So, why does good sex so often fade, even for couples who continue to love each other as much as ever? And why does good intimacy not guarantee good sex, contrary to popular belief? Or, the next question would be, can we want what we already have? That's the million-dollar question, right? And why is the forbidden so erotic? What is it about transgression that makes desire so potent? And why does sex make babies, and babies spell erotic disaster in couples?
為什麼好的性愛容易消逝? 即使對天長地久的夫婦也是一樣 為什麼耳鬢廝磨也無法保證精彩的性愛? 這一事實與公眾信念相悖 或者說,還有一種問法 人們能否對已經擁有的東西心生嚮往? 這可是一個價值百萬的問題,對吧? 為什麼禁忌總是如此充滿誘惑? 究竟是什麼能讓越軌的欲望變得如此強烈? 為什麼性愛製造寶寶 而寶寶卻註定了愛欲的湮滅?
(Laughter)
這難道不是熄滅愛火的致命一擊嗎?
It's kind of the fatal erotic blow, isn't it? And when you love, how does it feel? And when you desire, how is it different?
愛情是什麼感覺? 欲望又有何不同?
These are some of the questions that are at the center of my exploration on the nature of erotic desire and its concomitant dilemmas in modern love. So I travel the globe, and what I'm noticing is that everywhere where romanticism has entered, there seems to be a crisis of desire. A crisis of desire, as in owning the wanting -- desire as an expression of our individuality, of our free choice, of our preferences, of our identity -- desire that has become a central concept as part of modern love and individualistic societies.
這些問題 是我探索關於愛欲本質 的核心 以及由之衍生出來的種種當代戀愛難題 因此,我踏遍全球 隨之發現 每當浪漫主義進入 愛欲危機似乎就要到來 擁有所缺之物會帶來欲望的危機 欲望是我們對個體的展現 展現我們的自由選擇、我們的偏好、我們的身份 欲望已成為一個核心概念 存在於當代戀愛中,存在於個人主義社會中
You know, this is the first time in the history of humankind where we are trying to experience sexuality in the long term not because we want 14 children, for which we need to have even more because many of them won't make it, and not because it is exclusively a woman's marital duty. This is the first time that we want sex over time about pleasure and connection that is rooted in desire.
諸位可知這是人類歷史上第一次 人們想要長期地體驗性生活 並非因為我們想要14個孩子 或是我們需要生育更多以免一些孩子早夭 也不是因為這是女性獨有的婚姻義務 這是我們初次渴望長期活躍的性愛 那份根植於欲望之中的歡愉和羈絆
So what sustains desire, and why is it so difficult? And at the heart of sustaining desire in a committed relationship, I think, is the reconciliation of two fundamental human needs. On the one hand, our need for security, for predictability, for safety, for dependability, for reliability, for permanence. All these anchoring, grounding experiences of our lives that we call home. But we also have an equally strong need -- men and women -- for adventure, for novelty, for mystery, for risk, for danger, for the unknown, for the unexpected, surprise -- you get the gist. For journey, for travel.
保持欲望的關鍵是什麼?為什麼如此困難? 在一段婚姻關係中維持欲望的關鍵 我認為是兩種基本人類需求的調和 一邊是我們對安全和可預知性的需求 渴望安定、可靠、可信、永恆 這些都是人生中停船落地的體驗 我們稱之為家 但我們無論男女也具有一種同樣強烈的需求 渴望歷險、新奇、神秘、莫測、危險 渴望未知,以及意料之外的驚喜 你們領悟了吧——這就是旅程
So reconciling our need for security and our need for adventure into one relationship, or what we today like to call a passionate marriage, used to be a contradiction in terms. Marriage was an economic institution in which you were given a partnership for life in terms of children and social status and succession and companionship. But now we want our partner to still give us all these things, but in addition I want you to be my best friend and my trusted confidant and my passionate lover to boot, and we live twice as long.
