# Devastating Beauty



## bmews

[FONT=&quot]*The enjoyment of pleasure derived from basking in the presence of an alluring feminine beauty is perhaps one of the most emotionally salient peak moments of experiential life. *
[/FONT]
  [FONT=&quot]Most heterosexual males are naturally hardwired and predisposed to the influences of feminine beauty. We have probably all heard the trite clichés: “Don’t judge a book by its cover” and “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.”  While beauty is certainly subject to our individual tastes and desires, and while we might not agree on a set standard or exact metric as to what features count as being “immensely beautiful”, we surely shall readily admit that *whatever we each individually regard as most beautiful, we all “know it when we see it.” *
[/FONT]
  For most men who are honest in their own emotional reflections, the encounter of feminine beauty at its highest peak is perhaps the best, most refined and infinitely perfect qualitative essence any male could ever hope to experience in life. Such are the neural-correlates-of-consciousness that makes life worth living. Perhaps only the feeling of mutually reciprocated “true love” can ever come quite as close.

Beauty and the enjoyment of beauty is a hedonistic pleasure in its own right, and this need not always be associated or correlated with other things like love, lust, infatuation or the want of a relationship.  Like most people, I am just compelled to take it all in and to imprint the unique impressions of those sorts of visual aesthetic pleasures and also to engrain and etch the most salient idealist archetypal templates of feminine beauty into my consciousness and memory forever.  There seems to be this overarching neurological or biological imperative to view as many distinctly different instantiated instances of the resplendent varieties and forms of supreme female beauty as is existentially possible.

  To give one passing example, I would sit in a class and try to get pass the boring tedious lecture and by sheer luck _(or misfortune)_ an exceedingly _(by any stringent standards)_ attractive girl would come in late and sit next to me simply because it was a large class and most seats were already taken. I never allow myself to directly stare and always maintain and uphold propriety.  Getting caught would be utterly embarrassing and totally humiliating for me. Even before she finishes taking her seat the encounter has already become nerve-wracking, distraught-ing, and emotionally devastating for me.  Within a split second later I’m totally overwhelmed by and painfully aware of the state-of-mind she has unknowingly put me in, and suddenly all my other cognitive processes have been seemingly displaced, and instead my focus lost and thoughts have peripherally shifted onto her.  *Even though I know absolutely nothing about this girl *_(or next to nothing, except how absolutely mesmerizing she appears)_ *subliminally I am already actively equating her physical beauty to “value” and conveniently both extending and projecting her physical beauty to other areas such as her personality, character, identity and the way she carries herself. * I become helplessly stranded on my own island of existential dilemmas of both wanting to look and afraid of getting caught; and of being happy that the universe afforded me another ‘stamp-collecting’ instance of a distinctive type of female beauty to savor, to imprint and to remember, whilst simultaneously cursing the universe for yet another distraction that will cause me to be distraught and leave me with the disappointment in not being able to capture or obtain a memorable and satisfactory glance. The end result is I'm left with an empty vacuous feeling.

*I find that (selectively attractive) girls that I run into in 'real life' to be far more alluring and beautiful than those on the covers of magazines or the actresses and models of hollywood. *There must be some kind of bias effect at work. I think it has something to do with the fact that once a male looks at a girl enough times - _whether in real life or otherwise_ - he "adapts" to her beauty.* It is precisely those very attractive girls whom one has not previously encountered - and has no visual template of her facial features and bodily physique stored in memory - that are most subjectively striking and appealing. *When we can only get access to a quick glance, our brain fills in the gaps and we project the most perfect ideals. Then when we get a closer look we usually find that we had set ourselves up for disappointment. In the rare cases where the girl is actually as attractive _(or sometimes even more attractive!)_ as we believed her to be, then that other kind of heartbreaking disappointment sets in as well.

  In general men are hardwired to copulate and impregnate as many different varieties of high fitness and healthy, youthful, beautiful women of excellent reproductive quality as possible. Since men compete with each other for access to desired mating opportunities, the average man is less able to have sex with as many attractive females as his biological hardwiring would ideally like him to achieve. In modern times this is compounded by the institution of marriage and the social stigma, cultural norms and religious moderators that comes with cheating, infidelity and physical or emotional polygamous behaviors. Beauty, being is one of the most valued signals that a female can send to a male, is an efficient proxy indicator of other desirable traits. Thus, *men evolved to place feminine beauty above all else.*

