To reclaim relational sexuality from the sex and beauty industry

Sexuality of the wealthiest part of mankind is tainted if not deformed into pseudo-sex by the beauty and sex industry that not only objectifies people but also make its consumers oversexed and sex addicted. The worst distortion though is that it presents sexuality as something to get or have and not as something to give and receive.

However, we can reclaim our sexuality when we understand how to differentiate between this pseudo-sex and real sexuality.

BTW, learning this dissimilarity has nothing to do with morality, with the question if sex is morally neutral, sinful or holy. That discussion is also important, but not now our subject.

Real Sexuality

Real sexuality, without any painful side or after effects, is only possible as the crown on an excellent relationship between consenting adults.

Sexuality’s perfect outcome is to end our deep feelings of loneliness. To have such results, it should be added to a relationship that is already stable, with emotional and physical closeness. It cements the bonding.

(The vast majority of people have only one biological sex that they can bond with, men or women. For them, to have sex with someone not of their biological preference may be nice but won’t have them bond.)

There is a misunderstanding that life is give and take. This mistake is also projected onto relationships and even onto sexuality.

In truth, though, taking is a violent act that has no place in any of this.

Life is give and receive. When all people in a relationship know to give to each other (and are willing to receive too), their life will be perfect. If only one of them is generous, the relationship will be not good for all people involved. And if the parties just try to grab “their fair share,” none of them will be satisfied, because it will never be enough.

Sexuality, in short, is people giving each other sexual feelings and helping them climax. The latter does not need to happen at all times of intimacy. And massages, cuddling, dancing, sporting together, being physically close, needs to be there first. And the base of that needs to be emotional closeness. (To listen is sexy.)

With all the above it is easy to distinguish pseudo-sexuality from real sexuality and to understand why the former doesn’t lead to closeness, happiness or satisfaction that would last longer than a moment or two.

Fake Sexuality

(Allergy warning: The below text contains words as penises, breasts, nipples and masturbate, though not in any graphic way.)

Fake sexuality then must be different from people giving each other sexual feelings and helping them climax, and indeed it is. Pseudo-sex is people trying to grab. They’re not in the mood to give but rather desperately trying to clutch. With guaranteed unhappy results.

And the beauty and porn industry plays into this. The biggest breasts, curves or penises, the most graphic sexual display and confident smiles and bulky muscles need to grab (again grab) the customers’ attention. These (often artificially) “beautiful people” are presented as desirable and seem to exist to snatch from. Their attention and if possible their bodies would be all just for the taking. And if we would have sex with such beauties (in mind), we would become beautiful and irresistible ourselves and able to have the highest unlimited sex and pleasure.

Sex actors may play-act fake great excitement and intimacy, pretend love and commitment, and go on in endless sex sessions that supposedly leave at least one participant happy and satisfied – none of it for real.

Performing and consuming bogus sex not only leads to no satisfaction, it also trains us to have wrong and unrealistic expectations and egocentric habits with sex and beauty, and even worse, makes us addicted to (fake) sex. For business, that’s profitable but as service to mankind, it’s not.

During real sex, we don’t need to be blind. We may enjoy our partner’s beauty, but that’s still a mere side dish, an extra. The real thrill is being sexual with a marvelous person, not a marvelous body or smile. Many people, when they get older, start understanding this better.

We don’t need our partner to have a big penis to satisfy him. (And some partners find small ones in the other nicer, cozier.) We don’t need our partner to have big breasts to satisfy her. (Big and small breasts are equally soft and nipples might be more important for the owner than breast.) Our partner’s skin doesn’t need to have the perfect amount of underlying fat or muscle to stroke it, when our goal is to connect or arouse our partner. You see: sex is to give (and receive), not to take.

The more that people masturbate, look at pornography and objectify people and body parts, the more we become addicted to pseudo-sex and the more we get out of the habit to have relational sex by giving. To get back to interpersonal sex, we need to give up on the sexual grabbing and return to sexual giving (on top of a mutually giving relationship).

(For people who are told that they should have no sexuality it could be revealing and liberating to masturbate once, but beware that even if that were good, it will quickly be spoiled by habituation and addiction and the loneliness and selfishness that will follow those.)

NB: Progress will come from former and potential customers ignoring the porn and beauty industry and choosing relational sexuality over recreational sexuality, not from making those illegal. (Though a ban for minors could work to prevent addiction before they have a chance to go for the real thing. For sure, child prostitution and producing, obtaining and spreading child pornography should be illegal and vanish forever.)

Beauty

Beauty is often only skin-deep but its effects go much deeper.

People society considers ugly, or who’ve often been called repulsive, are often ignored in a group. People rather talk to “beautiful people.” This makes “ugly” people often feel lonely and undesired. (It also often makes them more humble and willing to work harder in a relationship, which can be a real pro. And when people cry, everyone is beautiful.)

But those beautiful people, who look so privileged, they often feel lonely too, because most people don’t look at them either – only at their outsides. They might enjoy the attention but it doesn’t really help them because the spectators want to have them, not give them.

***

In summary, to distort sexuality has almost everyone lose. Let’s not fall for this any longer. The real thing or nothing!