將我們對安全和冒險的兩種需求 調和到一種關係中 也就是實現我們今天所說的“激情婚姻” 曾經可是一對矛盾 婚姻從前是一項經濟制度 人們被賦予了一個終身合夥關係 關乎後代、社會地位、 繼承權和溫情 現在我們仍然對婚姻有著同樣的期待 但同時也希望配偶是自己最好的朋友、 也是值得託付的知己、更是激情澎湃的愛人 而我們的壽命,是前人的兩倍那麼久
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
So we come to one person, and we basically are asking them to give us what once an entire village used to provide. Give me belonging, give me identity, give me continuity, but give me transcendence and mystery and awe all in one. Give me comfort, give me edge. Give me novelty, give me familiarity. Give me predictability, give me surprise. And we think it's a given, and toys and lingerie are going to save us with that.
總而言之,我們現在要求那個人 能帶給我們從前全村上下一起提供的東西 歸屬感、身份、一致性, 還有超脫、神秘和敬畏 會帶來舒適感,也製造緊張感; 花樣不斷翻新,卻不脫離熟悉; 讓我能夠預知,但也不乏驚喜; 而我們認為這只要靠情趣用品和情趣內衣就可以搞定了
(Laughter)
(掌聲)
(Applause)
這會兒我們觸及到了問題的現存真實
So now we get to the existential reality of the story, right? Because I think, in some way -- and I'll come back to that -- but the crisis of desire is often a crisis of the imagination.
我認為,從某種意義上(一會兒我會講到) 欲望的危機通常是一種想像力的危機
So why does good sex so often fade? What is the relationship between love and desire? How do they relate, and how do they conflict? Because therein lies the mystery of eroticism.
為什麼好的性愛容易消逝? 愛和欲是一種什麼關係? 它們如何聯繫,又如何衝突? 性衝動的秘密就隱藏於此
So if there is a verb, for me, that comes with love, it's "to have." And if there is a verb that comes with desire, it is "to want." In love, we want to have, we want to know the beloved. We want to minimize the distance. We want to contract that gap. We want to neutralize the tensions. We want closeness. But in desire, we tend to not really want to go back to the places we've already gone. Forgone conclusion does not keep our interest. In desire, we want an Other, somebody on the other side that we can go visit, that we can go spend some time with, that we can go see what goes on in their red-light district. You know? In desire, we want a bridge to cross. Or in other words, I sometimes say, fire needs air. Desire needs space. And when it's said like that, it's often quite abstract.
對我來說,如果用一個核心動詞來描述愛,那就是“擁有” 而用一個核心動詞來描述欲,那就是“渴望” 沐浴愛河時,我們嚮往擁有,我們希望瞭解摯愛的那個人。 我們要千方百計拉近距離,縮小差距, 減輕緊張,增進親密。 而欲火中燒時,我們卻並非想要那些已經擁有的東西 註定的結局無法引起我們的興趣 欲望就是我們渴望遠方有另一個人可以去拜訪 與之共度一段時光 去看看他們的紅燈區有什麼事發生 欲火中燒時,我們渴望有座橋去跨越 換個說法,我有時說風助火勢 而空間成就欲望 這樣的說法可能比較抽象
But then I took a question with me. And I've gone to more than 20 countries in the last few years with "Mating in Captivity," and I asked people, when do you find yourself most drawn to your partner? Not attracted sexually, per Se, but most drawn. And across culture, across religion, and across gender -- except for one -- there are a few answers that just keep coming back.
但我會問一個(具體的)問題 過去幾年我到過20多個國家 為了寫作《家中的性(Mating in Captivity)》這本書 我詢問人們:“你在什麼情況下覺得伴侶最有魅力?” 不是性的吸引,而是伴侶本身的魅力 無所謂文化、宗教、和性別的差異 有些回答總是重複出現
So the first group is: I am most drawn to my partner when she is away, when we are apart, when we reunite. Basically, when I get back in touch with my ability to imagine myself with my partner, when my imagination comes back in the picture, and when I can root it in absence and in longing, which is a major component of desire.