*There will always be a natural and instinctive impulse to "look”*. It is guided by the evolutionary forces of life and it cannot be avoided. Even when we try to override _(or at least curb)_ our genetic predispositions, there remains the problematic fact that we adapt and become desensitized to pleasurable experiences over time. Familiarity breeds indifference and contempt, and as human beings we are always on the lookout for new, fresh, exciting experiences and emotional states. *Men, just like women, do things based on how it makes them feel. *Rationale and logic are blunt instruments deployed retroactively once we have already made our decisions and based our actions on subjective emotional desires. *We are slaves to our emotions.* This problem is compounded by the fact that our own internal desires evolve, change, and are often conflicting, mutually exclusive and divergent.  Even if a male was lucky enough to obtain an exceedingly attractive girl as his girlfriend or wife, over time diminishing marginal utility/pleasure will dictate that even though her objective attractiveness stayed roughly the same _(more or less)_, his subjective intensity and interest towards her wanes and cannot be long-lasting nor sustainable.

  [FONT=&quot]By wanting to "look", perhaps this compulsion of visual aesthetic is a means of short-circuiting one's own biological imperatives.  Instead of going into the trouble of trying to score with multiple attractive women, men who are satisfied with merely enjoying a variety of attractive women visually and from afar in effect are providing their emotional sensors with the decoy that they are perhaps "_genetically successfully implanting their seed into attractive women_" but without the added expense of actually attempting – and often failing – to do so. Like masturbation, this could be yet another form of simulation and emulation. Since obviously only the most attractive top-echelon of healthy and virile men can "bed a lot of attractive women" this invariably leaves most men _(the vast remainder majority)_ unable to satisfy their genetic imperative of ‘manifest destiny’, so the ones that evolved appreciation for aesthetic beauty can emulate _(through vicarious empathy and mirror neuron processes)_ the overall happiness-factor of those successful alpha-males without expending the futile energy and resources in unsuccessfully trying to woe and mate with women who are simply outside of their reach. It also has the effect of curbing a man’s desire to actually cheat on his mate, for if merely “looking” at other attractive women provided his brain with the same or similar sets of emotional pleasures and rewards as physical infidelity _(albeit in significantly less intensity than the real deal)_ it would cause him to be less motivated and less compelled to carry out such an act. 
[/FONT]
  [FONT=&quot]*Maybe it is the intensity or valence of a particular "feeling" *_(whether it be the pleasures or happiness derived from the aesthetics of beauty, the intimacy of love or the exhilaration of passion or lust)_ *that moves us to declare *_(when poignancy, passion and wonderment seemed like reality and truth itself)_ *that basking in the realms of romantic beauty, love, and passion is the greatest, highest, more refined and noblest way and that it alone remains the highest truth, the greatest principle, purpose, cause, and meaning of life.  *After all, everything else we do in life just serves this one ultimate teleological purpose.  We are born, grow up, learn, work, shuffle through the days of our lives, and deal with all the realities of existence, grow old, and all for what if not but for those fleeting little moments of heaven-on-earth? Yes, these most salient and prominent experiential pleasures and compelling moments are the true end to all our other means. 
[/FONT]
  Some say that *variety is the spice of life*. We all invariably *adapt to pleasurable sensations and become desensitized to similar experiences* over time. If life boils down to experiences and the pursuit of such profound experiential essences, then *perhaps the only "constant" is perpetual "change"*. And maybe the best any of us can "do" is to endlessly run on this *hedonistic treadmill* and just *passively enjoy the flow of each infinitely unique experiential moment to the next.*

  [FONT=&quot]Human nature is inherently polygamous. The whole social construct of marriage goes against the natural instinct for members of both genders to stray and seek new and fresh opportunities for different varieties of experiences. No one can reasonably deny that there is indeed a natural impulse and effortless compulsion to look at, and interact with, and perhaps fall in love, and have sex with many different attractive members of the opposite gender. For me, *the existential conflict and dilemma stems not so much from the constraints of religion or the mores and norms of society but from an intrinsic struggle for unity.*

*Part of us actually wants* _(on our own volition, and not because we were told or instructed to do so)_ *to be with "one" special person* and love that individual forever. There is a sort of endearing, gingerly, intimate and fervently intense "immersiveness" that emerges when one delves deeper and deeper into the essence and being of another person. And although such highs are so high, this peak intensity can only be achieved at the expense of exclusivity and by being totally dedicated and devoted towards one singular person through commitment, attachment, devotion, loyalty, love and dedication. 

*Yet on the other hand part of us wants to seek variety,* we enjoy associations and interactions with multiple different and distinctively unique individuals. It seems "not enough" just to be with someone "good enough" or even someone truly great and awesome - someone who by any standards would exceed our threshold of compatibility and we'd count our blessings or our lucky stars to have found them.  We seek not only attraction and love, but also the excitement of new and refreshing scenery, of resplendent beauties and distinctive varieties. It feels like an innate, intrinsic or instinctive compulsion to discover and explore and to expose ourselves to as many different expressions and manifestations of combination of experiences as possible. 

