Posts Tagged ‘sex’


August 6, 2015



Most (damn near all) Western Homo sapiens sapiens (us) are whack jobs who can screw up an anvil with a rubber mallet!  Both genders, including me!

I began my research into sexology about 15 years ago to find out what was going on in our bodies after an awesome sexual experience.  It took 10 years just to find out the name: transcendent sex.  I got all the way down to the genetic level in our bodies without answers until I threw love into the pot.  Then it happened.  It worked!

I looked at love with an engineer’s eye: a different perspective.  Love is an energy spectrum impacting us at the genetic level.  It at least impacts our epigenome, and who knows after that?  Erotic love is apparently the most powerful because of the passion or amplitude of the energy we are transmitting.  Twenty-five hundred years ago, the Greeks defined Eros, the god of erotic love, as one who endowed us with creative powers and the ability to bring order out of chaos.  Around the time of Plato, Eros was diminished to the god of sexual pleasure.

One of the things I learned is sexology is very subjective.  Everybody is out to promote their view.  Me too.  The difference I claim is, I focus on love—attributes and behaviors—along with our biology.  I recognize there are no biological absolutes and we each have our own individual uniqueness.  I admit you are your own best “sex expert,” once you divest yourself of 5,000 years of fear-based BS creating your epigenome and screwing up your genes.  That is the tough part.

So, what is this war on women?  Face it!  We live in a greed based patriarchy.  We are given “standards of normalcy” from patriarchal authority.  What I have learned is that when I put anyone down, I am putting me down, which is where this authority wants me.  I don’t belong down!  Misogyny is not about putting women down.  It is about keeping men down!  The war on women is but a strategy in the war on love.  Until we come together in love, recognizing what fantastic creatures we and others are in their own right, “they” win!

Intimate Relationships

February 7, 2015

I have now three criteria for intimate relationships

  1. A mutual desire for unity
  2. Lotsa love.
  3. Great sex.

This is exactly the reverse order in which I studied these things, but I’ve always done things backwards.

Unity: oneness with

It starts at home, with me. It comes from loving myself. This is different from narcissism and being completely selfish. It is more like taking care of one’s self: physically, emotionally and spiritually. That is going to vary for each of us, so I’m not going to get into absolutes.

Once we know pretty much who we really are, rather than what society and others have told us who we are, then we are ready to receive or look for someone with whom we can share our life. Contrary to popular opinion, it is always going to be my life, just as it is always going to be her life. “Gears meshing smoothly” is one metaphor. Two gears are always going to be two gears, meshing to make things work. But both have this desire to blend and mesh THEIR lives into a life together. Pick your own metaphor.

Lotsa Love

You all know by now, I look at love as an energy spectrum, said energy being delivered through the heart rather than the head. This too, has to be mutual, though it will vary from time to time around the spectrum. One can love another to near infinite heights, and it won’t work if not reciprocated. Even when reciprocated it won’t work without the desire for unity. Love as a feeling comes and goes. The energy is always there. How we let it in to us and focus it on another is a different story.

Great Sex

This is another one up for grabs. My views on great sex have changed significantly. Great sex can come from quickies in the presence of love, just as a reminder you are together as a pair of gears meshing. It can be had in those sessions lasting for hours or with transcendent sexual experiences. The definition of great sex is an individual subjective thing. I think it may have more to do with our desire to give ourselves and our responses to one another than looking for a response from the other.

In the beginning of my sexual life it was about notches in my belt. I got so many my pants fell down. Then it was about pleasing her. I was wearying of the continual chase. Figure out how to please one and I wouldn’t have to chase as much. Then I fell in love and transmitted that love sexually. It was entirely different: ecstasy as compared to pleasure. It didn’t last either. I instinctively knew the desire for unity was not there, but when ahead anyway, kidding myself.

Now, I’ve decided to reverse my order and go for mutual desire for unity, then love and the great sex will follow. This is not to say I won’t break this order of things, but unity will always be primo! We’ll see how this works.

“Sex Experts” and Sexual Biology

October 29, 2014


It is my opinion there is no such thing as a “sex expert.” Various experts will try and tell you, “If you do this then that will happen.” Or they will tell you, “ALL men or women are like this or that.” I will agree that some generalities may be applicable in some cases at certain times. Mostly I find nothing but authoritative opinion based on limited experience projected onto men and women as universal truths. My response is, “Bullshit!”

When I began my research under the guidance of Dr. Beverly Whipple, one of the great lessons I learned is “all women are different.” So are men. I was acutely aware of her scientific statements: “the data suggest….” And, “it appears that…” This gives us only generalities that are applicable to that specific and tiny study population.

I have experienced and observed a relatively broad range of orgasmic experiences. I have anecdotal evidence of more. I have also learned not to limit ourselves. Just because I don’t know about a specific experience you may have doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. Just because you don’t have one of the ones I describe, or have it differently than I describe, only means you don’t have it or have it differently. You are unique where you are right now.

I will say I believe our orgasmic experiences are a function of our unique DNA coding and that is impacted by our epigenome. Much of our epigenome is created by fear. It is essentially like wrapping up our genes with duct tape so they cannot be expressed, or produce the amino acids and thereby proteins that create various sexual responses in our bodies, including pleasure. Just because I believe it doesn’t make it true or a fact. It appears to work.

It also appears “love” un-wraps the “duct tape” from our genes allowing them to express or shut down in cases where they are not supposed to work. This is why I view love as an energy spectrum. I have no idea which frequency or frequencies act on anybody’s genes to produce the varying responses. Neither does anybody else. I can only tell you about a few responses I have experienced, observed or about which I have been advised. I can tell you about things in the human body that appear at a gross level to be common or in some cases unique.