第一組共同的回答是:“我認為伴侶最有魅力的時候, 就是她不在身邊,我們相隔兩地,小別後的重逢時。” 基本上,這些都是 我能重新想像到與伴侶在一起的情形 想像力之所以能回歸 原因在於伴侶不在身邊而產生的渴望 這份渴望正是欲望的主要成分
But then the second group is even more interesting. I am most drawn to my partner when I see him in the studio, when she is onstage, when he is in his element, when she's doing something she's passionate about, when I see him at a party and other people are really drawn to him, when I see her hold court. Basically, when I look at my partner radiant and confident. Probably the biggest turn-on across the board. Radiant, as in self-sustaining. I look at this person -- by the way, in desire people rarely talk about it, when we are blended into one, five centimeters from each other. I don't know in inches how much that is.
第二組共同的回答則更為有趣: “我認為伴侶最有魅力的時候, “就是看到他在工作室(創作),她在舞臺上(表演); “當他在自己的領域如魚得水時; 當她做著全心熱愛的事情時; 當我看到他在派對上魅力四射、受到他人歡迎時; “當我看到她主持庭審時。” 基本上,這些都是看到了對方光彩照人、自信煥發的時刻, 這可能是最重大、最全方位的興奮點 容光煥發,自立自足。 “我凝視著這個人”——而且還帶著欲望 人們很少說“當我們合而為一時” “相距僅5公分。”我不知道(5公分)是多少英寸 (但至少說明距離不太近) 對方也並沒有在太遙遠的地方
But it's also not when the other person is that far apart that you no longer see them. It's when I'm looking at my partner from a comfortable distance, where this person that is already so familiar, so known, is momentarily once again somewhat mysterious, somewhat elusive. And in this space between me and the other lies the erotic élan, lies that movement toward the other. Because sometimes, as Proust says, mystery is not about traveling to new places, but it's about looking with new eyes. And so, when I see my partner on his own or her own, doing something in which they are enveloped, I look at this person and I momentarily get a shift in perception, and I stay open to the mysteries that are living right next to me.
以至於你看不到他們 我是在一個舒適的距離看著我的伴侶 當這個我已經非常熟悉、非常瞭解的人 頃刻間有變回了那個有些神秘、難以捉摸的人 在我與對方的空間之中醞釀著性衝動 這裡隱含著通向對方的行動 有時候,就像普魯斯特所過的 神秘“並不是去往新的風光, 而在於擁有新的眼光。” 因而,當我看到伴侶獨自一人 在獨特的氛圍中做著擅長的事 我馬上就有了一個視角的轉換 我對身邊的這個謎一樣的人保持著開放之心
And then, more importantly, in this description about the other or myself -- it's the same -- what is most interesting is that there is no neediness in desire. Nobody needs anybody. There is no caretaking in desire. Caretaking is mightily loving. It's a powerful anti-aphrodisiac.
更重要的一點是,在這條關於對方的描述中 關於自己的描述也一樣,有一點尤其有趣 那就是欲望中無所謂需要 誰也不需要誰 欲望中沒有關懷 關懷絕對屬於愛情的範疇,它能夠強力地消除性欲
(Laughter)
I have yet to see somebody who is so turned on by somebody who needs them. Wanting them is one thing. Needing them is a shot down and women have known that forever, because anything that will bring up parenthood will usually decrease the erotic charge.
我還未見到過有誰的衝動 來源於需要他們的人 渴望對方能激發衝動,需要對方卻能阻止衝動 女性向來深知這點 任何能激發母性的東西 一般都能降低情欲水準
(Laughter)
這並非毫無道理吧?
For good reasons, right?
And then the third group of answers usually would be: when I'm surprised, when we laugh together, as somebody said to me in the office today, when he's in his tux, so I said, you know, it's either the tux or the cowboy boots. But basically it's when there is novelty. But novelty isn't about new positions. It isn't a repertoire of techniques. Novelty is, what parts of you do you bring out? What parts of you are just being seen?