*And yet these two higher-ordered overarching goals, imperatives and desires are divergent and at fundamental conflicting odds with one another. We perpetually want what we cannot have. There can be no happy reconciliation.* Some call this the struggle-for-existence; others say it is the failure of our triune brain to normalize, but whatever it is, it just feels so darn unpleasant.    
[/FONT]
  [FONT=&quot]*Each emotional experience, feeling and state-of-being, during its peak intensity and valence always feels like “the singular one”.* And while we are under its influence *we attach a certain intangible “specialness” to it*. It feels like it is the only truly great and unique feeling in the world. We say to ourselves: THIS is THE moment, or SHE is THE ONE, or NOW should last FOREVER. Today the girl who sat next to me felt like the most attractive girl in the world, tomorrow it will be someone else. Yesterday it WAS someone else. *We convincingly tell ourselves that if we could just get the object of our affections *_(and continue to experience such an emotional state into perpetuity)_ *we would be happy forever*, and would love for nothing else than to bask in that moment for the rest of eternity and be perfectly content and in want of not one thing more.  *We act entirely based on the way we feel.  But even feelings themselves are apt to often change. 
* [/FONT]
  [FONT=&quot]When we are infatuated we don’t have the mental capability to focus on the attractiveness of any other person, and when we are in love we attempt to guard and protect that loving relationship by making vows of commitment to restrict our individual freedoms. There are so many astoundingly beautiful people in the world - _and so many attractive personalities that would be utterly compatible with our own_ - *that whom we meet or end up with is largely an arbitrary and random function of chance. *While we fall in love with idealistic archetypes, in the end we have to make a decision and pick and choose one person to be the physical embodiment of our wants and wishes so that we may have something real to hold and to show for. We make promises and vows partly because of our own feelings of insecurities, but also because when we have finally found a happy feeling we want to hold on to it with every ounce of our being and never let it go. We do these things ( *we make rules) in order to stay in that pleasant and pleasurable emotional-state for as long as possible.* 

[/FONT]   [FONT=&quot]As emotional beings we cater to our desires but use logic, rules and rationale as justification for our behavior, feelings and beliefs. Yet every now and then _(largely unbeknownst to ourselves)_ *our emotional center of desire involuntarily shifts from one state and one place to another*, from one interest or one particular person to something or someone else. No one “plans” to fall out of love or to become infatuated or involved with another person who is not one’s original mate or partner. It just so happens.  
[/FONT]
  In the end, *it is never so much the actual person that we love, rather it is a set of ideals, we love the feeling of love itself,* and any convenient placeholder or proxy that fits the bill will surely make do. We seldom see the truly fickle nature of our own emotional lives. In essence, the “_rug gets pulled out from under our feet_” and there is nothing we can do about it but to go along with our new feelings, new emotions and new desires. *There seems to be no experiential unity, no holistic convergence of differentiated desires. Beauty - even one single instance of the greatest most beautiful feminine beauty, essence and form - is not always enough. *


----------



## Olly Buckle

" distinctly different instantiated instances" is tautology taken almost to an art form, to then reveal that one should experience as many of these unique moments of experience as "existentially possible".

I had been following the argument with a degree of interest up to that point. I suppose it might be done as a deliberate effect, but I don't think that's what this is.


----------



## bmews

Olly Buckle said:


> " distinctly different instantiated instances" is tautology taken almost to an art form, to then reveal that one should experience as many of these unique moments of experience as "existentially possible".
> 
> I had been following the argument with a degree of interest up to that point. I suppose it might be done as a deliberate effect, but I don't think that's what this is.



Are you saying there is some sort of ontological contradiction by suggesting an entity or form can be embodied in physicality whilst simultaneously being bounded and defined by abstract platonic existential references? Does not empirical reality itself on some level or another reflect the same self-similar paradoxes in these dichotomies of dualities? 

