Ego, empathy and sexuality

In any sexual relationship, there is Me and there is the Other. Ego and empathy are automatically engaged, with the dysfunctions they may have inherited from an education or an environment contrary to natural laws. From the point of view of genetic determinism, and despite all the latitude of adaptability specific to a complex being like human beings, we can therefore expect that an unnatural structuring of the ego (parasitized by the ego) , just like a poor learning of empathy (following Oedipal frustrations) places the psyche in conditions such that the natural impulses belonging to the sexual instinct, in particular the more complex ones, will not be aIn any sexual relationship, there is Me and there is the Other. Ego and empathy are automatically engaged, with the dysfunctions they may have inherited from an education or an environment contrary to natural laws.

From the point of view of genetic determinism, and despite all the latitude of adaptability specific to a complex being like human beings, we can therefore expect that an unnatural structuring of the ego (parasitized by the ego) , just like a poor learning of empathy (following Oedipal frustrations) places the psyche in conditions such that the natural impulses belonging to the sexual instinct, in particular the more complex ones, will not be able to function correctly. By correctly, we must understand here: “in accordance with what is provided for by our genetic data and their margin of adaptability”, or again: “in accordance with the natural laws of love and sexuality”.

It is clear that a disproportionate ego will disrupt the dynamics of the relationship. The paranoid component will induce excessive reactions, the overinvestment in the quest for orgasm will distort the subtle balance which should ensure synchronization. The will to succeed will disturb the other partner, the disappointment in the event of failure will take too much place and will give rise to reproaches which will degrade mutual trust. The relationship will degenerate quickly, without the partners, locked in their reciprocal egos, understanding the reason for the degradation. Ultimately, the relationship will turn into rape (for example “marital rape”, so common that it was once assimilated to marital duty …). The drives belonging to the reproductive instinct more or less adapt to a situation of this type. Female orgasm is not necessary for fertilization. In animals, rape is rather favorable to reproduction. We can understand that the oversizing of the ego hardly blocks all the reproductive impulses (or PIR). It will be quite different with the infinitely more subtle impulses linked to metasexual function (MIP).

However, each individual is the bearer of a psychic structure more or less marked by the failure of alliesthesic learning (paranoid component) and by repressed oedipus (neurotic component). We immediately deduce that sexuality can only be experienced with difficulty on the metasexual level, and that it will generally tend to slide on the reproductive level. The imbalance is further accentuated by the fact that the biological impulses specific to the PIR are much more reactive to attachment, whereas the impulses of the PIM type are on the contrary inhibited as soon as certain biological components are exacerbated. Everything therefore seems to converge towards a general inhibition of PIM in the food and social context currently in force.

This little demonstration is based on the hypothesis of the existence of a drive consisting in giving priority to orgasm to the loved one. This seems to be the case: even under ordinary working conditions, many individuals (especially homosexuals) feel the importance of this form of expression of love. In conditions closer to nature, as defined by instinctonutrition and metapsycanalysis, the priority of giving over quest is observed more systematically. There is therefore reason to believe that it is natural. The question which then arises is to know what is the function of this priority.

First answer: between two partners who each naturally tend to give the other an orgasm, the romantic relationship takes place in a much more harmonious way than in the opposite case where each one thinks only of himself (or deliberately gives himself in order to please the other). It is enough that one of the partners pursues his personal satisfaction while neglecting that of the other (or that he calculates the advantage that he may have in giving pleasure to the other), for a relationship to end up degenerate, as is often the case in couples: Madame comes to count the time while the gentleman seeks his satisfaction. The very fact that many relationships degenerate from a lack of empathy and the selfish quest for pleasure, generating frustrations or suffering, suggests, from the heuristic of non-suffering, that theble to function correctly. By correctly, we must understand here: “in accordance with what is provided for by our genetic data and their margin of adaptability”, or again: “in accordance with the natural laws of love and sexuality”.

Example: let’s say that the urge to orgasm is predicted to be more important than the urge to reach it yourself. If this is the case, the erotic behavior must be oriented primarily towards the other. His eventual orgastic failure must be felt as an overall failure of the relationship. Personal orgastic failure should not count beyond a certain lack (as long as the situation does not continue excessively). The individual pursuit of orgasm at the expense of the Other must, on the other hand, be felt as contrary to nature. It is clear that a disproportionate ego will disrupt the dynamics of the relationship. The paranoid component will induce excessive reactions, the overinvestment in the quest for orgasm will distort the subtle balance which should ensure synchronization. The will to succeed will disturb the other partner, the disappointment in the event of failure will take too much place and will give rise to reproaches which will degrade mutual trust. The relationship will degenerate quickly, without the partners, locked in their reciprocal egos, understanding the reason for the degradation.

