While discussing the meaning of life with bloggers and friends, this video experiment came to my attention. I watched it amidst the all encompassing big questions of life and meaning, carefully observing and soaking in the raw human experience.
There is something beautiful in consensual non-sexual intimacy. Could it be there is also something evil in our (American? Anglo? Judeo-Christian? who is “our”?), thought that intimacy should be limited? In the culture I live in, at least, experiencing our fellow human with any other sense other than sight is extremely limited. We shake hands in professional encounters, but everything else is deemed inappropriate or uncomfortable.
In classical philosophical discussions on love and intimacy, there is found hardly a trace of our concept of romanticism and monogamy. Socrates and many other philosophers were married with children, but also would have a young boy they shared an intimate relationship with. The sexual interactions aside, it was seen and accepted largely as a mentor-disciple type exchange with the elder imparting himself into the acolyte.
Judeo-Christian understanding, at least, seems to have interpreted and encourage this type of imparting of the self as something only properly expressed through child-rearing and creating. Why is this so? Life, knowledge, wisdom, and experience are all surely more broad then this understanding. A child is naught the only fruit of an intimate exchange. “Intimate,” furthermore, is hardly sexual in nature alone. Why do we shirk from the word in other contexts?
I find my mine reeling with thoughts difficult to put into words. The above has most likely hardly done any of this justice. But this is why communication is key, and exchange with fellow humans paramount.
How do you understand intimacy? Does the above video make you uncomfortable, or smile? Do you see it as sexual, or other? What does it communicate?
How does all of this fit into the meaning of life? Or anything?
A penny for your thoughts?