Monday, December 11, 2006

Religious Sex Survey

It really bothers me that a lot of visitors to my blog find it because they are looking for 'frum sex'. Apparently some combination of these words traingulates the search engines squarely on my blog. Apparently, my blog is also not alone in this dubious distinction.

Well since so many people are looking for it, I thought I would try to make this blog somewhat useful to them. Here is what I mean:

Chana had a post entitled "Ayn Rand and the Rav: On Sexual Theory" which I commented on, and apparently raised her hackles. Apparently I criticized R' Soloveitchik in a disrespectful way. If so, I apologize - this was not my intention. Frankly, I have not read his works - I've tried, but they are just not my cup of tea. Partially because they are so dense and hard to understand, and partially because I just don't buy into this type of philosophic approach. This is true of many of the philosophers I've tried to read. Essentially, it seems like someone comes up with an idea which sounds good to them, and then tries to mold reality to fit this idea. Perhaps I am wrong, but this is how it seems to me. Anyway, Chana did not want to discuss this further on her blog, and I respect her wish, but I am curious enough about this to repost it on my blog.

So, by now all the 'frum sex' seekers are probably ready to hit their next link, so let me get to the good stuff. The Rav makes the following statement:

If you should inquire as to the essence and meaning of the institution of marriage, I would say that through marriage the miraculous transition from the I-it contact to an I-thou relationship occurs. Marriage personalizes sexuality as the joint experience of the I and the thou, as a community of two individuals driven by loneliness and metaphysical despair to give up their independance and commit themselves to each other.

How many married people out there, especially religious people, view this as their ideal of marriage? Let me know in the comments!


Blogger chugibugi said...

what the hell ,you talkin about ,care to explain?

December 11, 2006 7:07 PM  
Blogger e-kvetcher said...

What do you want me to explain? Read the quote by the Rav, and if you're married, let me know if you agree with his conception of sexuality within a marriage.

December 11, 2006 7:16 PM  
Anonymous Chaim said...

Nu, I could hear where he's coming from.

December 11, 2006 7:58 PM  
Blogger Ezzie said...

No comment on the post right now, but I've had people coming to my blog for the same search. Along with "bais yaacov locker room" and other such doozies... wonderful. :(

December 12, 2006 9:37 AM  
Blogger yitz.. said...

i wanted actually to address something you said about philosophers..

I find very often when people discover a truth, they then need to flesh it out and relate it to other people and in so doing, they over-extend the applicability of that one truth.. which leads people to think that truth is just plain false.. when, in reality if people read sources to uncover the granules of truth that exist within them, we'd be better off and be much closer to understanding how these different kernels of truth relate to one another in some larger truth.

back to the issue at hand..
this definitely can be part of what marriage is about.. but just as definitely it isn't all of it.. in my admittedly limited experience.

(i remember that in my teen years i used to classify relationships as one person always being more into the relationship than the other, the 'more obsessed one' would more easily identify with the Rav's opinion in this case--that would be my guess)

December 13, 2006 9:32 AM  
Blogger e-kvetcher said...


Thanks for the comment. I think I agree with your statements about over-generalizing.

December 13, 2006 11:58 AM  
Blogger Tobie said...

I am not a married person, but I think that it's hardly fair to judge the Rav's whole philosophy of marriage based on that statement. Not that I know the context of the quote, but it sounds as if it's taken from Lonely Man of Faith and if so, the essay is meant to be intensely personal and also so abstract as to be pretty disconnected from normal daily feelings. I think that a philosophical definition of marriage and people's everyday ideals are probably going to be pretty far apart, no matter who the philosopher.

December 14, 2006 12:41 AM  
Blogger e-kvetcher said...

Tobie, I believe the quote is from a work called "The Family Redeemed".

Once again, despite almost being banned from the Curious Jew blog, I had no intention of disrespecting the Rav, nor was I trying to imply that all of his works are ridiculous and devoid of meaning.

However, I just don't buy into this aspect of his philosophy. If you tell me that is intensely personal, then, of course, I cannot argue with how an individual perceives his own reality, but I am dubious that this statement was meant as purely a self-descriptive essay.

I think that a philosophical definition of marriage and people's everyday ideals are probably going to be pretty far apart, no matter who the philosopher.

I am having trouble understanding the term 'everyday ideals' - it sounds paradoxical. In general, I expect a philosophy to reflect a somewhat universal truth, and hence be applicable to reality.

December 14, 2006 7:32 AM  
Blogger Irina Tsukerman said...

OK, I'm not a married person... Furthermore, I have not thought about this much thus far, having no occasion or necessity to. However, a couple of general observations:

1) Could it be that the Rav is talking about one of the very general, almost subconscious motivations for entering into marriage... but that once people enter into marriage, their relationships are transformed, and other motivations and attitudes towards sexuality become more prevalent?

2)Although philosophers do try to articulate universal truths, an existential view of sexuality marriage, can be true for many people... which doesn't mean that a completely different attitude ISN'T true for many others. I'm sure there'll be many people who find they can relate to Rav. Soloveitchik's idea... but different people ascribe to different philosophies, though all philosophies are meant to be universal! : )

December 15, 2006 11:00 AM  
Blogger e-kvetcher said...


Thanks for your comment. My original intent was to actually get some responses from religious married people, but that appears to be failing miserable. I guess all the frum perverts that come to my site are either single or introverted :)

My point wasn't that nobody can have this outlook. Frankly as I think about this, I get more and more confused how one can be a religious Jew and be an existentialist. Perhaps someone can elaborate?

Shabbat shalom and happy Chanukkah.

December 15, 2006 11:54 AM  
Anonymous "HAIMISHE SEX" said...

Firstly, Mr.Tzaddick.

Who said when someone searches "frum sex" they are looking for a married person? That's your assumtion!! Are you looking for a married person??

Secondly, If your such an angel, what would prompt you to create such a blog?? (oh of course to catch out people like me)!!

Thirdly, I'm looking for hard, Chassidishe, Gay sex!!

Zay Gezunt!!

December 17, 2006 8:17 AM  
Blogger e-kvetcher said...

Wow, "Haimishe"!

1) I must have touched a raw nerve!

2) That's a really inventive spelling of "TzadDICK"

3) I don't think you get the purpose of my blog!


December 17, 2006 9:37 AM  
Anonymous Hesh said...

Dude I now publish my search terms of the week on my blog since I receieved so much attention from the "frum porn" or "horny bais yaakov girls" etc crowd. I deven published some postings making fun of them- but yes it is disturbing and I guess you can chock one up for the anti-internet crowd.

December 20, 2006 8:45 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Be smart go to a big mikveh for example satmar vizsnitz see this amazing penises rubbed and the asses shaking you won't regret it

January 14, 2016 4:33 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home