Ultimately, the relationship turns into rape (for example “marital rape”, so common that it was once assimilated to marital duty …). The drives belonging to the reproductive instinct more or less adapt to a situation of this type. Female orgasm is not necessary for fertilization. In animals, rape is rather favorable to reproduction. We can understand that the oversizing of the ego hardly blocks all the reproductive impulses (or BIP). It will be quite different with the infinitely more subtle impulses linked to metasexual function (MIP). However, each individual is the bearer of a psychic structure more or less marked by the failure of alliesthesic learning (paranoid component) and by repressed oedipus (neurotic component). We immediately deduce that sexuality can only be experienced with difficulty on the metasexual level, and that it will generally tend to slide on the reproductive level. The imbalance is further accentuated by the fact that the biological impulses specific to the PIR are much more reactive to attachment, whereas the impulses of the PIM type are on the contrary inhibited as soon as certain biological components are exacerbated. Everything therefore seems to converge towards a general inhibition of PIM in the food and social context currently in force. This little demonstration is based on the hypothesis of the existence of a drive consisting in giving priority to orgasm to the loved one.

This seems to be the case: even under ordinary working conditions, many individuals (especially homosexuals) feel the importance of this form of expression of love. In conditions closer to nature, as defined by instinctonutrition and metapsycanalysis, the priority of giving over quest is observed more systematically. There is therefore reason to believe that it is natural. The question which then arises is to know what is the function of this priority.

First answer: between two partners who each naturally tend to give the other an orgasm, the romantic relationship takes place in a much more harmonious way than in the opposite case where each one thinks only of himself (or deliberately gives himself in order to please the other). It is enough that one of the partners pursues his personal satisfaction while neglecting that of the other (or that he calculates the advantage that he may have in giving pleasure to the other), for a relationship to end up degenerate, as is often the case in couples: Madame comes to count the time while the gentleman seeks his satisfaction. The very fact that many relationships degenerate from a lack of empathy and the selfish quest for pleasure, generating frustrations or suffering, suggests, from the heuristic of no suffering, that the average dose of paranoid and neurotic tendency is contrary to our genetic programming.

This example shows that empathy plays a key role in sex. It is still essential on another level: the representation of what the other feels stimulates erotic sensitivity much better than any form of self-arousal. It is by putting yourself in the place of your loved one that you can experience sexual fullness yourself. Otherwise, the partial drives can work and produce a certain satisfaction, but deep emotion, “love magic”, the only one capable of fueling extrasensory perception, is not there. Egocentric arousal, even if it makes “normal” sexual functioning possible, freeing the individual from physiological need and emotional frustration, always leaves a void behind it, which can be interpreted as a lack on the level of metapsychic energy.

The discomfort and inhibition that arise when the other selfishly pursues enjoyment can be interpreted as excalibur urges to warn against failure of MIP. This is incompatible with an egotistical eroticism, undoubtedly because the metapsychic dimension is fundamentally associated with empathy and incompatible with the ego. It is understandable that the excalibur drives aim to avoid romantic failures and egotistical fixations which could compromise the implementation of the MIP. Such a failure, although widespread in our form of culture, has serious consequences for the fate of the individual and the community, and this gravity explains the genetic programming of important excalibur drives.

So that the psychic energy can circulate and feed the noble parts of the being, it is necessary that the ego remains in the background. Otherwise, the energy made available invests the ego components of the psyche and worsens the closure of the individual on himself. The implementation of the MIP therefore requires work on oneself, aiming to restore as much as possible the natural functioning of the psyche. It is a question of observing oneself, of taking advantage of each conflictual situation to learn to “dissolve” egoic emotions, that is to say of recognizing the paranoid and neurotic tendencies crystallized in our automatisms and of disinvesting them by taking the hindsight required.

For lack of having done this work against the ego, withdrawal, disappointment, regrets, aggressiveness tend to gain more and more strength as the MIP fails. These attitudes result in further compromising any subtle relationship, and crystallizing excalibur drives within the BIP. Thus a vicious circle sets in which results in the form of macho-type virility, associating dependence and contempt for the partner, and for the woman with a femininity allying the seductress and the shrew. On this subject, see the transpulsion analysis presented in the Essay on metapsychanalysis, page 85 and following.

The function of excalibur drives is to prevent the initiation of this vicious circle. They occur as soon as the first egotistical manifestations (paranoid or neurotic) interfere in the relationship. They sometimes interrupt it suddenly, as if to get the partners to take a step back, to disentangle situations, to identify the root cause of their failure. However, these urges can only be transmitted and received correctly with a sufficient capacity for empathy and ego control. These two qualities therefore remain the essential prerequisites for any metasexual experience.