By Masahiro_Morioka, at 2:08 AM, December 17, 2005

By amba, at 4:05 AM, March 10, 2005

• Comments in AmbivaBlog:
  
  http://ambivablog.typepad.com/ambivablog/2005/03/more_morioka_ma.html
  
  http://ambivablog.typepad.com/ambivablog/2005/04/male_sexuality_.html

  By Masahiro_Morioka, at 6:52 PM, June 20, 2005  

• Citation in "Growing Up Sexually":
  
  http://lists.topica.com/lists/growingupsexually/read/message.html?mid=1719049347&sort=d&start=1355

  By Masahiro_Morioka, at 1:38 AM, July 12, 2005  

• I don't know how I missed this one when I've been here before, but BRAVO for speaking up on the subject how our sexual fetishes and fantasies shape our lives.
  
  I would like to say, first of all, that miniskirts for me are one of the biggest turn-ons as well and am so happy to be offered this opportunity to let it out, regardless of what others might think. But I think miniskirts turn me on for a different reason.
  
  Living in the US, where most people are out of shape, not a lot of women wear miniskirts because of issues they have with their appearance. Of course, many would not wear them under any circumstances, no matter what they look like. And there are some who will wear them and not worry about the fact that they are architecturally compatible.
  
  It is not common dress, I think, because of the stigma attached to the physical appearance. Occasionally more mature women in business will use them to manipulate men on a genetic/cellular level.
  
  I used to have a friend I loved to visit with, because she wore a lot of them. She would go on and on about her issues, and I would keep the conversation going just to watch her in her miniskirt. I'd go shopping with her just to watch her try them on etc. I'm embarassed to talk about that being married with children now.
  
  When a woman is wearing a miniskirt there is a certain nuance of style and gesture that makes them appear as if they have transcended the problems that beset the physical body, like a fakir walking on fire. They are doing something that fear stops other women from doing.
  
  In other words, a miniskirt can be a talisman worn by a woman to show she is superior to her peers. And from that standpoint I get aroused by miniskirts because I feel they are symbols of transcendental being, unaffected by biology or philosophy. Not necessarily something pure, but something strong and free.
  
  The miniskirt was designed, however, for slim and young women, and somehow reminds me of a woman wearing a man’s shirt or sweater after sex, which is another turn on. On the other hand, they started as dancing clothes, which basically make them packaging for women attending modern mating rituals, just as young men’s suits and jackets are designed to exaggerate their biological-role features. The mini says to my hormones “this woman is available for mating” and to my mind "she is not confusing".
  
  The young and slim idea does represent a certain vulnerability, but we don't have the kind of school uniforms that we see in Manga/Anime. I know them mostly through the designs of Anna Sui and Betsy Johnson and other fashion designers. They have, at times, caused me to doubt my own pro-feminist ethics. But I think that I have begun to come to terms with these waves of 'misknowledge' that screw around with my internal chemistry.

  By Roy Kirkland, at 5:43 PM, July 20, 2005  

• Thank you Roy for your excellent comment on mini skirts. I didn't talk about that aspect in my book, but it is interesting indeed. I regret that my analysis of mini skirts in Chapter 1 was somewhat shallow. However, Chapter 2 and subsequent chapters are more interesting, so please look forward to them.

  By Masahiro_Morioka, at 10:17 PM, July 20, 2005  

• Comment in AmbivaBlog:
  
  http://ambivablog.typepad.com/ambivablog/2005/08/post_coitem_omn.html

  By Masahiro_Morioka, at 12:55 AM, August 05, 2005  

•  

  Extenal comment on The Insensitive man:
  
  http://www.volkskrant.com/weblog/pub/blogs/entry.php?id=16887

   

• By Masahiro_Morioka, at 6:57 PM, December 02, 2005  

• What I miss in this article is a distiction about ejaculation while having looked at pornography and ejaculation after a lovingful moment of whatever how many minutes with a person you love. In other words, I believe in a philosofical part of orgasm, which is absolutely not there while looking at pornography. There is e great difference in orgasm while having looked at porn-pics or movies and experiencing orgasm with someone you love.
  I am not sure that all men grow the same attitude towards orgasm (or sex for that matter) through pornography. I myself do not think I have changed much over the years in that aspect, but you should ask my wife that question. Nor has my way of looking at, or ideas about love, which has always been a bit of a struggle.
  The real talk should be about that difference, but I am not planning to tell much more about my point of view in this subject, here on the internet. Yet I think that there should be dome some real research, and I wouldn't mind to participate.
  