第三組共同的回答通常會是 “當我感覺驚訝時,當我們一起歡笑時” 今天有人在辦公室告訴我: “當他穿上燕尾服的時候。”你們知道, 要不就是燕尾服,要不就是牛仔靴 但基本上,都是出現了新穎元素的情形 新穎並不是說一定要有新體位,以及一大堆技巧 新穎的關鍵是,你要表現自己的哪些部分? 你要把哪些部分拿給對方看?
Because in some way one could say sex isn't something you do, eh? Sex is a place you go. It's a space you enter inside yourself and with another, or others. So where do you go in sex? What parts of you do you connect to? What do you seek to express there? Is it a place for transcendence and spiritual union? Is it a place for naughtiness and is it a place to be safely aggressive? Is it a place where you can finally surrender and not have to take responsibility for everything? Is it a place where you can express your infantile wishes? What comes out there? It's a language. It isn't just a behavior. And it's the poetic of that language that I'm interested in, which is why I began to explore this concept of erotic intelligence.
在某種意義上,我們可以說 性愛的奧妙並不在於你做了什麼 而在於你要達到什麼境界 對自己對他人皆然 你要達到什麼境界? 你連結了哪些部分? 你追求什麼樣的表達? 是一種超脫的靈魂結合嗎? 是調皮搗蛋嗎?是安全地挑釁嗎? 是要終於示一示弱, 不再需要事事兼顧嗎? 是不是要表達孩子氣的願望? 你想要什麼結果?這是一種語言, 而不僅僅是一種行為。 這種語言的詩意所在才是我感興趣的 也是我之所以開始研究“愛欲情商”這個概念的原因
You know, animals have sex. It's the pivot, it's biology, it's the natural instinct. We are the only ones who have an erotic life, which means that it's sexuality transformed by the human imagination. We are the only ones who can make love for hours, have a blissful time, multiple orgasms, and touch nobody, just because we can imagine it. We can hint at it. We don't even have to do it. We can experience that powerful thing called anticipation, which is a mortar to desire. The ability to imagine it, as if it's happening, to experience it as if it's happening, while nothing is happening and everything is happening, at the same time.
大家都知道動物的性行為 這是一個重點,是生物學,是自然本能。 人類是唯一具有性生活的物種 這表明人類的性行為經過了想像力的加工轉換 唯獨人類的性愛可以持續數小時之久 飄飄欲仙,數次高潮 完成這些甚至可以全靠想像而無需觸碰任何人 我們可以靠暗示,甚至無需付諸動作 期盼是我們能體驗到的一種強大的武器 來產生欲望 仿佛身臨其境的想像力 沒有什麼實際事件發生而能產生精神體驗 還是甚為豐富的精神體驗
So when I began to think about eroticism, I began to think about the poetics of sex. And if I look at it as an intelligence, then it's something that you cultivate. What are the ingredients? Imagination, playfulness, novelty, curiosity, mystery. But the central agent is really that piece called the imagination.
我開始思考性喚起 開始研究關於性的詩歌 如果它是一種智慧 就說明它是能夠被培養的 它的構成元素是什麼?想像、戲謔 新穎、好奇、神秘。 但其中最關鍵的部分當屬想像力
But more importantly, for me to begin to understand who are the couples who have an erotic spark, what sustains desire, I had to go back to the original definition of eroticism, the mystical definition, and I went through it through a bifurcation by looking, actually, at trauma, which is the other side. And I looked at it, looking at the community that I had grown up in, which was a community in Belgium, all Holocaust survivors, and in my community, there were two groups: those who didn't die, and those who came back to life. And those who didn't die lived often very tethered to the ground, could not experience pleasure, could not trust, because when you're vigilant, worried, anxious, and insecure, you can't lift your head to go and take off in space and be playful and safe and imaginative. Those who came back to life were those who understood the erotic as an antidote to death. They knew how to keep themselves alive. And when I began to listen to the sexlessness of the couples that I work with, I sometimes would hear people say, "I want more sex," but generally, people want better sex, and better is to reconnect with that quality of aliveness, of vibrancy, of renewal, of vitality, of Eros, of energy that sex used to afford them, or that they've hoped it would afford them.