For example, some women as part of their orgasmic experience, will have a clear, copious emission (250 -500+ ml) through the vagina. This is natural for them. Others may have a clear copious emission through the urethra (125 + ml) in addition to the milky emission from the female prostate (5- 15 ml). It doesn’t make any difference. As a guy, my job, our job, is to accept and appreciate what ever response she offers. We also need to listen to her and her body with our heart.

Some women have no control over their responses. They are going to respond the way they do whether we love them or they love us or not. Our love for them simply makes them feel safe, or confident in knowledge we will accept their response with gratitude, no matter what it is. WE ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR RESPONSE! WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING THEM FEEL SAFE ENOUGH SO THEIR BODY WILL RESPOND. Our love for them un-wraps our genes. Their love for us un-wraps their genes.

Some of the fears we hold are buried so deeply in our sub-conscious we don’t even know we hold them. Love seems to work anyway. My opinion is that with love, we are each our own “sex experts,” and I only have one X-chromosome. I can only tell you of a few things that may happen and some of the things in our common history that appear to wrap up our genes. We are fantastic creatures. My wish is for each of us to grow into our fantastic selves.


August 7, 2014



To provide couples with some tools which may lead to a lasting, interdependent relationship, from which growth may begin.


All relationships go through dependent stages of development. Today, it seems most get stuck in dependency or co-dependency. It makes no difference if it is with a beloved, children, family, friends, neighbors or co-workers. I compare this process with the germination of a seed, and there are many ways in which a seed may germinate. Interdependence, then, is the sprouting of the seed. Just like trees, that is when we really begin to grow.

Why did I choose the field of “Sexual Biology?”

  1. I created the field and there is no one else here.

  2. I recognize the uniqueness of the individual and only provide information on various responses and how they may occur in the human body.

  3. I recognize the “mind boxes” into which modern man is placed and although I cannot remove them, I can tell you where they came from and you can remove them if you want.

  4. I used to think I was alone in my magnificent sexual experiences. Thanks to many of you, I now believe millions have these awesome experiences. I share mine along with those of others, and provide possible biological mechanisms for them. THEY ARE NATURAL AND NOT TO BE FEARED!

  5. I’m the only guy I know of that takes a hardcore look at love as a powerful energy spectrum (not mushy gushy stuff), breaks it down into general behaviors and attitudes, then gets into the positive impact on the human body at the genetic level. Doctors today tell us “sex is good for us.” Hell, I suggest it can even reverse the aging process, when we incorporate love in our sexual activities without all the bullshit!

  6. Then, I’m the only guy who says don’t believe me. Try it for yourself! Then you’ll believe me.

Bottom line is great sex isn’t going to hold intimate relationships together: love is!

Why Do I Have This Mission?

The truth is, damn if I know. I like to think it is because I’m selfish and want to live in a better world.

The Alchemy of Erotic Love… forGuys: Chapter 1. Where Are We?

April 28, 2014

What do we think about sex and love? Why do we think about sex the way we do? Where do you start a book like this? The best place to startmight be from where we are, and then work both past and future. What is important is not what “we” think, but what you think, and why.


What we think about sex is unique to each of us, but generally ranges from “it’s better than masturbation” to “it’s the most wondrous experience in life.” What I found humorous in my research is there is no clinical or scientific definition of sex! We all assume everybody knows what it is and what we are talking about. The problem is we can only define it from our own experience and education. Then, our education depends on how we interpret the opinion of others based on our own unique experiences. And then, we have our point of view.


The first thing I would like to offer for your consideration is a clinical definition of sex. “Sex is the mental and/or physical stimulation of nerve endings, creating electro/chemical energy that may result in pleasurable involuntary muscle contractions in the genitalia and other sexual responses.” Sex is also a mechanism for transmitting love, and we’ll get to this later.


As we will see throughout the book, this definition opens a larger can of worms than it closes. I have observed involuntary muscle contractions ranging from a gentle fluttering or buzzing in the genitalia (accompanied by a sigh of relief) to something resembling a grand mal seizure. Further, science doesn’t know what the “nerve impulses” are or if they vary with the individual? The bottom line is what we know about sex is primarily the opinion of others (including me) that limits our perception and experiences. I have no idea how far you can go and all I want to do here is give you more options by taking your blinders off. You may experience more pleasure and have other results as well.


Generally speaking what I have learned from others is that sex is either about pleasure or procreation. A distinct effort is made to keep love outof the equation. I call this the “Pleasure/procreation paradigm.” A paradigm describes distinct concepts or thought patterns. Even with this definition, we each have our own perception of the concept. When it comes to sex, there are about 7.5 billion perceptions of sex, one for each of us, and each of us believes most of the rest of us holds the same perception, but if you don’t, you are a pervert. I don’t think you are a pervert. I think you hold a different perception of sex and love than I do. All I am offering you here is a different angle to look at your perception. As you will see in Chapter 7, our sexuality is simply based on how we view sex, and that is a function of many factors.


In1974, Robert C. Solomon noted, “It is one of the dangers of conceptual analysis that the philosophers choice of paradigms betrays a personal bias, but it is an exceptional danger of sexual conceptual analysis that one’s choice of paradigms also betrays one’s private fantasies and obsessions.”1 What Solomon did not recognize is the overall sexual paradigm under which we in Western civilization currently operate (for 5000 years+/-): pleasure and/or procreation. The paradigms to which he referred were but sub-sets of this one, which in and of itself is a political construct. What this political construct does is keep us focused on pleasure or procreation and keeps us from focusing on love. We will see that love may be different from what we imagine it to be and in the next chapter we will see it can change us in wondrous ways.
Maintenance of the paradigm may also be viewed as “the war between the sexes.” The primary strategy of war is “divide and conquer.” In this war, the tactics are the four “D’s:” deification, demonization, denigration, and dismissal. I’ve found a number of historic documents that blatantly show these mechanisms and will discuss them in detail later, along with more modern erroneous myths. The problem is even though we are not consciously aware of these myths and misinformation; they permeate our society. I’d never heard of the Myth of Lilith, yet for years limited myself to the missionary position.


