From: Gina Miller <email@example.com>
To: firstname.lastname@example.org <email@example.com> Date: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 8:00 PM
Subject: Re: Nanorgasm
> I find myself unable to agree with these comments. Maybe sexual
>pleasure and neural science will "combine" as opposed to delete one
>sex out all together.
I suppose it's possible, but I just don't want us to become married to the idea that sexual pleasure is the ultimate in instantaneous pleasure. An orgasm is really quite meager when compared to all that is POSSIBLE.
> This is some of what I was saying previously though, about
>individual choice. You could choose sex as nill, non-void in your
>life, you could focus on whatever you wish. And so could others,
>different as they may be.
I contend that it's possible that no one will even want to pursue sex as pleasure, given other choices.
> Did you really say "sex is not productive in our current
>society" I don't know about your angle on this, but sex is a sure
>fire benefit to me!
As far as it helps us reach our goals, it is not very productive. Perhaps indirectly, yes, by relieving stress or strengthening bonds or what have you, but not directly. These things can be achieved in other ways. My point is that sex was originally created for procreation, and now that we have more than enough people on the planet we really don't need much more of that.
> Also I'd have to say that drug addicts still feel and enjoy sex.
>I'm not one, but I am not oblivious. I don't know anyone who doesn't
>like sex, excluding the obvious celebits, monks, and nuns and I'm
>sure a few others.
I didn't mean to say that drug addicts don't enjoy sex, just that, given the choice between sex and heroin, most heroin addicts would choose the heroin.
> And as far as the vampire gig, you could include this in the
>layering of engineering the usual unsexual sensation's along with the
Perhaps it may be an easy way to re-engineer the brain, but to me this seems a first step. There are things about sexual pleasure that may not be suited to all tasks... I'll let your imagination go with that one.
>Gina "Nanogirl" Miller
>>It seems to me that after a certain amount of time, sexual pleasure
>>obsolete, due to greater advances in neural science. Not only is it
>not productive ( wow... what an incredible unintentional pun) in our
>current society, it can and will be superceded by greater methods of
>pleasure. Even today, for a lot of heroin users sex pales in
>comparison to the purely
>>chemical high. Who knows what's coming next?
>>I'm reminded of the role-playing game Vampire: The Masquerade (I
>noticed some roll-playing buffs on this list) where the immortal (see
>a parallel, anyone?) vampires have replaced the lust for sex with the
>far more powerful lust for human blood, which is the sustenance of
>>Might we be doing ourselves a favor to somehow link physical
>>that by which will sustain ourselves in the future?
>Gina "Nanogirl" Miller
>"The science of nanotechnology, solutions for the future."
>Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com