Joseph wrote:
>That is why I find Gregory?s proposal for a nuetered non-sexed
viractuality
abhorant
I think I probably have not been clear enough about the "viractual
condition" I am describing. I am not describing a state of neutered
sexuality, not a neutrality, not a state of negation, removal, erasure, or
lack....not neutralized...the state I am groping to describe is a state of
"both AND" relative to gender, a location beyond genital-identification, a
place of potential arousal-attraction-stimulation that is not
genito-centric
and therefore cannot be called sexual in that it is not focused on climax
or
procreation but on decentered stimulation, desire, pain, and joy. A
construction of self, identity, that is beyond such labels as male, female,
new locations of erogeny other than the genitals, alterior to even the
cutaneous; locations for mind and memory that are not of the brain....but
my
only zone of contention with your definitions of viractualism is the
necessity of leaving the body to soar....for me it must happen through the
body.
>I hope I have not been too verbose, too introspective and too articulate
here and that >I have bored you. I know most people have a limited
intellectual span for this kind of >examination and that what people want
are accounts of my sexual adventures. {^_~} Such
>criticism does sting me, much the way that drop of scalding olive oil had
>the check of sleeping Eros.
again, for me your words are extremely stimulating, poetic, unique,
difficult, and, as I said early, oddly, admirably clear.