Lilith was among the first to be demonized; later the Malleus Maleficarum demonized all women. The goal of deification is to put the opposite sex, or the sexual relationship out of reach as seen between Isis and Osiris. To some extent, even “motherhood” is deified. The extreme end of the sexual paradigm is for men to view women as either sacred brood cows or pleasure palaces: both ludicrous. A man’s love for woman will be the salvation of mankind, should they accept it and return it.


Around1250 CE, Vincent of Beauvais wrote the Speculum Maius (The Great Mirror), the Funk& Wagnalls Encyclopedia of the time. In there was a section consisting of 2734 chapters called the Speculum Doctrinale. Deep in one of those chapters is an admonishment for husbands not to love our wives too much. This seems to have stuck!


Dismissal can be more damaging than burning at the stake.“Pay her no mind. She’s just a woman.” (I detested Tool Time for this reason.) It would be easy to point out the vile put-downs, or denigration, of women today. But they are historic and will continue into the future. We can only change it in ourselves, and by boycotting those who persist in it. One damn good reason is backlash. Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned! Or, “Karma is a bitch!” A better reason is what we men (and women) can do for ourselves by violating the Speculum Doctrinale, and loving. Through love, we may transform into the divine human beings we can be.


Through the ages, the word “divine” became woo-speak. It simply means having the ability to see or find the unseen. It is more about accessing our intuition and being able to solve problems without knowing how we are doing it. Although that “ignorance” in my left-brain, sometimes ticks me off, it works.


My point of view (POV) came from a transcendent experience, following my then beloved glowing like a firefly, lighting the room.  I was in blackness. There appeared a point of shimmering light, I recognized as my essence.

Then, another point of light I recognized as her essence.













The two lights danced toward each other,









becoming one bright light.



Beginning with the blackness, I was inthe presence of God and God was smiling.  THE POINTS OF LIGHT HAD NOGENDER.  There was no masculine or feminine, divine or otherwise in this dimension, or plane, whatever you want to call it.  No more than photons have gender.  I don’t know if I had “an orgasm” or not.  This was a part of that orgasmic experience.


This type of transcendent experience is called merging and it has many variations, as many as there are “types” of transcendence. “Any kind of transcendence with a partner is no guarantee of a lasting relationship.”  I read this in Jenny Wade’s book, “Transcendent Sex,” ten years later and smiled, because she was gone in four days. All this is discussed in later chapters.


Our society, or culture what ever you wish to call it, conditions us to believe, as it once did me, men are penises with wallets attached, the larger the better, and women are toys for pleasure or breeding to satisfy our respective egos.


There was one other element to my experience I forgot to mention: love; as close to “unconditional love” as I have ever experienced.  As I plowed through my research, I ignored it.  But something was missing?  DUH! Love!  With love everything fell into place.  Better yet, I was aware that I could recognize the essence of someone and had the capacity to love that essence unconditionally as well as receive her love.


In this life, or on this plane, where most of us exist, men and women are different.  We have different anatomies, not only in our genitalia but also all over our bodies.  I believe this anatomical difference was given to us for a reason.  I can’t put my finger on it, but I like it. It seems first we unite in the flesh, becoming one flesh.  Then we unite as male/female to female/male. Then we can see our essence,without gender, though in this life our gender will be with us ‘till we die.  The order is immaterial and there may be more.


My work leads me to believe as sentient,biological beings we have the capacity to make this leap.  It is a process: quickly for some, a long winding road for others. I choose to begin at the beginning, in this plane, this life, leaving each to their own quantum leap.  Is there more?  Probably. I can only lead as far as I have gone and leave the door open for the individuals who wish to pass through.  I also recognize other POV’s, because mine is not the only one.   Yet in the other ones I like, I can always find the love, even with another name.


Why is my book “… for Guys?” I chose to begin at the beginning.  In this life, I am a guy. As such, I have no business telling a woman how she should feel, beor what she should do.  I don’t even tell guys this.  I tell them what I have done and observed what works.  I tell them what my perspective is and how it changed my life.  How I think it works is all intuitive speculation.  I just know the results.


I describe the fantastic male and female interior genitalia for guys, using parts lists and wiring schematics.  I talk about responses few have experienced or even heard of.  This is just so they will know and not be frightened when and if they happen.  I talk about anatomical differences between men and women.  Women have a better connection between left and right brain, due to a thicker corpus callosum.  Sensory perception is a function of both halves.  Women have about 4000 genes on Chromosome #23, and men only have 2084.  Women have the capacity for billions of different kinds of orgasms (slight to major variations) men may have a dozen or more and usually limit themselves to one.  We are all unique creatures, but women are far more fluid and their bodies respond in accordance with their monthly cycle, making them an adventure.  If nothing else, I hope men develop more respect for women, simply based on their anatomy. My goal is to make this book an anachronism.  We will look back on it and smile, shaking our heads, saying, “weren’t we silly. All we gotta do is love.”


We are going to get into Archeology later, but I have to wonder about primal man. Suppose there was one who could read English, who picked up this book. He would probably look at it and ask, “What do I need this for?” When looking at how primal man lived, Archeologists project their perception of sex, their sexuality, on to primal man. Each of them has their own agenda, mostly to show they are not perverted. This way, they get to keep their job. I wonder, if without all the garbage we carry around, primal man was not more “advanced” than we give him credit? It’s just a thought.