The human form, in all its myriad complexities, is encoded by ~750 Megabytes worth of 'digital'  DNA material. We could fit neatly on a USB flash drive. We have nearly a 7 billion human population, roughly half of that is the female sex. Yes, from an empirical experiential perspective all that we will ever know are the raw "sense data" inputs that are afforded to us. And then from that informational overload we are compelled to make sense of it all by filtering and seeing patterns, by abstraction, perception and categorization. One we have experienced enough of life we form these salient idealistic archetypal templates, and we use these as convenient pointers and placeholders to bookmark the most prominent epiphenomenon that we have come across and would like to reference again. Yet existentially there are female forms that exists on some platonic realm that could be brought into physical existence and be instantiated (hypothetically speaking : genetic engineering, cloning, etc) as just one more of the many resplendent instances of beauty in the flesh. What if the most beautiful girl that could ever be encoded by the human genetic structure hasn't even been born yet? Are we to limit ourselves (or our imaginations) only to the set of women that actually exists right now in the world "out there"? In practical terms no one actually can experience the entire world anyway, so by that definition what "exists" is strictly defined by simply what we have been able to personally come across?


----------



## The Blue Pencil

I'm not going to discuss the subject matter of this piece since I am a female  But I will critique your writing. 
Honestly, it seems like you took a simple, to the point subject and used "big words" and flowery language to stretch the piece into something extremely long. The way you wrote almost makes you look ridiculous as though you think flowery writing will make you look intellectual. 
Shorten the essay and write in plain English, and then it's an excellent piece.
Then again, I'm probably the only person here who uses plain language when I write so most won't support my views.


----------



## bmews

The Blue Pencil said:


> I'm not going to discuss the subject matter of this piece since I am a female  But I will critique your writing.
> Honestly, it seems like you took a simple, to the point subject and used "big words" and flowery language to stretch the piece into something extremely long. The way you wrote almost makes you look ridiculous as though you think flowery writing will make you look intellectual.
> Shorten the essay and write in plain English, and then it's an excellent piece.
> Then again, I'm probably the only person here who uses plain language when I write so most won't support my views.



What do you mean plain language? It seems already pretty plain. I had a couple of "big words" in there before but I took them out. Anyway I'm not a writer and this is no writing exercise for me, I am just trying to make sense of what I wrote. The content, not the execution.


----------



## The Blue Pencil

bmews said:


> Beauty and the enjoyment of beauty is a hedonistic pleasure in its own right, and this need not always be associated or correlated with other things like love, lust, infatuation or the want of a relationship.  Like most people, I am just compelled to take it all in and to imprint the unique impressions of those sorts of visual aesthetic pleasures and also to engrain and etch the most salient idealist archetypal templates of feminine beauty into my consciousness and memory forever.  There seems to be this overarching neurological or biological imperative to view as many distinctly different instantiated instances of the resplendent varieties and forms of supreme female beauty as is existentially possible.


This paragraph itself is confusing and seems just overdone. Are you trying to sound like a wordy philosopher? It could easily be compacted into a few simple sentences. If this is just the way that you write, fine. But if you're using extravagant language just to seem intelligent, that's ridiculous.


----------



## ClosetWriter

This is my first response, and I hope I don't sound too critical, but I must admit that I found it very hard to read. The question I ask myself, when I read something like this, is, do people really talk like this? I caught myself drifting off to other thoughts; the subject matter caught my attention, but the wording seemed like an advanced text book. I'm sorry. I think the skills are there; you just need to tone down the dialect.


----------



## bmews

Well actually I'm in college and this thing has been bothering me a little.. Last week this really hot girl sat next to me and I just totally lost my concentration. And then I realized how affected I was by feminine beauty and how long this has been influencing me. So I typed up a little something last night and posted it on some forums, no one read it because everyone thought it was too long and wordy. I condensed, abridged and redacted it some more, and thought perhaps if I posted it on a writing forum people would be more inclined to read and respond to it. Guess not.


----------



## Olly Buckle

> This paragraph itself is confusing and seems just overdone. Are you trying to sound like a wordy philosopher? It could easily be compacted into a few simple sentences. If this is just the way that you write, fine. But if you're using extravagant language just to seem intelligent, that's ridiculous.


This sort of criticism is often not very useful without demonstrating exactly what you mean. The writer is often expressing themselves in a way that they have no problem with and thus have trouble seeing the problems of others, for example.

To approach the paragraph in question

Beauty and the enjoyment of beauty is a hedonistic pleasure no arguing with that in its own right,Is this necessary? and this need not always be associated or correlated withtry "Not always associated with", we know what we are talking about, "need" does not come into it and associated and correlated have a close association and correlation of meaning other things like love, lust, infatuation or the want of a relationship. Like most people, I am justjust in which sense? or is it _just_ filler compelled seems strong,to take it Unnecessary, if they are impressions they are imprintedall in and to imprint ]the unique impressions of those sorts of visual aesthetic pleasures andthis sentence is starting to get a bit long also to engrain and etchit's ingrain, but etch as well? the most I don't think you can apply a superlative to words like idealetc. salient idealist archetypal templates of feminine beauty into my consciousness and memory are the rwo separate? forever. There seems to be this an overarching neurological or biological imperative to view as many distinctly different instantiated instances distinct different instantiated instances are usually called "occasions" or sometimes "times"of the resplendent varieties and formsis there any meaningful differentiation between a variety and a form in this context?  of supreme female beauty as is existentially possible

