Is it possible to have a lover without sex? Why?

If I say that there is no real lover relationship in China at present, then I will certainly be questioned by all kinds and think that I am placed inside and outside this relationship. Phenomenologically, we not only have countless people enjoying their excitement or suffering from their unspeakable pain, but also this relationship is a major theme of major media. However, I want to say that this relationship is only a fog in the eyes of the public (public opinion and media). Of course, I can and must admit that there may be a real lover relationship in reality, otherwise I will discuss this relationship here purely on the assumption of an abstract metaphysical concept.

Before I try to make any substantive definition of this, I should first look at what relationship can't be called lover relationship. My first thought is the most vulgar myth of success. A man (of course, he shouldn't be a woman), a career-minded, good husband, good son and good father (anyway, they are all good roles required by social relations, but they can't take care of them or show them because they are devoted to their careers). This is because first of all, people should not criticize this man from morality or personality (in fact, it should be said that it is private morality). A good man must be what the ancients called loyalty and filial piety. People who run between loyalty and filial piety are villains, and in the end they will definitely not become great things; In the final analysis, this is still the "non-toxic no husband" at work. In the process of his success, a young woman (young and beautiful, of course, with high taste, higher than his hard-working wife) has a "selfless" crush on him (she will definitely say it at the critical moment, regardless of public opinion on his side), so she is finally considered by the society as his lover (confidante). Behind this success myth is that a real man (a real man always wants to succeed) will be thrown around by a beautiful woman. This can be said to be the social ethics version of the business exchange relationship. Paying here (paying for the society, often implying this man's abstinence in marriage) will eventually be rewarded here (so the public still sympathizes with the woman who dares to talk about social morality, which is also a man's sexual reward). On the one hand, this version legalizes and promotes men's desire for power (becoming heroes, pillars of society, etc.). ) by making him popular with beautiful women, on the other hand, by legalizing the immoral behavior of that woman, the concept that women are just consumer goods is promoted. As consumer goods, women can't argue that they can take the initiative to bet their feelings on a man, let alone bet on a so-called successful man; Because of this, and because she is portrayed as actively and freely betting on a successful married man, she is just a sex consumer in a man's society. From this perspective, there is no real lover relationship in China media. If there is, it must be under the surface. Successful man+confidante ≠ lover relationship (of course, the inverse theorem does not hold).

The relationship between lovers is not the relationship between lovers, not for marriage, and I don't expect this possibility, so there is no premise as the basis of communication; It is not a cohabitation relationship, so it is not a temporary partnership for the convenience of life or physiology, so there is no sharing or commitment of responsibilities and obligations. This is an extramarital relationship, at least for one party (it must also mean that at least one party's marriage is not a dead marriage, including long-term paralysis or separation of husband and wife), which was previously considered as a cohabitation relationship; But because it is not centered on any one person, the status of two people is completely equal, and the contribution of either party is self-care. In this relationship, the pleasure given to oneself is also given to the other party, so this is not a gigolo or a mistress. This is not a platonic love affair, such as Tchaikovsky, a gay man, and Nadezhda von Meek, a patron he has never met, although he can write endless love letters. This is not even the current network relationship, but the satisfaction of fantasy and masturbation to language or viewpoint. This is a physical relationship, but it should be beyond desire; This is an illegal relationship outside the system, but it must go beyond morality; This is a mutually owned relationship, but it must be a non-possessive relationship. If you can't do this, then the physical relationship here will become lust and can't last, illegality will become pressure and guilt, and freedom without possession will become gain and loss.

In fact, the relationship between lovers is just an ideal, and there is no foreseeable ending. Every night together, every meeting, is an arrival. Once this kind of halfway relationship produces the expectation of the result, it will be overcast and will soon suffocate; Once you accelerate infinitely on this road, you will crash like a meteorite, and this road will be dead. Therefore, the real lover's way lies in an idle skill-maintaining the momentum of acceleration but showing the elegance of going slow, riding safely at lightning speed, not worrying too much and not getting carried away. This relationship is based on giving up the stability of social relations as a long-term condition and insisting on not expecting results as an eternal premise. Because the relationship between lovers highlights the instantaneous harmonious beauty, it should promote the aestheticization of marriage daily life. But it is precisely because of this function of lover relationship that it can only be hidden, and its existence has no identity. If a good marriage is an iceberg emerging on the sea, then the lover is a hidden iceberg, or the lover's fantasy is the sea. The lover is not a definable existence, so it is not necessarily a real existence, so the lover's sexual relationship, as a relationship beyond desire, must also be a virtual physical relationship. In a true lover relationship, the body is neither moral nor social, neither desirous nor physiological; In other words, the body must not constitute a betrayal of marriage.

So this relationship is just an illusion? How big or where can it be achieved?

First of all, although I have always insisted on the non-identity of this relationship, it is not a pure utopian concept, it is an achievable relationship. Those explorers who try to take this as the standard will naturally get my wholehearted blessing and encouragement, but I am still conservative. The existence of this relationship can only be hidden, that is, it cannot be pursued; Therefore, it can only exist in the common construction of each other, and neither party can be named. Just because it only exists in one kind of construction, it also exists in one kind of understanding. Therefore, any party can call the roll. The former refers to the private logo of the name, while the latter refers to the private meaning of the name. Another possible area is actually within marriage. This may make people laugh and show off their depth. Betrayal in marriage exists in many moments. When you stare at each other, you will suddenly feel how much you miss a distant past. When you walk in a stream of people, you walk on a strange street with your other hand. When you look at each other, you are in a trance. Be in a state of ecstasy when having sex. At that time, even though you may still be yourself, if he/she is no longer him/her in a trance, then this marriage relationship will instantly transcend sociality (think how sad those couples who have always been husband and wife are). Your dedication has turned you into a medium to make others or yourself happy. You are your organ or your fantasy or both. When you are not a role in daily life, you have betrayed each other in this relationship stipulated by the social system. Of course, that kind of betrayal has never been pointed out or named, because it has been legalized by the behavior required by marriage, so it never constitutes betrayal However, the transcendence in the relationship between lovers is a continuation of this instantaneous transcendence and a sense of satisfaction that will never be socialized. To sum up, the relationship between lovers may just be not narcissistic about the image in the mirror, and the ideal marriage may provide you with a mirror.

Any satisfaction, as far as it is concerned, is beyond social morality and has its own aesthetic value, but the behavior of pursuing this satisfaction and the field of realizing it are often socialized. Because marriage is a socialized relationship, it is impossible to conform to the lover relationship mentioned above, so it is unrealistic to pursue the satisfaction that can only continue under the lover relationship, that is, it is anti-social and anti-moral. True lover relationship can only exist behind the shadow of marriage relationship, and its existence itself is moral; Only when a person can enjoy this relationship beyond morality and desire can the attempt to pursue this relationship be immoral. Of course, I think this is almost impossible, because once you have the pursuit of behavior, people have entered the society. In today's society, if you want to meet another person who transcends society and develop a physical relationship that transcends morality and desire, it is tantamount to finding a needle in a haystack. Moreover, after catching this needle, I can't help it in my hand. It can only be a relationship of mutual trust and confidence, which exists in an unknown way. Can't be a lover.

Tao is extraordinary. The latest explanation: the way to create a good path cannot lead people to the right path. The so-called right path is the way for individuals to move towards freedom. In other words, once it can be described as a universal formula, then no formula can be applied to the free development of individuals, and only the experience of each individual constitutes a real panorama. Therefore, once an applicable criterion is summed up, it loses its meaning.