但對我的研究更為重要的是 要想明白激情四射的夫妻都有什麼特徵 欲望又是靠什麼來維持的 我需要重新審視性喚起的定義 這一神秘的定義 我從反面來看待這個問題 去檢驗“創傷”的定義 我來到小時候居住的社區 那是一個居住著大屠殺倖存者的比利時的社區 在那裡有兩組人 一組是大難不死,一組是劫後還生 大難不死的那組人往往苟且偷生 無法感受歡樂,也無法給予信任, 因為他們小心翼翼,煩惱重重,憂慮無數, 擔驚受怕,就無法抬頭挺胸, 就無法堂堂正正地享受歡樂、心安,就無法充滿想像力; 而劫後還生的那組人 他們認為性喚起是死亡的一劑解藥 他們知道如何求生 當我為缺乏性生活的夫妻提供諮詢時 常常聽到他們說“我想要更多的性愛” 但通常人們想要的是更好的性愛 “更好”的意思是要把性重新變得充滿活力、 生機、更新、持續、性和能量, 就像性愛從前能帶給他們的那樣, 或者說他們認為如此。
And so I began to ask a different question. "I shut myself off when ..." began to be the question. "I turn off my desires when ..." Which is not the same question as, "What turns me off is ..." and "You turn me off when ..." And people began to say, "I turn myself off when I feel dead inside, when I don't like my body, when I feel old, when I haven't had time for myself, when I haven't had a chance to even check in with you, when I don't perform well at work, when I feel low self esteem, when I don't have a sense of self-worth, when I don't feel like I have a right to want, to take, to receive pleasure."
於是我問了另外一個問題: “我在什麼情況下讓自己性致全無?”成了新的問題。 “我在什麼情況下熄滅了自己的欲火?” 這與先前的問題不一樣: “是什麼讓我性致全無?” “你在什麼情況下讓我性致全無?” 人們開始回答“我讓自己性致全無的原因有, 是我覺得了無生趣,當我不喜歡自己的身體, 當我感到年華老去,沒有屬於自己的時間 當我找不到機會跟你好好談談, 當我工作不順, 當我不再自信,當我感到自己的存在沒什麼價值, 當我感覺自己沒有權利去渴求,去索取, 去享受歡樂。”
And then I began to ask the reverse question. "I turn myself on when ..." Because most of the time, people like to ask the question, "You turn me on, what turns me on," and I'm out of the question, you know? Now, if you are dead inside, the other person can do a lot of things for Valentine's. It won't make a dent. There is nobody at the reception desk.
然後我詢問了相反的問題: “我在什麼情況下性致勃勃?”因為多數時候, 人們喜歡問的重點是:“你激發了我,” “外物激發了我,”而“我”本人不在問題的考量之中。 如果你自身感覺了無生趣, 就算另一伴為了過情人節做很多事 而你毫無感覺,因為沒人在前臺接待。 (笑聲)
(Laughter)
So I turn myself on when, I turn on my desires, I wake up when ...
所以,關鍵是“我”如何激發自己, “我”被欲望喚起的情形有哪些。
Now, in this paradox between love and desire, what seems to be so puzzling is that the very ingredients that nurture love -- mutuality, reciprocity, protection, worry, responsibility for the other -- are sometimes the very ingredients that stifle desire. Because desire comes with a host of feelings that are not always such favorites of love: jealousy, possessiveness, aggression, power, dominance, naughtiness, mischief. Basically most of us will get turned on at night by the very same things that we will demonstrate against during the day. You know, the erotic mind is not very politically correct. If everybody was fantasizing on a bed of roses, we wouldn't be having such interesting talks about this.
