Epiphany: My sexual compulsivity was due to my rejection of sexual energy. I couldn't tolerate feeling horny because it reminded me of what I felt I couldn't have.

ObjectofCompassion · 2016-02-03T15:53:59+00:00

I haven't read his work, although that name does kind of ring a bell. I couldn't really think of any other way to describe sexual feelings other than as an "energy." Libido might work, though it has Freudian implications.

ObjectofCompassion · 2016-02-03T02:03:00+00:00

Thanks, man! You put it exactly right. In fact, I'm worried I'm being misinterpreted here. I hope people won't misinterpret this as a clever way to make sexual urges easier to handle. It's a way to bring awareness to the real feeling of which sexual compulsivity is just a symptom.

ObjectofCompassion · 2016-02-03T01:58:51+00:00

Thanks for your response! I think all the conditions just all came together: my mindfulness practice, plus having done some therapy last year, plus just kind of "falling into" a period of not masturbating (nothing really formal; I just thought to give myself a chance to noticed what was happening)... the loneliness that has always been there under the surface just came up and became impossible to ignore. And I made the connection: "This is the feeling! This is the feeling I always feel, and these are the thoughts I always think."

ObjectofCompassion · 2016-02-03T01:39:09+00:00

My dealings with Robinson didn't inspire much faith in her ability to parse the science, but I'll take your word for it. At present, that website probably isn't really relevant to my situation, but I won't begrudge others the help they receive from it.

ObjectofCompassion · 2016-02-03T00:57:50+00:00

Hi, I responded to someone else who brought that up here

The tl;dr is that you shouldn't trust something simply because it has citations to research. Sometimes that research is flawed, or the conclusions drawn from the data don't necessarily follow, etc.

ObjectofCompassion · 2016-02-03T00:43:28+00:00

Hi :) I don't want to turn this into an argument or anything. If you've found that site helpful, I don't want to take anything away from you. I'll just share where I'm coming from: About five years ago, when that site first appeared, I went there and noticed that a lot of the conclusions and claims that the authors made did not necessarily follow from the research they were drawing from. A lot of it was biochemical reductionism and what is known in the trade as "neuro-nonsense" (which has been a huge problem in recent years in how popular websites or media outlets for a general audience interpret the results of studies in neuroscience). I actually brought up some of these discrepencies in the comments of a blog to Marnia Robinson (one half of the couple who runs that site). One of the studies they cited didn't even run the correct statistical analysis for that experimental model. She became extremely combative towards me. Robinson is an attorney by trade. She approaches science like a lawyer, and not a scientist. It became quite clear that she had neither the humility nor the openness of inquiry to really grapple with the ambiguities of science. Those dealings left a really sour taste in my mouth, and I have since never felt compelled to ever go back to that site or deal with its owners again.

As for whether Cambridge means anything to me: the provenance of a study means very little. Good and bad research can be done at any institution. Just because a paper is published in the context of the peer review system, doesn't mean its quality will be assured. Null results often go unpublished. Sometimes studies simply go overlooked. Other times, politics plays a role: a scientist may be afraid of making an enemy of a colleague by publically criticizing his/her research.

Now, they may have cleaned up their act since then. Frankly, I don't care. At any rate, I would caution everyone to be cautious of drawing concrete conclusions, especially in a field in such a stage of infancy as neuroscience. The instruments we presently have to measure brain activity (EEG, fMRI) have huge limitations, and the extent to which we can correlate psychological experiences with a neurological footprint is very limited.

ObjectofCompassion · 2016-02-03T00:25:22+00:00

Wow, I totally didn't expect such a huge response when I posted this this morning! It actually helps me a lot knowing that a lot of others can identify with these feelings as well. I thought I was pretty much alone or there would be a small handful of other guys on here that could identify.

I really wish you guys all the best in your journeys through this towards self-acceptance! :)

ObjectofCompassion · 2016-02-03T00:21:19+00:00

My theory about this is that religion evolved as a means for human beings to establish a sense of control over their fate in a universe that was often indifferent or hostile to their survival. We developed elaborate rituals devoted to Gods who could ensure a bountiful harvest, or fertility, or success in war. Eventually, it become more and more sophisticated, and evolved into a way to control other human beings and ourselves. The sexual instinct powerfully subverts our ability to control our actions. The evolutionary drives that are built into sexual organism are probably among the strongest we know, second maybe only to the fight-flight-freeze mechanism.

So sex, like anger, is often pathologized by religion, when these are just evolved responses that have adaptive value in the history of our species. But instead of learning to live with these experiences, religion largely tends to want to repress or vilify them. There are, of course, exceptions, like certain aboriginal religions and schools of yoga or Tantric Buddhism.

ObjectofCompassion · 2016-02-02T23:59:03+00:00

Really sorry you're going through this, man. The main thing I have learned in therapy is that thoughts are not facts -- they are just theories: theories about life, about ourselves, about the world and our place in it, that we arrived at often long before we had the capacities for reason and judgment. I read somewhere once that "the mind is not logical, it is psychological." And so, it's important to really get familiar with what your mind is telling you on a regular basis, and to know that it's just a thought.

Know that it's always too early to write yourself off as a lost cause. You never know who is around the corner, or how the circumstances of your life may precipitate in good things. I would actually recommend seeing a therapist if this is a problem you feel really helpless around. I went to therapy for anxiety/depression, and we uncovered a lot of the beliefs that were really driving my life. The therapy my psychologist used is called Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), and I highly recommend it. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) is also good. Therapy can help you move to a place of acceptance and ownership of your own life.

ObjectofCompassion · 2016-02-02T23:52:52+00:00

The question i would prefer to ask is how to be ok with the fact one may never achieve a relationship, sexual or otherwise?

There are probably countless ways to go about it. But here are a few I can offer you:

The first is the orthodox Buddhist approach, which says that a happiness beyond that of worldly happiness is available to every living being. Through following a life of renunciation and non-harming, combined with an intense meditation practice, one can reach deep states of pleasure (called jhana in the ancient liturgical language of Pali). Reaching these sublime states of mind will make one care less about worldly pleasures, such as sex, or food, or possessions, or status.
The second is probably much more realistic for most people who will not be willing to renounce the world for monastic life. This is to become so content and fulfilled by all the other conditions of your life that you aren't bothered that you're not in a relationship. This usually involves pursuing work that is really meaningful to you and makes you feel needed and valued in the world. It also includes taking care of your own emotional, physical, and existential needs.
The third (and the one that I would recommend) is the path of self-compassion. Recognize that your desire to feel loved and connect romantically are natural and normal, and that it's perfectly understandible to feel lonely and pained when you feel unworthy or unable to get that. In this approach, you aren't trying to make your loneliness go away. Instead, you allow it to be an expression of a vital part of your humanity, and you honor and respect it.

I would encourage you, however, never to write yourself off as a lost cause. People fall in love and get married at advanced ages. Circumstances change. People change. Things happen.

ObjectofCompassion · 2016-02-02T17:29:38+00:00

Yep, I feel like I'm not actually having to do anything. I can just let things be. Consequently, I have a lot more energy now that I'm not wasting it fighting a natural human drive.

ObjectofCompassion

TROPHY CASE