try,


Beauty and the enjoyment of beauty is a hedonistic pleasure, not always associated with things like love, lust, infatuation or the want of a relationship. Like most people, I take it in and remember the visual and aesthetic pleasures. I want beautiful women to stay in my memory forever. There seems to be an overarching neurological or biological imperative to view as many forms of female beauty as possible.

It could probably be worked on a bit but the reduction in verbosity and increase in accessibility more than compensate for any reduction in the exactitudes of meaning in my opinion. This is a discussion of physique, not physics.


----------



## bmews

Olly Buckle said:


> This sort of criticism is often not very useful without demonstrating exactly what you mean. The writer is often expressing themselves in a way that they have no problem with and thus have trouble seeing the problems of others, for example.
> 
> To approach the paragraph in question
> 
> Beauty and the enjoyment of beauty is a hedonistic pleasure no arguing with that in its own right,Is this necessary? and this need not always be associated or correlated withtry "Not always associated with", we know what we are talking about, "need" does not come into it and associated and correlated have a close association and correlation of meaning other things like love, lust, infatuation or the want of a relationship. Like most people, I am justjust in which sense? or is it _just_ filler compelled seems strong,to take it Unnecessary, if they are impressions they are imprintedall in and to imprint ]the unique impressions of those sorts of visual aesthetic pleasures andthis sentence is starting to get a bit long also to engrain and etchit's ingrain, but etch as well? the most I don't think you can apply a superlative to words like idealetc. salient idealist archetypal templates of feminine beauty into my consciousness and memory are the rwo separate? forever. There seems to be this an overarching neurological or biological imperative to view as many distinctly different instantiated instances distinct different instantiated instances are usually called "occasions" or sometimes "times"of the resplendent varieties and formsis there any meaningful differentiation between a variety and a form in this context?  of supreme female beauty as is existentially possible
> 
> try,
> 
> 
> Beauty and the enjoyment of beauty is a hedonistic pleasure, not always associated with things like love, lust, infatuation or the want of a relationship. Like most people, I take it in and remember the visual and aesthetic pleasures. I want beautiful women to stay in my memory forever. There seems to be an overarching neurological or biological imperative to view as many forms of female beauty as possible.
> 
> It could probably be worked on a bit but the reduction in verbosity and increase in accessibility more than compensate for any reduction in the exactitudes of meaning in my opinion. This is a discussion of physique, not physics.


 
Okay, thank you for that. Yes, I see how I could have been unnecessarily wordy and verbose. Do you have any substantive advice in general in terms of the subject matter?


----------



## ClosetWriter

I think it is a great topic, and the fact that you were in tune with, and aware of your reaction to her beauty is great. Since this is a writing forum I felt compelled to respond about your writing style, and not your intellect. For me, half the battle is coming up with interesting things to write about. You are obviously good at achieving this. I think the fact that it is long is _not_ the reason that no one read it in those other forums. As I mentioned it is a great subject to explore. I think that had you taken a more light-hearted approach to the male response would have made it more readable.


----------



## The Blue Pencil

Olly Buckle said:


> This sort of criticism is often not very useful without demonstrating exactly what you mean. The writer is often expressing themselves in a way that they have no problem with and thus have trouble seeing the problems of others, for example.
> 
> To approach the paragraph in question
> 
> Beauty and the enjoyment of beauty is a hedonistic pleasure no arguing with that in its own right,Is this necessary? and this need not always be associated or correlated withtry "Not always associated with", we know what we are talking about, "need" does not come into it and associated and correlated have a close association and correlation of meaning other things like love, lust, infatuation or the want of a relationship. Like most people, I am justjust in which sense? or is it _just_ filler compelled seems strong,to take it Unnecessary, if they are impressions they are imprintedall in and to imprint ]the unique impressions of those sorts of visual aesthetic pleasures andthis sentence is starting to get a bit long also to engrain and etchit's ingrain, but etch as well? the most I don't think you can apply a superlative to words like idealetc. salient idealist archetypal templates of feminine beauty into my consciousness and memory are the rwo separate? forever. There seems to be this an overarching neurological or biological imperative to view as many distinctly different instantiated instances distinct different instantiated instances are usually called "occasions" or sometimes "times"of the resplendent varieties and formsis there any meaningful differentiation between a variety and a form in this context?  of supreme female beauty as is existentially possible
> 
> try,
> 
> 
> Beauty and the enjoyment of beauty is a hedonistic pleasure, not always associated with things like love, lust, infatuation or the want of a relationship. Like most people, I take it in and remember the visual and aesthetic pleasures. I want beautiful women to stay in my memory forever. There seems to be an overarching neurological or biological imperative to view as many forms of female beauty as possible.
> 
> It could probably be worked on a bit but the reduction in verbosity and increase in accessibility more than compensate for any reduction in the exactitudes of meaning in my opinion. This is a discussion of physique, not physics.


