When Religion Gets Sexuality Right…
We have a lot to offer. Our ancient sexual wisdom speaks to a healthy and helpful pacing for sexual relationships.
In these three episodes, we look at the research of zoologist and anthropologist, Desmond Morris. He has studied the psychological and emotional processes necessary to form stable sexual bonds.
Which, it turns out, take some time.
This is part 3 of 3.
Have a listen,
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Excellent podcast. I am thinking about the good it might do for my youngest grandsons. As I listened, and recollected my own adolescence I couldn’t help but wonder what kind of timeframe range you thought might be appropriate, and how that range might change and accelerate as we go from early teens, to mid teens, to late teens, to full adulthood and beyond. Any thoughts you have on timeframe, and on how that might be a function of age would be appreciated. In addition, with the emotions we are dealing with there is a level of maturity needed to deal with the emotions and urges that arise. Have you any comments on what ages are altogether too young, what ages are really iffy, and what age range has an emotional level of maturity to deal with the feelings that result from intimacy at one or more of these stages, i.e. hand to hand, hand to face, hand to body, etc.
So wise and sensible. I like this and really think it would help us all so much to understand why going slow is important and how we can put our sexual intimacy on that deep and important plane, instead of treating it casually and lightly.
I was pondering the same questions that Bob was asking, but answering them myself. I think the time will vary according to age and maturity, and it is something the individual has to work out him/her self. Each case will have it’s own times. If we are taught to know and examine ourselves we will do better at getting the timing right.
I appreciate how the stages of physical touch reflect the inner emotional work. Years ago I initiated “sex therapy” with a couple who implemented the Masters and Johnson approach. I did this due to chronic lack of sexual arousal with my then husband. First they drilled me on how I came to believe that sex was bad. Well I’ve never believed that so that wasn’t the problem. Part of our homework was to engage in a similar set of non intercourse interactions starting with eye gaze and ending in hand to genitals. This homework in no way improved my level of arousal. I became certain that I had a hormonal imbalance and I was throwing away money with the therapy. I lied and said I was all fixed and ended the therapy. Now I know that my lack of arousal was secondary to a deep lack of interior work, self awareness, and lack of connection with my partner. So it is a thing. And I’m willing to bet there are many married women who have no arousal and they have no idea why. They just accept that this is what happens in a marriage.