December 22, 2012

 infinityI have finally come to the conclusion I am stark raving mad.  Mad, I tell you, MAD!  (That ‘s insane, not angry.)  I’ve also come to the conclusion that everything is love and love is everything there is.

 I started this journey studying sexual science.  I’ve been blessed by knowing some fantastic women and cursed with curiosity.  I had experiences science could not explain, so I had to go to the occult, and then came back to science to make some guesses based on what little was known.    The first thing I learned is the definition of occult: beyond common knowledge.  That’s all.  No connotation of mean, evil bad or nasty; just beyond common knowledge.  I’m just a guy, so it took me a while to recognize the importance of love.

 By this definition, sex is a part of the occult because we know so little.  My studies were quite broad, ranging from ancient (sexual) history and anthropology into microbiology and genetics.  This of course does not make me an expert in any of these specific fields, but does give me a better understanding of both the politics and conclusions within these fields from the standpoint of erotic love: and maybe just love, period!

 You may ask, “Why genetics?”  The proteins dopamine, serotonin, oxytocin and all of the others that are studied in sexual science and found in the “feel good” aspect of sex, are formed by amino acids produced by our genes.  BUT, our genes occupy less than 3% of our DNA.  What about the other 97%?  At one time, science in its arrogance called this “Junk DNA.”  Now they know it does something, but not exactly what.  

 The next thing I learned is we are all mutants.  None of us are exact duplicates of our parent’s contribution to our DNA.  During fetal development the base pair in any of our genes may be added to, subtracted from or end-swapped within a gene.  This will produce a slightly different amino acid.  If we expand the definition of “mutant” to include the other 97% of our base pair, we can see we are all beautiful, unique individuals.  Further, mutation (alteration of base pair) is not the only mechanism for altering our genetic code.   A gene, normally found on one chromosome, may “jump” to another chromosome.  Now science has the ability to restructure our genes.  They tell us we can’t do it by ourselves with “mental effort,” so science panned “The Secret.”  If we could do it then they couldn’t sell us the shot (it is an injectable compound) for a zillion dollars.  History says they lie.

 So, where does love come in, or “What Does Love Have to do With It?” In my blog, Love: A Many Splendored Spectrum, I model love as light energy in the visible light spectrum (VLS).  That’s for us humans, what we can “see” of love.  Although erotic love occupies on a very small part of the VLS, it appears to be the most powerful form.  This is possibly due to its metaphorical longer wavelength or lower frequency.  So, maybe this energy I have modeled as the VLS can alter, or restructure our genetic code?  I don’t know but history tells us something is going on!  I’ll blame it on our DNA.  In a sound bite, love is the gasoline for life’s engine: erotic love is the nitrous-oxide boost.

 Then I took a look at the rest of the electromagnetic spectrum (EMS).  I wondered were it not but a shadow of the Love Spectrum?  What we can see in the VLS is only a tiny part of the EMS.  Then we look at humans:  our organs are formed of cells, formed of molecules, formed of atoms and at the subatomic level the atoms are nothing but space and energy, which in turn forms mass: us, and everything else in the universe!  Whew.  This is mind-boggling, so you can see why I’m crazy.

 The implications of this are wide spread.  What the Chinese call “Qi” or “Chi,” the life force, is but another kind, or segment, of the Love Energy Spectrum.  Back to genetics, we humans have the same genes found in every other life form on the planet, but more of them. (We have 20 or 30,000—science still argues.)  Also we have near a half billion more base pair than our closest “relative.”  But, we are all connected by this energy!  More mind-boggling! 

 Now, let us look at ancient and current human events in terms of this BIG LOVE.  We say God is love.  True, but we have little concept as to how big love is.  We look at “unconditional love” in the VLS model and limit it to what we can “see.”  From the VLS model, it is easy to see where pantheistic deities originated as various attributes of love, or the absence of love. 

 We look at all the new age stuff and to me, each proponent of some facet for a product or service, has found something that works in or on their specific genetic code, and can work for others.  But there is a lot more.  Remember we are all mutants and our perception and reception may be different.  Just because we are human doesn’t mean we are all alike, except generally.

 Ascension, awakening, enlightenment and all these other words again to me only reflect a modification of our genetic code, allowing our brain chemistry to be altered and our brains to work more effectively.  It just seems like magic.  We don’t know what fantastic creatures we humans are (particularly women) and so we have to blame it on outside sources, like muses or even Pleiadians.  What we call channeling is simply access to the infinite intelligence that lies within us on a need to know basis.  This access made available to us by love altering our DNA and thereby our brain chemistry.  When we get to physics, we may find the Higgs Field and Bosun particles are just another aspect of love.  But, what ever works for you is going to do the same job.

 Bottom line for us humans is our minds are the most powerful computer ever created and the most malleable.  To get the power, we need to plug into love.  If left unplugged, we are twisted, turned, diverted, and reshaped by those who may be plugged into an ungrounded circuit or are just bigger and meaner. 

 So, call the guys with the nets and straight jackets.  I’m ready.


© Art Noble 2012


Sex: A Mechanism for Transmitting Love?

October 14, 2012

This is an opinion piece. Just because I believe it doesn’t mean it’s “true.” It’s origin is a long discussion on the Professional Sexologists’ discussion Linkedin site, started by an asexual sexual therapist.

It would almost appear that “Professional Sexologists” are addicted to the pleasure arising from sex and are attempting to enable the rest of the earth’s population to become addicted as well. However, since sex is a “normal “ animal function, we can’t be addicted to it. Therefore, there is no such thing as sex addiction and “I’m not one, because it doesn’t exist.”

Then, we have this asexual therapist defending her ground as others attempt to “cure” her, so that she, too, is enabled to derive pleasure from the sex act as they do. Well I’m an alcoholic with 28 years of sobriety, so please don’t offer me a drink!