Olly Buckle, thank you for making such a good critique. I realized that my crit was not very helpful and I will admit the reason I didn't provide a better one. I couldn't understand most of it, just picked up the main ideas. I guess it's not really my place to by trying to critique. Sorry.


----------



## Olly Buckle

> I guess it's not really my place to by trying to critique. Sorry.


Not at all, critique is like writing, you improve by practice, you need to practice to improve.
 Your comment was not invalid, it merely needed to be expanded to make it more helpful. The awareness critiquing produces will also help with your own writing, nothing exists in isolation.


----------



## Shirley S. Bracken

I think what you are saying is... It's easy to get what you want but hard to want what you get. 
You have shown me a bit about how males think.  It is rather enlightening and I liked the ending.
As for how it is written, I was put off a bit at first until I read what Olly said.  I went back and read it again, got more from it the second time.


----------



## Mike in the West

In one of your responses you say that you are interested in the content not the written style of your piece. Fair enough. However, by posting you are seeking feedback, and for me that is difficult. I did read through to the end but did not bother to keep reaching for the dictionary, although maybe I should have taken the trouble. Perhaps at college you are required to demonstrate a wide vocabulary, but surely not at the expense of communicating. Too often you have chosen words that the vast majority of English-speaking people do not understand, why do that?

Of the 2543 words in your piece more than 10% are adjectives / adverbs, often to be found in strings of four at a time. Although heavy to wade through it has the unexpected benefit of emphasising how passionately you feel about your subject. I'm inclined to agree with much of the sentiment you express, but I feel you underestimate the power of genuine love that is mutually felt. Nothing stays the same for ever, but the foundation of genuine mutual love brings with it a sincere ability to cope in times of difficulty. Too often that genuine foundation is not emplaced and then perhaps the grass looks greener...........


You might like to read one of my poems entitled 'Such beauty', I think it has a bearing on your written piece.


----------



## Divus

Bmews,
You asked for criticism of what you wrote rather than how you wrote it. Your style of writing is for me a little highbrow and well above my comprehension level. I will not comment much on the style, merely to say that I found it to be heavy. I could not bring myself to read it all. Others can criticise far more eruditely than I. 

However I do know something about sex so maybe I can help with your underlying question. Having lived through all the stages of sexual attraction I can only say to you: “Enjoy it whilst it lasts“. Stop writing about it and get on with doing it.

So the scene is that a pretty young woman sat in an empty seat next to you. Her presence seemed to turn you on mentally but I do wonder what it did to you physically. 
Did your loins stir, my Boy? 
Did your hand quiver? 
Did you take in a extra breath? 
Did you steal a surreptitious gawp?

Her presence obviously made a big impression on your mind but did you feel an urgent desire to reach out and touch her hand. Did you want to look down her cleavage. Was the fact that her thigh was just a matter of inches away from your own make you think to reach out and give it a gentle stroke. 
Did you edge your chair closer to hers? 
Were you anxious to see the shape of her bottom? 
What was she wearing? 
Did she wear perfume? 
Did you hear her voice? 
Had you seen her before? 
Later did you lay awake at night dreaming of what might have been?

As a reader I want a taste. 

What is very important, did you actually speak to this Goddess of Pulchritude?
Did she return your approach and more importantly did she smile when she spoke? 
Did she speak with a harmonious voice? 
Or did she look at you with a look of distain and turn her head the other way?

Now beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Sadly with many modern women you cannot always tell if what you are looking at is real. Some women wear make up centimetres thick. They tint everything with cosmetic colouring. They wear bras with pads. They wear elasticated underwear and coloured tights. Sometimes the creature you are looking at fully dressed in war paint and couture is not actually what lies underneath the wrapping. 
You will not know whether this delightful apparition is all real until you remove the wrappers. But she probably will not let you touch anyway. She wants to tease.

