Defining Lust

[Penumbra]

Most religions, in their texts and/or teachings, prohibit, discourage, or warn against lust.

But lust can have several understandings. And I'm sure that, since religions come from all corners of the earth, there are culturally distinct understandings of lust (especially with translations, they might even have translated words that mean similar but not synonymous things).

So, what is lust in your view? What aspects of lust, the way you define it, are bad? I'm primarily interested in religious opinions but everyone is invited to define it in their way.

 

[Father Heathen]

Arousal and sexual desire. It's only "bad" when it leads to impulsive and irresponsible behavior.

 

[dust1n]

Arousal and sexual desire. It's only "bad" when it leads to impulsive and irresponsible behavior.

Agreed. Lust is totally natural if not down right healthy. Lust, at least in my experiences, only serves a problem when it is mixed with a real negative quality, like violence and dishonesty.

I don't really know why it needs to be redefined. No need to reinvent the wheel here. Lust is a strong sexual desire for anyone. In fact, lust does not just disappear in a marriage or when love is in the air. Certain people attempt to make that distinction to inflate their self justification for things they were conditioned to be ashamed of.

 

[Riverwolf]

Arousal and sexual desire. It's only "bad" when it leads to impulsive and irresponsible behavior.

That. ^_^ (Except I would extend "lust" to include most sensual pleasures, and not just sexual ones.)

 

[Skwim]

Not sure what a "religious opinion," is, but these work for me

1. Intense or unrestrained sexual craving.
2.
 a. An overwhelming desire or craving: a lust for power.
 b. Intense eagerness or enthusiasm: a lust for life.​

 

[Vendetta]

Arousal and sexual desire. It's only "bad" when it leads to impulsive and irresponsible behavior.

Now that is a very good answer. FRUBAL, FRUBAL, FRUBAL

 

[Vendetta]

Lust is this.......

Moderator cut: image removed

 

[Tom Terrific]

Lust is covetousness.

The Bible does not use the word "lust" in the sexual context strictly; it also speaks of "lust of the eye," which I understand is the desire to possess. Furthermore, if "lust" were the same thing as sexual desire -- at least in the Christian context -- then sexual desire would be a sin, which it isn't.

Think about it. Sexual desire is natural and good; but treating someone else as an object to be used for your personal gratification is a perversion -- not because it's sexual, but because it's depersonalizing and dehumanizing.

That's my take on it, anyway.

 

[Vendetta]

[Q
UOTE=Tom Terrific;2408602]Lust is covetousness.

The Bible does not use the word "lust" in the sexual context strictly; it also speaks of "lust of the eye," which I understand is the desire to possess. Furthermore, if "lust" were the same thing as sexual desire -- at least in the Christian context -- then sexual desire would be a sin, which it isn't.

Think about it. Sexual desire is natural and good; but treating someone else as an object to be used for your personal gratification is a perversion -- not because it's sexual, but because it's depersonalizing and dehumanizing.

That's my take on it, anyway.[/QUOTE]

So if I have lust for Mileena Hayes (the woman in the picture) and I fantasize about being with her and having intimacy with her that is objectification?

 

[Nooj]

So, what is lust in your view?

English speakers seem to use the definition that Skwim posted.

What aspects of lust, the way you define it, are bad? I'm primarily interested in religious opinions but everyone is invited to define it in their way.

I don't know if lust is bad, but I know that lust is only important at the time you are feeling lustful, even though at the time it may seem like there isn't anything more important. After you have acheived sexual gratification or your interest turns elsewhere, lust is seen for what it is, an intense but ultimately brief state of mind. I think that if someone puts lust into context, the risk of harm can be minimised.

 

[Tom Terrific]

So if I have lust for Mileena Hayes (the woman in the picture) and I fantasize about being with her and having intimacy with her that is objectification?

You would know better that I.

Fantasy is not a straightforward matter. Images are symbolic. What is the real essence of your fantasy? If she were available to you, what would your intentions be? How would you regard her -- as a toy for your amusement, as a lover, or simply as a casual sex partner with whom to share a few idle hours as an equal?

Only you know your intentions.

 

[Father Heathen]

You would know better that I.

Fantasy is not a straightforward matter. Images are symbolic. What is the real essence of your fantasy? If she were available to you, what would your intentions be? How would you regard her -- as a toy for your amusement, as a lover, or simply as a casual sex partner with whom to share a few idle hours as an equal?