在愛和欲的悖論之中 似乎最令人費解的就是 滋養愛的那些要素:親密、互惠、 保護、牽腸掛肚、對對方負責—— 這些要素恰恰能扼殺欲 因為產生欲的諸多因素 恰恰無益於愛: 嫉妒、佔有欲、侵略性、權力、支配、 頑皮、胡鬧。 基本上,夜幕之下讓我們蠢蠢欲動的東西 正是我們光天白日反對的東西 我們的情色心可不管自己心理是否政治正確。 如果每個人在一床玫瑰中都能想入非非, 那麼我們也就不可能進行這次有趣的對話了。
(Laughter)
事情絕非如此簡單。
But no, in our mind up there are a host of things going on that we don't always know how to bring to the person that we love, because we think love comes with selflessness and in fact desire comes with a certain amount of selfishness in the best sense of the word: the ability to stay connected to one's self in the presence of another.
我們很難把情色心裡萌發的那些東西 傳達給我們的愛人 因為我們認為愛是無私的, 事實上,欲望需要一定程度的自私, 從個最好的方面說: 就是在他人存在的前提下 保持自我的能力。
So I want to draw that little image for you, because this need to reconcile these two sets of needs, we are born with that. Our need for connection, our need for separateness, or our need for security and adventure, or our need for togetherness and for autonomy, and if you think about the little kid who sits on your lap and who is cozily nested here and very secure and comfortable, and at some point all of us need to go out into the world to discover and to explore. That's the beginning of desire, that exploratory need, curiosity, discovery. And then at some point they turn around and they look at you. And if you tell them, "Hey kiddo, the world's a great place. Go for it. There's so much fun out there," then they can turn away and they can experience connection and separateness at the same time. They can go off in their imagination, off in their body, off in their playfulness, all the while knowing that there's somebody when they come back.
大概地總結一下,就是 需要我們去調和兩組 與生俱來的需求 對聯繫和分離的需求, 對安定和冒險的需求, 對團結和對自主的需求 拿小孩子來打比方,剛開始孩子總是坐在父母的膝上 舒舒服服地窩著,又安全又放鬆, 但所有的孩子在某一天 都要掙開這個懷抱去看世界, 去發現、去探索。 這就是欲望的開端。 探索需要好奇心和探究心。 過了一會兒,孩子們肯定要回頭看你 如果你這時候告訴他們: “孩子,世界很奇妙,放手去探索吧! 會有很多樂趣的。” 這樣說了,他們就能轉身離開, 並同時體驗到聯繫和分離。 他們能盡情想像,盡情探索, 盡情玩樂,同時確信 回轉時總有人等著他們。
But if on this side there is somebody who says, "I'm worried. I'm anxious. I'm depressed. My partner hasn't taken care of me in so long. What's so good out there? Don't we have everything you need together, you and I?" then there are a few little reactions that all of us can pretty much recognize. Some of us will come back, came back a long time ago, and that little child who comes back is the child who will forgo a part of himself in order not to lose the other. I will lose my freedom in order not to lose connection. And I will learn to love in a certain way that will become burdened with extra worry and extra responsibility and extra protection, and I won't know how to leave you in order to go play, in order to go experience pleasure, in order to discover, to enter inside myself.
但是,如果另一方說: “我擔心、焦慮、絕望。 我的伴侶已經很長時間沒有照顧到我了。 外面有什麼好的?我們難道不是 已經擁有了在一起所需要的一切, 那就是你和我嗎?” 這樣一來就會產生一些 我們毫不陌生的反應。 我們中的一些人早早地回轉過來 像那個回轉過來的孩子一樣 他放棄了自己的某些東西 只為了不要失去對方。 我放棄了自由,這樣就不會失去與你的關聯; 我要學會一種愛你的方式 那將會負擔更多擔憂、 更多責任、以及更多保護; 我不會離開你 出去玩樂、體會歡愉, 去探索未知,深入自我。
Translate this into adult language. It starts very young. It continues into our sex lives up to the end. Child number two comes back but looks like that over their shoulder all the time. "Are you going to be there? Are you going to curse me, scold me? Are you going to be angry with me?" And they may be gone, but they're never really away. And those are often the people that will tell you, "In the beginning, it was super hot." Because in the beginning, the growing intimacy wasn't yet so strong that it actually led to the decrease of desire. The more connected I became, the more responsible I felt, the less I was able to let go in your presence. The third child doesn't really come back.