Now it would be nice to think that the sight of beautiful women is an enjoyment in itself but I assure that it isn’t always. There are millions of beautiful women out there. Virtually every other human is female and they come in all shapes, sizes and colours. However if you can’t touch, feel, taste, smell you might just as well be looking at a model on Page 3 of the London Daily Mirror.

What is always nice is that little bit of ‘frisson’ brought about by your knees brushing against hers, your hand brushing against her arm, or that you caught a glimpse of soft, warm, downy flesh. And instead of going all flowery and writing long words you blurt out: ‘*Gawd, I fancy that something rotten‘.*

The physical attraction between male and female is not a logical process to be reasoned out.
Most animals, and we humans are merely animals with over large brains, are aroused by pheromones, namely scents or fine odours emitted by creatures of the opposite sex with the deliberate objective of sexual arousal. That is where perfume comes from. It is Nature’s way of securing the survival of the species. 

Every now and again in your life you will meet a female who for some unknown reason arouses in you sheer, unadulterated lust. Amazingly not all of these creatures are beautiful, some are just plain sexy and you won’t understand why. Personally I used to like occasionally enjoying the companionship of a willing, sexy slut, even if she was a bit plain to look at in daylight. 

_PS ‘Devastate’ (as per Collins) 1: lay waste, make desolate, ravage, destroy._
_2: to confound or overwhelm _
_Did this girl really do all that to you just by sitting down close by? _

_I thought we were talking about procreation not devastation. Or am I being coarse?_


----------



## Olly Buckle

to then reveal that one should experience as many of these unique moments of experience as "existentially possible".



> Are you saying there is some sort of ontological contradiction by suggesting an entity or form can be embodied in physicality whilst simultaneously being bounded and defined by abstract platonic existential references? Does not empirical reality itself on some level or another reflect the same self-similar paradoxes in these dichotomies of dualities?



Existentially, to do with existence, based on experience, empirical.
So, in one sense One should experience as many of these experiences as is possible, based on experience.

As Mr Hendrix would have it “Are you truly experienced?"

I should ask yourself the questions that Divus has asked, then go find her next class and ask if she will come and have coffee with you after class, if she says yes do not use a word over two syllables unless it is to say "Fascinating" to something she said, focus your attention on her, never use more than a few words together, things like "Really, what did you say?". Do *not* demonstrate your erudition, knowledge and intelligence, let her demonstrate hers. Afterwards she will report you as being erudite, intelligent, knowledgeable and kind.

I am serious, this is some good advice.


----------



## bmews

Divus,

Thanks for the input. Wow I have to say your response made me blush and a little bit self-conscientious. I very much appreciate your thoughts and advice, even though it was outside the realms of what I had expected. 

*"Every now and again in your life you will meet a female who for some  unknown reason arouses in you sheer, unadulterated lust. Amazingly not  all of these creatures are beautiful, some are just plain sexy and you  won’t understand why. Personally I used to like occasionally the  companionship of a willing, sexy slut, even if she was a bit plain to  look at in daylight"

*I agree, the sheer desire for unabashed wanton lust and exhilarating passion exists as a pleasure in its own right. Who said love, beauty and lust had to go together? Why can't they be separated and isolated into their own component channels and enjoyed in a more intense and focused manner? 

The problem is that beauty affects me the most, and not lust nor even love. Beauty too exists as an distinct aesthetic pleasure in a class of its own, wouldn't you agree? Haven't you ever been spellbound by the breathtakingly visual imagery of an exceedingly attractive woman (physique + facial) simply because she was naturally and effortless a "goddess"? This sort of aesthetic beauty and pleasure does not readily lead itself to be translated or transformed to lust.. Love maybe (or rather infatuation) but hardly lust. 


*There are millions of beautiful women out there. Virtually every other  human is female and they come in all shapes, sizes and colours. *

True, but only a very small percentage possess such subjectively salient and prominent features as to stand out as outliers and in a class of beauty and mesmerization of their own.


----------



## Olly Buckle

> Haven't you ever been spellbound by the breathtakingly visual imagery of an exceedingly attractive woman (physique + facial) simply because she was naturally and effortless a "goddess"?


Twice, I had an affair with one and married the other, both were mistakes, and I do not regret them in the slightest.


----------



## Divus

Quote: 'the sheer desire for unabashed wanton lust and exhilarating passion exists as a pleasure in its own right. Who said love, beauty and lust had to go together? Why can't they be separated and isolated into their own component channels and enjoyed in a more intense and focused manner? Unquote 

*Lust* is a chemical reaction - provoked by many triggers eg abstention, alcohol, drugs, pain, anger, pity, imagination.
*Love* is a feeling. An emotion. Within most humans there is a need to give it and to receive it. It is an emotion not just confined to relationships between man and woman or even man and man, or parent and child it can be shared by human and animal particularly horses and dogs. The lick of the hand of a man by a dog is an act of love. A stroke of the head of a dog can be an act of love from a human.
*Beauty* is mostly an effect, a vision, a taste. It is often transient. It is hard to accept that any example of beauty is supreme. 