  Funny where dutch weblogs bring you... (-
  
  greetings

• By Paul Bernhard, at 6:28 AM, December 09, 2005  

• Ejaculation with porn is hollow and empty, true. Ejaculation inside your wife, whom you cherish and love more than anything in the world, is truly bliss. I wouldn't trade it for anything. Joel

  By Anonymous, at 4:41 PM, February 12, 2006  

• Interesting discussion is going on at:
  http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=47031

  By Masahiro_Morioka, at 2:27 PM, March 31, 2006   

• Hi! My internet name is Keenagain, and I am a doctor of medicine from scandinavia. I read the two first chapters of your book, "The Insensitive Man ". I just felt like leaving a comment here, as I found it very interesting reading. Although you are talking about your own experiences, I think a lot of people , including my self have a lot of the same thoughts as you do on these topics. I am waiting with great anticipation for the following chapters of your book! I hope that it will be possible to one day buy the hardcopy of the english version. The thoughts you are describing were as if you had taken them straight out of my mind! Continue the good work! Regards,Keenagain
  
  By keenagain, at 12:25 AM, August 25, 2005  

• Thank you, keenagain! I am very happy to hear your heartfelt comment on my book. In Japan there have been many comments and book reviews on this book since publication, and many of them were affirmative ones about the author's basic point of view. Your comment from Scandinavia encouraged me a lot. Thanks again. I am now checking the rest of the translation of Chapter 2. I think I will try to find a publisher. If it isn't successful I will upload the translation on the website. Please stop by from time to time.
  
  By Masahiro_Morioka, at 2:20 AM, August 25, 2005  

• Comments in AmbivaBlog:
  
  http://ambivablog.typepad.com/ambivablog/2005/03/more_morioka_ma.html
  
  http://ambivablog.typepad.com/ambivablog/2005/04/male_sexuality_.html

  By Masahiro_Morioka, at 6:52 PM, June 20, 2005  

• Citation in "Growing Up Sexually":
  
  http://lists.topica.com/lists/growingupsexually/read/message.html?mid=1719049347&sort=d&start=1355

  By Masahiro_Morioka, at 1:38 AM, July 12, 2005  

• I don't know how I missed this one when I've been here before, but BRAVO for speaking up on the subject how our sexual fetishes and fantasies shape our lives.
  
  I would like to say, first of all, that miniskirts for me are one of the biggest turn-ons as well and am so happy to be offered this opportunity to let it out, regardless of what others might think. But I think miniskirts turn me on for a different reason.
  
  Living in the US, where most people are out of shape, not a lot of women wear miniskirts because of issues they have with their appearance. Of course, many would not wear them under any circumstances, no matter what they look like. And there are some who will wear them and not worry about the fact that they are architecturally compatible.
  
  It is not common dress, I think, because of the stigma attached to the physical appearance. Occasionally more mature women in business will use them to manipulate men on a genetic/cellular level.
  
  I used to have a friend I loved to visit with, because she wore a lot of them. She would go on and on about her issues, and I would keep the conversation going just to watch her in her miniskirt. I'd go shopping with her just to watch her try them on etc. I'm embarassed to talk about that being married with children now.
  
  When a woman is wearing a miniskirt there is a certain nuance of style and gesture that makes them appear as if they have transcended the problems that beset the physical body, like a fakir walking on fire. They are doing something that fear stops other women from doing.
  
  In other words, a miniskirt can be a talisman worn by a woman to show she is superior to her peers. And from that standpoint I get aroused by miniskirts because I feel they are symbols of transcendental being, unaffected by biology or philosophy. Not necessarily something pure, but something strong and free.
  
  The miniskirt was designed, however, for slim and young women, and somehow reminds me of a woman wearing a man’s shirt or sweater after sex, which is another turn on. On the other hand, they started as dancing clothes, which basically make them packaging for women attending modern mating rituals, just as young men’s suits and jackets are designed to exaggerate their biological-role features. The mini says to my hormones “this woman is available for mating” and to my mind "she is not confusing".
  