把這些翻譯成大人的語言 這樣的情形很早開始,並一直持續到 性生活的終點。 第二個孩子回轉了, 但惴惴不安: “你還在嗎? 會不會罵我? 會不會生我的氣?” 他們也許會走開,但不會真正離開, 這些人經常告訴你 一開始他們打得火熱 因為逐漸增加的親密感 並沒有強到 能減輕欲望 但當我們越來越親密,我就感到更多的責任, 我就更加離不開你 第三個孩子不再回轉。
So what happens, if you want to sustain desire, it's that real dialectic piece. On the one hand you want the security in order to be able to go. On the other hand if you can't go, you can't have pleasure, you can't culminate, you don't have an orgasm, you don't get excited because you spend your time in the body and the head of the other and not in your own.
如果你想要維持那種欲望 就要真正掌握其中的辯證。 一方面,投入的前提是要有安全感 另一方面,投入才能產生歡愉 才會達到頂峰,獲得高潮 你無法興奮的原因是 你在別人、而不是自己的身體中和頭腦上花了太多工夫
So in this dilemma about reconciling these two sets of fundamental needs, there are a few things that I've come to understand erotic couples do. One, they have a lot of sexual privacy. They understand that there is an erotic space that belongs to each of them. They also understand that foreplay is not something you do five minutes before the real thing. Foreplay pretty much starts at the end of the previous orgasm. They also understand that an erotic space isn't about, you begin to stroke the other. It's about you create a space where you leave Management Inc., maybe where you leave the Agile program --
要能夠調和 這兩組基本需求, 那些成功保持了激情的夫妻有以下法寶: 第一,他們在性生活上有較多的隱私。 他們明白各人都應該有 一些發揮情欲的空間 他們也懂得前戲 並不是上真傢夥之前五分鐘的動作戲, 前戲可以說是從上一次高潮結束時就該開始了。 他們也懂得,情欲空間 並不是單純的活塞運動 而是要離開Management公司 離開這個敏捷式管理專案
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
And you actually just enter that place where you stop being the good citizen who is taking care of things and being responsible.
你要進入那個領域 不用再充當良好市民
Responsibility and desire just butt heads. They don't really do well together. Erotic couples also understand that passion waxes and wanes. It's pretty much like the moon. It has intermittent eclipses. But what they know is they know how to resurrect it. They know how to bring it back. And they know how to bring it back because they have demystified one big myth, which is the myth of spontaneity, which is that it's just going to fall from heaven while you're folding the laundry like a deus ex machina, and in fact they understood that whatever is going to just happen in a long-term relationship, already has.
不用再認真做事、負責任。 責任和欲望是一對矛盾, 它們無法協同合作。 能夠保持激情的夫妻也理解,激情是有盈虧的。 就像月亮一樣,它間歇性地會消減。 但他們有本事讓激情重燃 他們知道怎麼回復激情 而他們之所以知道怎麼做, 是因為他們已經解開了一個 關於自發性的大謎團 當你在疊衣服時,性致可不會突然之間從天而降 像超級英雄那樣,他們懂得 將要發生的所有事 在這個長期關係中已然存在
Committed sex is premeditated sex. It's willful. It's intentional. It's focus and presence.
婚姻中的性是有預謀的 是有意策劃的 它聚焦,它存在
Merry Valentine's.
情人節快樂
(Applause)
(掌聲)