therefore for a child to have a similar form to a man is in a literal sense a sharing of elements of identity.
For these reasons, women who give birth to boys are often thought of as selfless or more greatly in love, because they have dwelt on the man so much in their mind that their child has become manly. However, it is recognised that the primary reason for boys is because they will grow up to be useful to women, and hence there are reasons other than love that may determine the sex of children. On the one hand, the need to propagate the female line is paramount (a woman so in love with her husband that she can produce only sons is a beautiful tragedy); on the other hand, it is observed that powerful men have more sons, perhaps because the woman’s body subconsciously is choosing to flatter the man.
Importantly, however, this element of fatherhood is not directly linked to conception. It is generally acknowledged that a woman is most likely to be thinking of the man who inspired her to conceive (women may not be aware they are thinking of him, of course – the Là believe that people may have many ‘subconscious’ thoughts they are not directly aware of without intense reflection); however, it is not uncommon for children to bear resemblance to other people. Often in stories, for example, a woman who has sex only with a jealous husband may bear children who appear to be the child of the woman’s true love, simply because she has been thinking of him. It is also acknowledged that women may be tormented by thoughts of those they are not in love with – it is therefore no surprise if, for example, a rape victim conceives a child who resembles the rapist. Moreover, although strong resemblance to the father is a sign of love, men do not generally take offence if the connection is less obvious: they instead will be flattered that the woman trusts them not to demand such superficial proofs of her affection. At least, most will say they are not disappointed. It is also worth noting that as the child continues growing, they may continue to be influenced, either by the thoughts embedded within their bodies or by their own thinking, by the men around them. Thus children often grow more like their father-figures, regardless of who was physically present with their mother when they were conceived.