About the Author

MM is a prolific and creative writer and thinker, previously a daily blog contributor to the TOI. He often makes his readers laugh, mad, or assume he's nuts—close to perfect blogging. He's proud that his analytical short comments are removed both from left-wing and right-wing news sites. None of his content is generated by the new bore on the block, AI. * As a frontier thinker, he sees things many don't yet. He's half a prophet. Half. Let's not exaggerate. Or not at all because he doesn't claim G^d talks to him. He gives him good ideas—that's all. MM doesn't believe that people observe and think in a vacuum. He, therefore, wanted a broad bio that readers interested can track a bit what (lack of) backgrounds, experiences, and educations contribute to his visions. * This year, he will prioritize getting his unpublished books published rather than just blog posts. Next year, he hopes to focus on activism against human extinction. To find less-recent posts on a subject XXX among his over 2000 archived ones, go to the right-top corner of a Times of Israel page, click on the search icon and search "zuiden, XXX". One can find a second, wilder blog, to which one may subscribe too, here: https://mmvanzuiden.wordpress.com/ or by clicking on the globe icon next to his picture on top. * Like most of his readers, he believes in being friendly, respectful, and loyal. However, if you think those are his absolute top priorities, you might end up disappointed. His first loyalty is to the truth. He will try to stay within the limits of democratic and Jewish law, but he won't lie to support opinions or people when don't deserve that. (Yet, we all make honest mistakes, which is just fine and does not justify losing support.) He admits that he sometimes exaggerates to make a point, which could have him come across as nasty, while in actuality, he's quite a lovely person to interact with. He holds - how Dutch - that a strong opinion doesn't imply intolerance of other views. * Sometimes he's misunderstood because his wide and diverse field of vision seldomly fits any specialist's box. But that's exactly what some love about him. He has written a lot about Psychology (including Sexuality and Abuse), Medicine (including physical immortality), Science (including basic statistics), Politics (Israel, the US, and the Netherlands, Activism - more than leftwing or rightwing, he hopes to highlight reality), Oppression and Liberation (intersectionally, for young people, the elderly, non-Whites, women, workers, Jews, LGBTQIA+, foreigners and anyone else who's dehumanized or exploited), Integrity, Philosophy, Jews (Judaism, Zionism, Holocaust and Jewish Liberation), the Climate Crisis, Ecology and Veganism, Affairs from the news, or the Torah Portion of the Week, or new insights that suddenly befell him. * Chronologically, his most influential teachers are his parents, Nico (natan) van Zuiden and Betty (beisye) Nieweg, Wim Kan, Mozart, Harvey Jackins, Marshal Rosenberg, Reb Shlomo Carlebach, and, lehavdil bein chayim lechayim, Rabbi Dr. Natan Lopes Cardozo, Rav Zev Leff, and Rav Meir Lubin. This short list doesn't mean to disrespect others who taught him a lot or a little. One of his rabbis calls him Mr. Innovation [Ish haChidushim]. Yet, his originalities seem to root deeply in traditional Judaism, though they may grow in unexpected directions. In fact, he claims he's modernizing nothing. Rather, mainly basing himself on the basic Hebrew Torah text, he tries to rediscover classical Jewish thought almost lost in thousands of years of stifling Gentile domination and Jewish assimilation. (He pleads for a close reading of the Torah instead of going by rough assumptions of what it would probably mean and before fleeing to Commentaries.) This, in all aspects of life, but prominently in the areas of Free Will, Activism, Homosexuality for men, and Redemption. * He hopes that his words will inspire and inform, and disturb the comfortable and comfort the disturbed. He aims to bring a fresh perspective rather than harp on the obvious and familiar. When he can, he loves to write encyclopedic overviews. He doesn't expect his readers to agree. Rather, original minds should be disputed. In short, his main political positions are among others: anti-Trumpism, for Zionism, Intersectionality, non-violence, anti those who abuse democratic liberties, anti the fake ME peace process, for original-Orthodoxy, pro-Science, pro-Free Will, anti-blaming-the-victim, and for down-to-earth, classical optimism, and happiness. Read his blog on how he attempts to bridge any tensions between those ideas or fields. * He is a fetal survivor of the pharmaceutical industry (https://diethylstilbestrol.co.uk/studies/des-and-psychological-health/), born in 1953 to his parents who were Dutch-Jewish Holocaust survivors who met in the largest concentration camp in the Netherlands, Westerbork. He grew up a humble listener. It took him decades to become a speaker too, and decades more to admit to being a genius. But his humility was his to keep. And so was his honesty. Bullies and con artists almost instantaneously envy and hate him. He hopes to bring new things and not just preach to the choir. * He holds a BA in medicine (University of Amsterdam) – is half a doctor. He practices Re-evaluation Co-counseling since 1977, is not an official teacher anymore, and became a friendly, powerful therapist. He became a social activist, became religious, made Aliyah, and raised three wonderful kids. Previously, for decades, he was known to the Jerusalem Post readers as a frequent letter writer. For a couple of years, he was active in hasbara to the Dutch-speaking public. He wrote an unpublished tome about Jewish Free Will. He's a strict vegan since 2008. He's an Orthodox Jew but not a rabbi. * His writing has been made possible by an allowance for second-generation Holocaust survivors from the Netherlands. It has been his dream since he was 38 to try to make a difference by teaching through writing. He had three times 9-out-of-10 for Dutch at his high school finals but is spending his days communicating in English and Hebrew - how ironic. G-d must have a fine sense of humor. In case you wonder - yes, he is a bit dyslectic. If you're a native English speaker and wonder why you should read from people whose English is only their second language, consider the advantage of having an original peek outside of your cultural bubble. * To send any personal reaction to him, scroll to the top of the blog post and click Contact Me. * His newest books you may find here: https://www.amazon.com/s?i=stripbooks&rh=p_27%3AMoshe-Mordechai%2FMaurits+van+Zuiden&s=relevancerank&text=Moshe-Mordechai%2FMaurits+van+Zuiden&ref=dp_byline_sr_book_1