In Dr. Cindy Meston’s study, “Why Humans Have Sex,” “expressing love” was #5 for women and “expressing affection” was #8 for men. Respondants listed more than one reason, as our reasons change from time-to-time, and #237 was “I wanted to give him AIDS,” but the bottom line was “it feels good.” Also near the bottom of the list at #227 was, “I wanted to see God,” so somebody is catching on.

There are some who say love is in us or from us. I agree, but do not limit love to human containment. Suppose love were also all around us like the earth’s magnetic field? Suppose we could let it in to augment what we already have and transmit it? Four hundred years ago, we knew that compass needles pointed to the North Star, but we had no knowledge of the Earth’s magnetic field. Same with love. We only have anecdotal and some scant empirical evidence of love’s power. (Science nor the establishment will fund research on love because there is no money in it and it might destroy the current economic system.)

Only from my own experience do I also believe that erotic love is the most powerful mechanism for transmitting love having the greatest positive impact on humans. (Note how I generalize.) But, SEX IS NOT THE ONLY WAY! We can transmit love with a smile. Usually a smile does not have the emotional energy of erotic love, so it takes more of them over a longer time period.

Consider Bernini’s “Ecstasy of St. Teresa.” It is one lousy example out of tens of thousands of human existence years and a current population of 7 billion. When I first saw a photo of it, I thought it was a joke Bernini played on the Church. That expression of ecstatic beauty is orgasmic! So, was St .Teresa a virgin having an asexual spiritual experience or was she a surrogate “church” for the priests of the day to consummate their marriage? I now believe the former.

We humans are a fantastic species, each of us unique, from our genetic make-up onward. One size does not fit all! The impact of love’s energy is different for each of us. Again in my opinion and believe system, love is good stuff.


September 26, 2012

Image “Love is the invention of romantic fools.”  I don’t know who said this, but surely some wounded cynic must have uttered these words in our history.  As a pragmatist, I would not dispute that interpretation, recognizing our individual experience and education shapes our perception and the perception of many is unshakeable.

 Throughout history, it would appear, the cynics would have the upper edge in Western civilization, which begs the question, “What’s so hot about Western civilization?”  Other cultures and civilizations, we arrogantly regard as “primitive,” viewed love differently. 

Western cultures appear to divide and categorize different kinds of love into separate boxes, whereas more primitive cultures incorporate love as a spectrum without a specific name, excluding early Hindu where there are 531 words for love in Sanskrit.

We talk about brotherly love out of one side of our mouth while preaching hatred against an entire ethnic group.  This is not to say there are no evil individuals in the various ethnic groups around the world.  Somehow, we always manage to exclude ourselves on the basis on some non-existent special dispensation.

 One of the consequences of “boxing” the many forms of love is exclusion.  Should a culture decide that father love is not important, then they would direct, even legislate against fathers loving their children.  This is more easily seen in erotic love.

 Our culture, Western, particularly Anglo, has separated love from sex, and this to our detriment.  We look at sexual practices of the occult, with out the knowledge or awareness these sexual practices are only a small part of the overall belief system.  When Osho spread Tantric sex in America from the 1940’s on, he neglected to focus on the other aspects of Tantra, so we automatically associate Tantra with sex.  Whoever heard of Tantric Economics?  Shamanism is said to have originated in Siberia, or perhaps the word was applied to North and South American natives who practiced very similar lifestyles.  But again, we hear Shamanic Sex without recognizing the overall lifestyle.

 My very cursory overview of many of these primitive lifestyles simply shows the earliest adopted, within their cultural and genetic confines ways of respecting, transmitting and receiving love for their benefit.  Now, what could these benefits be to us as individuals?  Supposedly, we humans have two types of nervous systems: one over which we have control and one that works automatically.  This is only partially true, and we see evidence of this all over the world: firewalkers, fakirs, and snake charmers to name a few who have disciplined their minds.  Our military (US, et al) is said to train soldiers to feel no pain and SEALs are trained not to bleed.  I don’t know whether or not pain is felt, but I saw a mini-submarine hatch fall on a SEAL’s head, leaving a two-inch scalp wound and he didn’t bleed!  It scared the hell out of me because it was contrary to what I had been taught in first aid.

W must be disciplined to have control over our autonomic nervous system and we must be disciplined to love.  Currently we have little if any discipline and sex equals pleasure is what we are taught.  Perhaps the discipline of love leads to control of our autonomic system, or visa versa?  Perhaps it also leads to our genetic restructuring?   Of course, “science” tells us this is not possible.  But, “science” produces an injectable substance that can restructure certain genes and Big Pharm sells it for a zillion dollars. If we could do the same thing with a little discipline, they couldn’t make any money.

 The bottom line is our primitive ancestors knew about this without the benefit of science.  It is discipline that is the key to love, life and health.

 © Art Noble 2012

We’ve Been Conned Out of Love!

July 11, 2012

 I’ll be doing a radio show on this topic on August 19, so I think I’ll get my thoughts in order.

 First “love” is a lot bigger than we normally think about.  There are all kinds of love.  In my blog “Love: A Many Splendored Spectrum,” I model love as light energy with unconditional love as white light going through the prism of our mind.  It comes out as a rainbow, with each color representing a different form of love.  I focus on the red and orange as erotic love.  The problem is somebody stuck pieces of chewing gum all over the prism, blocking a lot of the colors.

 Governments are good at splattering our prisms with chewing gum.  There are a lot of people in this country who hate Islam.  We use an intellectual approach, citing the Koran to show what evil people Islamists is.  That’s nothing!  You ought to hear what Islamists say about us.  They use an emotional approach, calling us sons of Satan and punctuating their epithets with gunfire.  We hate each other and hate is the absence of love.