  The young and slim idea does represent a certain vulnerability, but we don't have the kind of school uniforms that we see in Manga/Anime. I know them mostly through the designs of Anna Sui and Betsy Johnson and other fashion designers. They have, at times, caused me to doubt my own pro-feminist ethics. But I think that I have begun to come to terms with these waves of 'misknowledge' that screw around with my internal chemistry.

  By Roy Kirkland, at 5:43 PM, July 20, 2005  

• Thank you Roy for your excellent comment on mini skirts. I didn't talk about that aspect in my book, but it is interesting indeed. I regret that my analysis of mini skirts in Chapter 1 was somewhat shallow. However, Chapter 2 and subsequent chapters are more interesting, so please look forward to them.

  By Masahiro_Morioka, at 10:17 PM, July 20, 2005  

• Comment in AmbivaBlog:
  
  http://ambivablog.typepad.com/ambivablog/2005/08/post_coitem_omn.html

  By Masahiro_Morioka, at 12:55 AM, August 05, 2005  

•  

  Extenal comment on The Insensitive man:
  
  http://www.volkskrant.com/weblog/pub/blogs/entry.php?id=16887

  By Masahiro_Morioka, at 6:57 PM, December 02, 2005  

  , at  
• What I miss in this article is a distiction about ejaculation while having looked at pornography and ejaculation after a lovingful moment of whatever how many minutes with a person you love. In other words, I believe in a philosofical part of orgasm, which is absolutely not there while looking at pornography. There is e great difference in orgasm while having looked at porn-pics or movies and experiencing orgasm with someone you love.
  I am not sure that all men grow the same attitude towards orgasm (or sex for that matter) through pornography. I myself do not think I have changed much over the years in that aspect, but you should ask my wife that question. Nor has my way of looking at, or ideas about love, which has always been a bit of a struggle.
  The real talk should be about that difference, but I am not planning to tell much more about my point of view in this subject, here on the internet. Yet I think that there should be dome some real research, and I wouldn't mind to participate.
  
  Funny where dutch weblogs bring you... (-
  
  greetings
  
  By Paul Bernhard, at 6:28 AM, December 09, 2005  
  

• Ejaculation with porn is hollow and empty, true. Ejaculation inside your wife, whom you cherish and love more than anything in the world, is truly bliss. I wouldn't trade it for anything. Joel

  By Anonymous, at 4:41 PM, February 12, 2006  

• Interesting discussion is going on at:
  http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=47031

  By Masahiro_Morioka, at 2:27 PM, March 31, 2006   

• Hi! My internet name is Keenagain, and I am a doctor of medicine from scandinavia. I read the two first chapters of your book, "The Insensitive Man ". I just felt like leaving a comment here, as I found it very interesting reading. Although you are talking about your own experiences, I think a lot of people , including my self have a lot of the same thoughts as you do on these topics. I am waiting with great anticipation for the following chapters of your book! I hope that it will be possible to one day buy the hardcopy of the english version. The thoughts you are describing were as if you had taken them straight out of my mind! Continue the good work! Regards,Keenagain
  
  By keenagain, at 12:25 AM, August 25, 2005  

• Thank you, keenagain! I am very happy to hear your heartfelt comment on my book. In Japan there have been many comments and book reviews on this book since publication, and many of them were affirmative ones about the author's basic point of view. Your comment from Scandinavia encouraged me a lot. Thanks again. I am now checking the rest of the translation of Chapter 2. I think I will try to find a publisher. If it isn't successful I will upload the translation on the website. Please stop by from time to time.
  
  By Masahiro_Morioka, at 2:20 AM, August 25, 2005  

By Anonymous, at 3:46 AM, July 01, 2005

• Peace unto all... Let me more actively participate for universal brotherhood. Why dont you suggest me a group which devoted their life for the same.
  
  Warm regards to Life studies team.

  By Arekepudi Suresh, at 9:57 PM, October 15, 2005  

• let me meet you

  By Arekepudi suresh, at 10:02 PM, October 15, 2005  

• your study intrigues me...
  but i admit that to study life is to study something that goes on continuously but has no pattern. I am more intrigued that you shall study something that surpass all of you. I pray that you do not underestimate the content of life...for sometimes...life kicks you in the ass.

