The desire to fuck is in itself love. The wanting is an initial stage in the development of love; we do develop love, we do make it. This physical desire, as we like to say whether we are being positive or subtractive in our assessments, is a warning, an alarm, a message from a messenger. What messenger? All messengers are angels. This is what angel means. Angel, in Hebrew, pronounced not so far from the Spanish, means just this, a messenger.
If this is true, then love is a message that must be heard, must be listened to, must be read, must then be recited, returned as it is given. It must be chosen as a response in the desire to fuck. All messages are themselves demands upon us. They must be acknowledged. If love is not then acted upon, the desire that has arisen suffers; the ensuing potential love rots in its potentiality that demands actualization, to become actual. Not all potential is so required; the demands differ with situation. The love that has arisen is corrupted, fouled, debased when not chosen; love is pro-active; love cannot be passive.
Sex as sex acted on as sex, physically, is not the debasement. Avoiding the appropriate actions in response is what allows for this undermining of love. At least acknowledging that love exists in the desire to fuck is a first step toward answerability. What really debases love is our irresponsibility in and for our desire. We do allow ourselves to make of fucking something other than what it can be, what it allows in potential for all ensuing actualities in love.
Love is a choice. The absence of the choice for love is in itself a choice and all choices have consequences. Make no mistake. Anyone who says sex is not love is an idiot. Sex is in itself love, but to say it is not love is to side step the choice of acting with love and for love. To believe sex is not love is like the girl with anorexia looking in the mirror and seeing that she is fat. Wanting to fuck somebody and fucking that somebody are love. I love you now, I love this minute, I love you as I fuck you, I love you until you leave, I love you forever, I love you until death do us part, I love you beyond my death, all of these are variations on love. I love you now but not in hour, or not tomorrow, or until we divorce, all of these speculative and not planned, although knowing them is a form of enlightenment.
Love is at the heart of humanity, that is a humanity when being human is to be humane; what is more humane, thus human, than love. Now the French still have one word for both words in English, humaine is both the English ‘human’ and the English ‘humane.’ The French notion is that to be human is to be humane; you cannot be the former without first being the latter. Without what we mean by humane there can be no human. Who disagrees?
Human is as humane does; humane does with love, with forgiveness, with compassion. The humane is what it means to love in this way your fellow humans, whether sexually, filially, friendly, et cetera. There are many ways to love, but lets not confuse the fact that there are kinds of love that are not sexual and should never be sexual for the fact that love is in itself separate from sex, that sexuality is not a humanity, or that it can never be a humane thing and that it is wholly governed by our animal nature, even if animals feel something of what we do when we want to fuck and do fuck.
So then, again with possible gain, if I want to fuck somebody, a woman, a person, another human, this is love. Even when one who fucks does so with contempt; the contempt is what he uses to corrupt the love resulting in something less than kind, less than compassionate, less then humane. We animalize our actions day in and day out. By doing so, we choose the homo-sapiens to the displacement of the human we can become. Fucking can be kindness, fucking can be compassionate, as well as passion; it is love as love that leads to transcendence, redemption, absolution. How do we miss so much so often.
Now, how does love function in the creation of humanity? And humanity is a creation. Its essential features are choices made with love. They would have to be. We should know that there is little of what we call humanity without love; love is necessary in order to be humane, of course we could say, but with the history of the world in counterpoint, and the current events of most of the world on the news in the like, it does not seem to be a matter of course. We must love those we can love and humanity presents itself to us every day; our opportunities to loveare innumerable; the options to act humanely are nearly limitless. But we don’t; we choose to turn away even when we do not choose to do anything. By doing nothing, by not acting on the ability to be humane we choose the inhumane, sins of omission again. Inhuman is as inhumane does.
Love is essential in acts of compassion and acts of kindness. It is essential in all tenderness, in all tolerance. Love, therefore cannot be greed, it cannot be sloth, it cannot be gluttony, it surely cannot be hate or pride. Power is often lustful and greedy and gluttonous. Love of wealth, the same. When love of wealth leads to philanthropy–loving money is not the same as loving what money can do. The kind of philanthropy needed in society can only be enacted by the wealthy. But then when philanthropy is vanity or pride then it is not philanthropy, it is business, it is lust or greed or gluttony again.
Be seen not praying in the synagogues, Yehuda Ben Miriam says. Who does not know the synagogues are the churches, the mosques, the schools, the gala events where the rich overpay for plates and make donations they can easily afford to the applause of audiences. In proportion of their wealth, the rich often do not give more to charity than the poor. But we believe that all is well that ends well, and perhaps charity is the beginning of the reformation of the rich. But it’s not the dollars they give that do dazzle the poor nonetheless, but the pittance of a percentage of their wealth that is formative in maintaining the rich elite are even more powerful. Their greed is evident in how tiny a percentage they actually do give; that’s why nothing changes and the rich continue to get rich and poor everywhere poorer.
Love is the antidote for the poisons of the deadly sins.
Our notions of love, however, are often skewered. How we manage it not always to the best of our potential. We are too exclusive with love, or we are too narrow in our definition of love, where love is acceptable, what love is and for whom and when. We foreshorten, we limit, we narrow, we constrict, we do not fully experience the broadness of love, the depth, the length, the endurance of love and loving. Man loving woman, man loving man, woman loving woman. I have not gotten to man loving dog like he does his lover his wife, his girlfriend, his just having met tonight other; or his boyfriend, another man or another woman for a woman or a man.
Herein let it be warm, living adults. The dead, the animals, the children are not objects of my love when the love I speak of dare speak the name sex. To fuck or not to fuck is still a question, but let it not be a question if it is to fuck who should not be fucked. To fuck is love, but there are sets and sub-sets here to consider and to understand.
If sex is a choice between consenting adults, it is fine. This is why rape is not sex because sex is love. When there is an active process on the part of one lover to eliminate love, then the act of fucking becomes masturbation, which of course can be sex with someone I love, but to use a woman’s vagina as hand is somewhat disturbing, but not nearly as disturbing as using penis as weapon, as knife or club in the act of rape.
The first and the last in being human when human is not merely being another kind of animal in the world is to love and love even more. In this love of your fellow humans, you choose the humane. You must. In doing so, you champion humanity. Kindness has its butterfly effect.
Now, much of what I have herein said about humanity can be denied, it can even be held in skepticism. I do not, though, recognize the deniability of anything as proof of its non-existence. The fact my dreams are not outside my head within reach of my finger tips is no reason to conclude that they are not real, that they have no veracity.
The very inhumanity present in the world can be used as a rebuttal for some of what I have said about the humane, but then it would have to eliminate the references I’ve made about free-will as the essential ingredient in our recipe for the humane; humanity, if we recall, is a choice. I do not claim any determinism for being humane. It is a potential only and once more must be asserted through choosing to become actual. The fact it must be chosen leaves it subject to free-will, free-will an essential for freedom, freedom then an essential for love, for human/humane
To love or not to love is therefore the question.