 We go around looking for ways to hate each other: skin color, hair color (dumb blonds and red-headed witches), belief systems, religion and politics (Dems and Reps.).  Nobody gives us a reason to love each other, particularly when it comes to erotic love.  Let’s face it.  The first real war was the war between the sexes, a.k.a., the war on women.  My question is why?  Why were we conned out of love.  I can only guess.

 Let’s speculate for a moment and say, “love is energy.”  I found there are a lot of people out there who believe this, after I came up with it.  There is little science on this.  But, energy has two attributes: transmittal and transformation.  We transmit electrical energy through wires into a microwave oven where it is transformed into microwave energy, then into heat energy when we nuke a potato.  So, can love energy transform us?  My answer is yes.  Particularly when we consider the passion (emotional energy) with which we transmit it through our bodies in sexual congress.

One of the things that can happen with transformation or enlightenment is an increase in our awareness.  We are no longer as easily swayed by politicians and used-car salesmen.  Kings and priests lose control.  We are not sheep following a false Shepard whose goal is to feed us to the wolves.

In today’s sexual paradigm, we live with the general belief sex is about pleasure and or procreation.  This political construct is designed to divide us into groups.  There is a group that says pleasure is bad and another saying pleasure is good.  Many sex therapists today are simply moving people out of the “bad” group into the “good” group.  Men are supposed to spread their seed and women are supposed to take birth control pills.  Very few see sex as a mechanism for transmitting love through our bodies. 

Even when we are focused on transmitting love, there is probably some piece of chewing gum stuck somewhere blocking the love.  You hate that she squeezes toothpaste from the middle of the tube.

Historically, the Church has been down on women since its inception.  When Jerome (a flaming cross-dresser) translated the Bible around 400 CE from Greek and other languages (as an example) in the Song of Solomon though the Greek word for “love” was “eros” Jerome used another word.   Around 1250, the Speculum Doctrinal told husbands not to love their wives too much.  Then in 1486 The Malleus Maleficarum told us “women’s insatiable lust was the cause of all evil and witchcraft in the world.”  The last successful prosecution for witchcraft was in England in 1944, so that one lasted a long time and is still hanging around. 

Erotic love is not the only form of love that will transform us and it seems to work best when other forms of love have little to no chewing gum blocking them.  We can love women with out desiring to bed them and the converse is also true.  We can desire to bed them without having love for them.  Given a choice, I’ll take love.  The results are better.


Copyright 2012 Art Noble


The Sexual Paradigm and Love

April 10, 2012
(This is a paper I hope to present at the International Network for Sexual Ethics and Politics in Ghent, Belgium this August.)


The Sexual Paradigm and Love


                In 1974, Robert C. Solomon noted, “It is one of the dangers of conceptual analysis that the philosopher’s choice of paradigms betrays a personal bias, but it is an exceptional danger of sexual conceptual analysis that one’s choice of paradigms also betrays one’s private fantasies and obsessions”[1]  What Solomon did not recognize is the sexual paradigm under which we in Western civilization currently operate: pleasure and/or procreation: a political construct.   The paradigms to which he referred were but sub-sets of this one.  Further, it would seem that most researchers and others in the “sexual industry,” today look at sex with the blinders of this paradigm.  This paper suggests expanding the paradigm by including love and looking at both sex and love with a more objective view based on energy.  Energy divided by time is power.

            It is further suggested the power obtained by the individual through love is genetic in nature, however there is suffiecient anecdotal evidence to validate its existance regardless of its nature.


              In Hindu mythology, the entire universe was created on the first orgasm of Shiva and Shakti, indicating this is a powerful experience.  In our current view of sex, we live with the paradigm sexual activity is only for pleasure and/or procreation.  The power of creation is ignored.  Eros, the god of love was originally “a primeval deity who embodied not only the force of erotic love but also the creative urge of ever-flowing nature, the firstborn Light for the coming into being and ordering of all things in the cosmos.”  Plato’s symposium changed that.

            Today, our grand sexual paradigm is that sex is either about pleasure or procreation or both.  Good scientists everywhere discuss, and even argue, over what brings the most pleasure to the greatest number of people, particularly women.  Since a lot of us are men, that is rather humorous on its face.  My research indicates women have much greater capacity for sexual pleasure than men, and we men are incapable of being in their bodies at a perceptive level.  All we can do is observe.  Further, most men limit orgasmic experience to the rush of endorphins accompanying ejaculation, believing, “that’s it.”

             Were I reading this, the first question I would ask, is what do 8000 year-old stories have to do with modern sexual politics?  The answer is, everything!  So, let us start with today’s paradigm, and then return to our history to see how we got here.

            There are many still suffering from Victorian prudery who would argue sexual pleasure is sinful… for everybody but themselves.  Throughout history, we oscillate on the pleasure question: pleasure is good or pleasure is bad.  This diverts us from looking at love as a part of the sex act.  Further, in the minds of the general public, and some scientists, the word “love” is specifically associated with the sex act, from which pleasure is derived.

             To understand how we might have arrived at  this sexual paradigm, I first would like to paraphrase three people.  First, Dr. Christopher Ryan who said, “Our cultivated ignorance (of sexuality) is devastating,” and “civilizations are based in greed.”[2]  Next, the founder of pseudo-psycho-sexual science, Dr. Sigmund Freud who exclaimed, “ Most of our neuroses are based in sex.”[3]  I don’t fully agree with much else they say, but they hit the mark with these statements.  Lastly, Napoleon Hill who said, “The combination of love, sex and romance can raise a man from mediocrity to the altitude of genius.”  Hill goes on to talk about “access to infinite intelligence,”[4] which I have discovered to be on an individual need to know basis.     