  By Anonymous, at 6:47 PM, December 17, 2005  

• I dont eat any sea food, and i eat a tiny bit of meat every week. I hate meat and i hate fish. I eat mainly vegetables, fruit etc

  By Anonymous, at 5:22 AM, January 28, 2005  

• Thank you. I don't eat meat, but I eat fish and vegitables. I plan to write a paper on this topic in the near future. It is interesting to think about why people hate to eat human's meat even when he/she has died naturally.

  By Masahiro_Morioka, at 12:00 PM, January 28, 2005  

• Anyone that doesnt eat meat is f****** wierd dude.

  By Anonymous, at 7:44 AM, April 26, 2005  

• If I were a regular meat eater I think it is justified to eat the comatose patient. If the comatose patient can be cut into something like a beef jerky without any sign of a living thing, I wouldn't mind eating it. Before killing the patient though we should also make sure that loss of this person will not cause depression for anyone of his family/friends.

  By Anonymous, at 7:20 AM, June 17, 2005  

• I don't eat mammal meat.
  To eat or not to eat a comatose patient is a toatlly diffrent thing. That would be cannabilism. It is different.

  By distill, at 8:48 PM, July 27, 2005  

• We can approach the issue of the consumption of human flesh on similar levels as the preservation of memories.
  
  One would not break or lose an antique vase. This is due to the high sentimental value attached to the object. One would not set fire to a letter from one's deceased grandparents, but would gladly send a flyer from a marketer to the shredder. This is because we, as human beings, have a tendency to preserve ourselves. Our memories being part of ourselves, we do not wish to destroy them.
  
  So we can link our lack of taste for human flesh to self-preservation: We would not eat our own living flesh, because it is a part of us. Some people do have a habit of picking and chewing scabs, because they are detached from their person.
  
  But what of eating another person? Perhaps this is because we fear loneliness: Who would wish to be locked away from your human kin forever? If we were to eat each other, we would have no safety in numbers. Again, self preservation.
  
  But what of a dead human being? We can link this to self preservation: Having consciences, we are inclined to respect our human brethren and their property, that we do not offend them and are risked with rejection. (Leading to lonelinness and lack of safety in numbers) Thus, we do not eat the flesh of a dead human being because we feel it holds sentimental value for the deceased's friends. Fearing to offend these hypothetical people, we do not eat the human flesh.
  
  Now, on to the subject of justifying the consumption of a cow. Unlike human flesh, the dead cow does not in any way trigger the safety in numbers switch. The cow is incapable of granting any companionship out of its will as default behavior. However, we would hesitate to eat our neighbor's pet cat, because it holds sentimental value for our neighbor, and we do not want to risk offending them. (And up the comes loneliness and safety in numbers behavior) Similarly, some people feel uncomfortable eating pork whilst petting a pig. This is because we feel we risk threats from the pig.
  
  Yah.

  By Anonymous, at 3:34 PM, September 11, 2005  

• there is a fourth argument to the meat debate.
  Someone chooses not to eat meat because it has been proven to be a more healthy lifestyle.
  that's it. not because they don't like the taste or because they sincerely believe that meat is not needed.
  it definately takes more effort to get all of the protein, minerals and vitamins that you need when you don't eat meat.
  and we really don't know until we see for ourselves if it will benefit our health.
  so i see why people just eat beef, chicken etc.
  no big deal. how about we all try to eat healthier and teach our children how to eat healthier and then just do what we want :)
  Love Emily

  By Anonymous, at 8:01 AM, November 10, 2005  

• i dont eat any meat at all. i have 2 take pills and vitamins. i have 2 get shots sometimes also to get the stuff meat gives. i think its soooooo sad that ppl would kill an animal just 2 eat them.

  By Anonymous, at 10:02 AM, November 15, 2005  

• I believe that the answer to this age old question is found right in the bible: (Rom 14)If it bothers your concience then it is wrong for you. If someone eats with a clear concience, then it is ok for them. This is for animals only (as God has provided them for this purpose) The eating of human flesh would of course be contrary to what the bible says. So I suppose the question for some of you will be whether or not there is a God, and if so, is the bible from Him?

  By Anonymous, at 5:45 AM, February 13, 2006  

By harrys blog, at 6:46 AM, January 31, 2006