Only you know your intentions.

What would it matter the nature of the fantasies when they're just that; fantasies?

 

[Tom Terrific]

What would it matter the nature of the fantasies when they're just that; fantasies?

Your question ("What would it matter?") is predicated on a judgment of one act being preferable to the other, e.g. one act being "wrong" and another being "right." The question was what constitutes objectification, not what is right or wrong.

Pardon me if I misread you, but if you are hoping to turn a simple suggestion and clarification into a debate, you've come to the wrong person.

 

[Nooj]

What would it matter the nature of the fantasies when they're just that; fantasies?

Are you implying that thoughts do not matter, only actions?

 

[EmpiricalAgnosticAtheist]

Arousal and sexual desire. It's only "bad" when it leads to impulsive and irresponsible behavior.

I would go a step further and say that lust is the act of thinking/ fantasizing about your sexual/ romantic desires.

I agree though- lust is natural, and not bad in and of itself.

 

[free spirit]

Most religions, in their texts and/or teachings, prohibit, discourage, or warn against lust.

But lust can have several understandings. And I'm sure that, since religions come from all corners of the earth, there are culturally distinct understandings of lust (especially with translations, they might even have translated words that mean similar but not synonymous things).

So, what is lust in your view? What aspects of lust, the way you define it, are bad? I'm primarily interested in religious opinions but everyone is invited to define it in their way.

It is written "You shall not covet" Covet is a blanket cover for all tipes of lusts, it is bad because it makes you do selfish things. Satan coveted to be equal with God, Adam coveted to have the knowlege equal to God, also that is how sin has its beginning. Lust is the evil in men and we all have it, there is only one way to controll lust and that is to nail it to a cross.

 

[Looncall]

The religious attitude to sexual attraction, usually called lust in religious settings, is just a way of bringing people under the boots of clergy. What could be more obvious than making people feel guilty about one of humanity's more powerful drives? It's just a scam.

 

[Riverwolf]

The religious attitude to sexual attraction, usually called lust in religious settings, is just a way of bringing people under the boots of clergy. What could be more obvious than making people feel guilty about one of humanity's more powerful drives? It's just a scam.

Very unlikely. After all, many non-clergy religions have the same kind of thing.

From what I've read, it's about self-control more than anything else. After all, will can be measured in strength, and if someone can conquer and bring fully under his or her control the strongest natural instinct, how strong would that will be in other areas? (And I don't mean total celibacy; that's for monks. Those people, I'd imagine, probably didn't have very strong sex drives in the first place.)

Another idea as to why it was applied to sex so much may have something to do with some of the original teachers being sexually promiscuous in early lives themselves, and getting somehow badly mentally injured or physically sick from STDs, and thus teaching that celibacy is best. After all, there is a saying that I've found is often (though not always) true: the one most adamantly against alcohol is the recovering alcoholist.

Another possibility, based on what I know of Mesopotamian religion (and I imagine some others did this, too), is that a lot of commoners were jealous of the priests, who got to participate in ritual sex with priestesses, to the point of some declaring that sex itself is bad.

I think if all religious teachers were out to deliberately scam their followers, I'd imagine they'd only tell them what they wanted to hear, not the other way around. It's a lot easier to placate them, that way.

 

[ellenjanuary]

...nail it to a cross.

:biglaugh:
Not my Gwynnies... if there's any nailing to be done... ahem!

It is but another thing that should be assessed and understood in the emotional context of the self. Other than that, Father Heathen "nailed" it; with the codicil that the desire need not be sexual.

 

[Vendetta]

You would know better that I.

Fantasy is not a straightforward matter. Images are symbolic. What is the real essence of your fantasy? If she were available to you, what would your intentions be? How would you regard her -- as a toy for your amusement, as a lover, or simply as a casual sex partner with whom to share a few idle hours as an equal?

Only you know your intentions.

Well I believe fantasies are harmless. If I sexually desire an attractive woman via looking at pictures I am only satisfying the natural sexual urges I have. My own thoughts and images are conjured up by me and are no way realistic. The point.of fantasies is fulfillment and the differences lie in the fact that in my own mind, I could never be rejected. The religious point of view on lust categorizes thought into action when in fact your neurochemistry only projects action in the brain.