            During the hunter-gatherer phase of human development, before the advent of civilization, what did early man need to know?  Primarily where the food was and whether or not it was good to eat.  Where is the water?  Where can we find shelter?  How can we stay safe from animals that want to eat us?  If many had not answered these questions, we would not be here today.  I am less amazed by Australian aborigines ability to find water on their walkabouts than I once was.  They had a need to know and were directed to water.  Just before the Tsunami of 2004, native  villagers were heading for high ground while American and European tourists lolled on the beaches.  They, too, had a need to know.  Humans are fantastic creatures once we get out of our own way.

             To arrive at the conclusion that power, or “access to infinite intelligence” belongs in the paradigm, requires looking at both love and sex with a different set of glasses.  For the most part today we look at love as a feeling generated by brain chemistry.  This is a very narrow and anthropormorphic view of love.  There are many forms of love, mother love, brotherly love, etc., perhaps each generating their own version of brain chemistry.  Only erotic love has been studied by Fisher, et al[5].   Dr. Jenny Wade relates an example of this power in Transcendent Sex due to brotherly love.[6]  

            To understand how love can give us “access to infinite intelligence,” it is necessary to view love as energy.  It is suggested this energy has the power to modify our genetic code thereby creating the brain chemistry.  Where sexual desire is a function of the PVN in the hypothalamus, the effects of erotic love are more readily observed in the caudate nucleus and tegmentum.[7]  Further, orgasms based solely on sexual desire are observed to increase bloodflow in the right half of the brain[8],[9] whereas orgasms including love are observed in both halves of the brain.[10]

             Love has two attributes in common with energy: transmittal and transformation.  We may think of “transferring” love from one to the other, implying one’s feelings generated within the individual are for another.  However, we may be transmitting love through us to another.  

            The origin of this view comes from the story of Shiva, Parvatti and Kama.  Kama, god of love, was implored by the people of the Indus Valley, under attack by evil demons and spirits, to do something to get Shiva and Parvatti to have a son who would save them.  Kama shot Shiva with a arrow made from a flower as parvatti was walking by, and one result was Karttikeya, who save the people from the evil spirits and demons attacking them.  The other result was Shiva was angered at having his meditation interrupted so he hunted Kama, found him and focused the energy from his third eye on Kama.  Kama burst into flame leaving only a pile of ashes and this conditionless, boundryless, borderless love all about the world.  It is called ApAaga in Sanskrit, Agape in Greek and we call it unconditional love. 

            The next problem was how to model this, with the many forms of love.  I chose the visible light spectrum with Agapeas the light source.  This provides for the spectrum of the forms of love, our minds being the prism through which the light of love refracts. 

"Love's Prism" in Our Mind


            Since prisms blocked in various areas do not let all the light through, we are left with only a partial rainbow of colors.  I chose “chewing gum” to represent the memes and other blocks to this light.  They may also be thought of as the conditions we put on love. 

Love's Prism With "Chewing Gum" Blocking Energy

            As I was working with this, I noted the rainbow from this prism, in the position of the ancient symbol for man—the blade, was inverse to the position of the colors in the visible light portion of the electromagnetic spectrum.  If I inverted it to represent the early symbol for woman—the chalice, what would happen?  Do women see love differently than men? 


Female View of Love?

            The last part of this assumption is the energy of love has the power to impact and modify our genetic code.  We know in the fetal stage of development mutation (alteration of base pair) occurs, along with genes jumping from one chromosome to another and  recombination also occurs.  Genetic restructuring is now being performed on adults.  Why can not love be a genetic modifying agent?  This, of course, is simply speculation.  Anecdotal evidence form Enkidu’s transformation in The Epic of Gilgamesh, through the “Divine Enlightenment” of Tantra, to Napoleon Hill’s observations in 1937 would indicate the existence of this phenomenon.  It makes no difference if it is genetic modification or not.  It happens.

            Now we can look at adultery and other relationship forms with a different eye.  Did it occur during the hunter-gatherer age?  Probably, but not to the extent it did when women were diminished to economic commodities, belonging to their father.  Through out history thereafter women “belonged” to either father or husband having the status of chattel.  In many cultures today, women are still sold into marriage, or simply sold.

            What did the hunter-gatherer have that we don’t?  First, they were not laden with all the garbage ideas we have about sex, and were probably a lot happier with it than we are today.  Secondly, they did not have the barriers to love that we have today.  Thirdly, they probably had a lot more respect for everything, including their women.  We can see this respect today in indigenous peoples around the world.  But we call them “savages.”   They have nowhere near the desire we have for material things, although Western culture has tipped many toward greed.  Many cultures now practice polyandry, polygamy, omni-gamy, and possibly even circular monogamy.  I don’t know if the latter exists yet, but we humans are inventive. 

            Stephanie Coontz traced the history of marriage back to the beginnings of civilization and found it to be an economic institution.[11]  In the agrarian age, adjacent farmers could merge their fields through the marriage of the son of one to the daughter of the other.  These arranged marriages neglected the wishes of the children, as they have throughout history.  “Wishes” is a very weak word when primal forces are at work.  We know today women have the ability to smell a man’s MHC[12] and it is believed they can determine at least immuno-compatibility for the offspring.  We know not what other forces may be working as well.  We can certainly presume it would be very difficult for a woman to copulate with a man whose smell was offensive to her, even when he was freshly bathed.  Bathing itself, an unusual circumstance in those days.

            As villages grew into towns, and towns into cities, we had war.  Somebody had something somebody else wanted, so they amassed a force of men and took it.  “To the victor belong the spoils of the enemy” is said to be coined by New York Senator William J. Marcey, referring to the victory of the Jackson Democrats in the election of 1828.  However, many tribal nations also live by this.  If we searched history for this phrase, we could probably find it, or something comprable, dating back thousands of years. 