Beauty too exists as an distinct aesthetic pleasure in a class of its own, wouldn't you agree? Not really. 

Haven't you ever been spellbound by the breathtakingly visual imagery of an exceedingly attractive woman (physique + facial) simply because she was naturally and effortless a "goddess"? I have never met a 'goddess'. Spell bound??? Hmmm. 

This sort of aesthetic beauty and pleasure does not readily lead itself to be translated or transformed to lust.. Love maybe (or rather infatuation) but hardly lust.
I 'see' a beautiful 'thing' by hearing, smelling, touching and occasionally tasting. Sight is but one sense. Lust, as I have said is a chemical reaction.

Bmews. You are obviously a romantic and nothing which I write is going to change/cure you.
To me, the sense for beauty lies within the beholder and is not confined to judging only the visual appearance especially of people. Sadly in this modern era, women are led to believe that they can make themselves supremely beautiful by the use of cosmetics and apparel. Whereas to me a woman is most beautiful when she is naked and scrubbed clean of feminine war paint. She smells best, when she is just that little bit sweaty. She looks best usually when she is laughing.

A smile makes a plain woman beautiful as does a squeeze of the hand. The emotion of love can make a woman look beautiful as can the sigh after sex. But who was the most beautiful of them all - well I cannot say.

Bmews, You worry me a little bit. You brought me into your mind with your article and in return I let you into mine. 
I imagine you finding something which you feel to be beautiful and then you lock it away in a cupboard so that noone else can see it whereas I believe that what can be described as beautiful is best shared.


----------



## The Backward OX

bmews, I lost interest when I came to the word 'instantiated'.



> Haven't you ever been spellbound by the breathtakingly visual imagery of an exceedingly attractive woman (physique + facial) simply because she was naturally and effortless a "goddess"?


 


Olly Buckle said:


> Twice, I had an affair with one and married the other, both were mistakes, and I do not regret them in the slightest.


 
An early mentor of mine once said, "Put bags over their heads and they're all the same." He said it in his wife's hearing, who shortly thereafter began showing an interest in this little black duck, but that's another story.


----------



## Olly Buckle

> The lick of the hand of a man by a dog is an act of love.


No, it's an adaptation of puppy behaviour, it is a dog eat dog world out there and the only way the bitch can get meat back to the den safely is inside her. When she gets back the pups start a licking frenzy which prompts her to throw up. What he is really saying is "That was a nice dinner you had, would you mind throwing up my share?"


----------



## Divus

Olly, you have such an elegant way of putting things.

And there was me with my illusions.

Dv


----------



## The Backward OX

I'm with Divus. Another childhood illusion shattered. I grew up on Old Shep. Well before the Elvis version too.

"Old Shep, he knew he was going to go
For he reached out and licked at my hand
He looked up at me just as much as to say
'We're parting, but I understand.'"

Shame on you.


----------



## alanmt

Alas, I have learned through bitter experience that all too often breathtaking beauty is accompanied by flaws of character, and not infrequently with DSM-IV defined disorders.

I think it can be said that beauty is both blessing and curse to those who have it.

My advice to you, bmews, is not to overidealize it. Appreciate it, but not to the denigration of your own self.




Also, use less bold type.


----------



## Divus

Alan,  You can't leave the debate like that.  I have got to ask:

         What is a DSM-IV disorder? 

and, while you are at it, you might as well define the other three.


----------



## The Backward OX

Sorry to butt in. It's the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. You'll find all manner of weird things listed there.


----------



## Divus

DSM

Damm,
It looks as though I am on yet another Government list


----------



## satkinsn

bmews said:


> Last week this really hot girl sat next to me and I just totally lost my concentration.



Start there.

s.


----------



## Divus

Satkin

Sorry, bmews is in a state of awe.    Any way the moment has passed.


----------



## satkinsn

I know, but it was low hanging fruit. 

s.


----------



## Divus

Be easy on the lad, if he stretched up, he'd fall off the ladder.

He's a nice chap really.     He's just got to stop driblling and start licking.


----------



## Sam

I would appreciate it if everyone kept on-topic with their posts. If you want to have a chat, take it to PMs or subscribe to the chat-room. Thank you.


----------



## satkinsn

Thanks Sam. Will do.


----------