            Men with “access to infinite intelligence” have a drawback for leaders.  They don’t believe the spin.  Spin is nothing new.  Brainwashing is nothing new.   Since not all marriages were arranged, men had a better opportunity of falling in love with a woman as their economic value was in its infancy.  This led to men applying the combination of love, sex and romance with amazing results for them.  They were not as likely to believe the exortations of the leaders of the day and resist military service.  Defense was one thing, but stealing from a nearby village was another.  This resistance had to be stopped!  Enter misogyny.

            If we put negative ideas about women in the heads of men, they will be more malleable and we can have more soldiers.  I use the word “soldier” loosely.  This also refers to “soldiers” of the fields, factories and other industries throughout history.   The myths about women began, and today, some women and a lot of men still believe them.   These are essentially conditions we put on love.

            Economics is about the production, distribution and consumption of goods and services from scarce resources.  Politics is about the control of those resources and the distribution of wealth created from those resources.  So, when we talk about the politics of sex, we should be looking at women as a resource, a valuable resource!  That is, a valuable resource to the individual man.  This is a resource that needs to be protected, rather than controlled.  By “protection” I do not mean legislated onto some pedestal, rather treated with far more respect than has been afforded them throughout the history of civilization.  However, with the power of love in a group of individuals, other resources are not as easily “controlled” by politics.  We now see this paradigm as a political construct.

            In order to “control” production of these resources: to have early farms and later industries grow larger, it was necessary to “control” the relationship between men and women.  As patriarchy grew, rules were laid down for women.  Daughters being chattel was but one of many.  Sexual myths were promulgated to divide us.  Women became “less than.”  Workers and soldiers were needed for farms and war.  Sons were valued over daughters to not only extend the patriarchy, but we are more easily manipulated into becoming soldiers and workers.  The war between the sexes began.

            A basic strategy of war is divide and conquer.  The current “war on women” is simply another battle in the war between the sexes, beginning at the dawn of civilization.  Most who wage this war today have no idea what they are doing or why.  After 10,000 years, it is just the way it is.  The tactics of this war are demonization, dismissal, denigration and deification.

            The early temples of Ishtar, Inanna and other goddesses were created to set some women apart as priestesses, implying they only, should be worshipped by men, while wives sat at home alone.  Divide and conquer.  This deification was carried over into the concept of motherhood to the extent during the Victorian era, wives were for procreation and mistresses were for pleasure.  An extreme result of this is the whore/Madonna complex underlying many relationships today in both genders.  It should be noted all women have essentially the same anatomical structures, but it appears cultural conditioning prevents both men and women from their full usage through love or pleasure.  The mind is both powerful and malleable.

            The myth of Lilith I knew nothing about until I started my research in this field a few years ago.  Yet, the “missionary position” was all I knew for most of my sexually active life.  It seems the purpose of that myth was to keep the male superior.  And Lilith, for wanting to get on top, was heavily demonized.  She was demonized in early Sumerian literature as a baby killer, but the Hebrew myth of the 13th Century had her consorting with demons, sleeping with men in their dreams to create more demons, and making Adam out to be a dummy.  He should have known the one on top does all the work.  Myths, like sea stories grow with the telling.  The most modern, Robert Graves’ version is probably the worst.

            We have dismissed women for centuries with, “Oh.  She’s just a woman.  What does she know?”   In the 19th Century, women who wished to enter the professional world were deemed hysterical and were given hysterectomies.   This of course removed anatomical structures that could be quite valuable to men.  But men have not considered women as a valuable resource for eons, except in rare cases.

            We continue to denigrate women, as is being done in the American Congress today with the media carrying the battle cry.  We neither recognize women as a resource nor the power of love to refine that resource for our benefit.  The paradigm of pleasure/procreation is still in gross operation to the detriment of men around the globe.

             We now can also see how the ancient stories of love, without the political construct of pleasure/procreation, can yield this power to men rendering the construct to a sick joke.  Neither procreation nor pleasure are “sick jokes.”  Rather it is the removal of love from the paradigm as a consideration.  Further, this removal may retard our evolutionary future.  It is the purpose of this paper for Sexologists everywhere to consider bringing love into the paradigm, showing the power of love to both genders.  “How ethical is this,” is a question only you may answer.


[1] Solomon, Robert C., Sexual Paradigms, J. Phil (11)336-345, 1974

[2]  Ryan, C., Jetha, C, Sex at Dawn, Harper Perennial, New York, NY, 2009

[3] The Freud Reader, ed. Peter Gay, W.W. Norton & Co., New York 1989

[4] Hill, N., Think and Grow Rich, Wilder Publications, LLC, Radford VA, 1937

[5] Why We Love, Fisher, H., Henry Holt & Co. (An Owl Book) New York, 2004

[6]  Wade, J., Transcendent Sex, Pocket Books, New York, NY, 2004

[7] Ibid. Fisher, Helen.

[8] Arnow, B.A., J.E. Desmond, L.L. Banner, G.H. Glover, A. Solomon, M.L. Polan, and S.W. Atlas. Brain activation and sexual arousal in healthy, heterosexual males, Brain 125:1014-23, 2002

[9] Janszky, J., A. Szucs, P. Halasz, C. Borbely, A. Hollo, P. Barsi, and Z. Mirnics, Orgasmic aura originates from the right hemisphere, Neurology 58:302-04. 2002.

[10] Ibid. Fisher, H.

[11] Coontz, S., Marriage, a History, Penguin Group (USA), 2006

[12] Meston, Cindy M., Buss, David M., Why Women Have Sex, Henry Holt and Co., New York, NY, 2009

%d bloggers like this: