Jump to content
Existing user? Sign In

Sign In



Sign Up

The Existential Absurdity of Omorashi


Recommended Posts

Interesting to read, and explains a lot about what goes on in my mind sometimes.

Though my omo fetish is for wetting under any circumstances. Fantasies of pee accidents do good for me, and as for actually taking part in it myself, the closest to "unintentional" I wanted to get to was to experience a full blown loss of control, and intentionally triggering it wouldn't have made it less enjoyable.

But for anyone who wants to suffer an actual pee accident, then this probably would apply.

Edited by The Dark Wolf (see edit history)
Link to comment

This is the omo-content I, a doctor of philosophy, have been waiting for. I've never gone down the existentialist rabbit-hole here, but I have with Lacan years and years back. Your objet petit a focus actually makes another interesting existentialist connection: because the little other is formed by a surplus of the Real assimilated by the Symbolic, it is also our channel to the Real and the big A, the Other. Lacan ties this to a sort of holy jouissance (pleasure, something beyond orgasm) in mysticism in his feminine sexuality lecture. As you point out via Žižek, this type of attainment is traumatic, but the lesser jouissances would also be traumatic too. Leo Bersani, using Freud, terms this self-shattering. He's not Lacanian (if I remember correctly), but you can imagine even the pleasure of pursuing the objet petit a and achieving some ersatz form of to be contact with the Other (which is the radical alternative to the self, not necessarily a person).

Don't know where I'm going with that, but your post raises cool things about which to think. Maybe I'm saying that inasmuch as one can become an existential hero in letting happiness ensue doing a patently absurdist and futile thing the pure form of which would be devastating, one can also imagine it as a truly silly way to lose oneself in radical alterity or be a mystic or something. If I'm not mistaken, big Satanist guy, Anton LaVey, apropos of nothing makes some argument about peeing on yourself being some kind of magic energy thing. (after perusing google, found it.)

I've always been more on the Foucault track, especially thinking about friggin fetishes and wetting pants, etc.: new configurations of bodies and pleasures, baby.

Link to comment
On 12/1/2018 at 7:21 AM, ragtime said:

This is the omo-content I, a doctor of philosophy, have been waiting for. I've never gone down the existentialist rabbit-hole here, but I have with Lacan years and years back. Your objet petit a focus actually makes another interesting existentialist connection: because the little other is formed by a surplus of the Real assimilated by the Symbolic, it is also our channel to the Real and the big A, the Other. Lacan ties this to a sort of holy jouissance (pleasure, something beyond orgasm) in mysticism in his feminine sexuality lecture. As you point out via Žižek, this type of attainment is traumatic, but the lesser jouissances would also be traumatic too. Leo Bersani, using Freud, terms this self-shattering. He's not Lacanian (if I remember correctly), but you can imagine even the pleasure of pursuing the objet petit a and achieving some ersatz form of to be contact with the Other (which is the radical alternative to the self, not necessarily a person).

Don't know where I'm going with that, but your post raises cool things about which to think. Maybe I'm saying that inasmuch as one can become an existential hero in letting happiness ensue doing a patently absurdist and futile thing the pure form of which would be devastating, one can also imagine it as a truly silly way to lose oneself in radical alterity or be a mystic or something. If I'm not mistaken, big Satanist guy, Anton LaVey, apropos of nothing makes some argument about peeing on yourself being some kind of magic energy thing. (after perusing google, found it.)

I've always been more on the Foucault track, especially thinking about friggin fetishes and wetting pants, etc.: new configurations of bodies and pleasures, baby.

My only exposure to Lacan has been via Zizek, but I definitely want to explore his stuff more now. I’d be especially interested in looking into how Foucault's idea of pleasure being derived from the exercise and evasion of power might be thought of in terms of Lacan's jouissance and our relationship with the Other. I haven't read Bersani either, but 'self-shattering' through contact with the Real sounds a lot like what Sartre describes as Nausea - as you said, there is an interesting existentialist connection there. 

That Lavey piece hurt my eyes a little to read. I imagined Foucault turning in his grave at that bit about secret wettings being a rebellious form of sexual expression back in a "repressive" age. Could you explain what you meant by this being an example of losing oneself in radical alterity?

Link to comment

Eloquently put and internally consistent. A pleasure to read.

Here is an engineer's summary of a philosopher's argument:

 

- happiness can be pursued, but not constructed; it is almost impossible to achieve by seeking it directly

- a lot of things are better in fantasy than they are in reality; this applies especially (but not exclusively) to sexuality

- the object of your desire is most attractive when slightly out of reach

- fullfilling a fantasy can be (and often is) a shallow, disappointing experience that rings hollow; this can downright ruin the fantasy forever

- experiences that may be appealing in the mind, but horrible in real life (e.g. glorious heroic battles, or rape fantasies) will probably be even more traumatic to someone who has fantasized about them beforehand

Link to comment

Thanks for sharing, it was definitely worth reading !

Though my experience makes me disagree with you, I use to study psychology and I even went to a psychoanalyst for some time, but somehow wondering "why?" didn't help me, just makes me felt overhelmed with suppositions and doubts about myself..

Only when I stopped trying to understand and actually met some girls and play around with those fantasies, did I got rid of the shame and had some undeniably good experiences. I'm not a big fan of public accident, I mean it's hot but i feel sorry for her.. if I ll have a public accident myself I ll feel terrible but I don't fantasize about this happening to me.

According to the Freudian description of a fetish, its function is to obliterate the difference between men and women, it is a way to deny some have a penis and some not. Can we carry on with this definition ? if I liked to fuck my car, ok it is totally an object without subjectivity, but while roleplaying omorashi scenario (IRL or online), there s another person with its own individuality, feelings, .. which hopefully we have empathy for.

It isn't always the case and some act like real jerks (like many weither they perceveid themselves under the curse of a kink of not) but I believe even the shadiest parts of ourselves can be worked on, grow up and be shared with some happy few.

The fact of a fetish getting real isn't necessary a disaster, you might find out you like different scenarios to be in your mind and or to happen in real life,

may we pay great respect to ourselves and our partner(s) and enjoy what is given to us, amen ;)

 

Link to comment

Very well-written. This kink tends to attract deeply interesting, creative and articulate people.

To make you feel better: Aristotle said, "The unexamined life isn't worth living." But, the comedian answered, "The examined life makes you wish you were dead."

About: “Imagine Sisyphus happy." The Buddhists say we must find pleasure in a painful existence.

However, I'll say this about a cute, naked woman's ass (do you like this turn? lol). I'd rather be around it than not. That's a form of happiness. And much as you've concluded, sometimes if what happens in your mind stays in your mind you can get the most out of your fantasies. Yet - have you ever read the "Making Her Wait" pieces? That guy lived the life, man. I'm pretty sure he was happy with our little favorite naughty subject. 

Link to comment
On 11/30/2018 at 11:01 AM, Mirzoza said:

I know that not everyone will to relate to this completely, as the fantasy element of omorashi is always tailored uniquely to your own subjective experience. Hopefully these ideas can help you better understand your own relationship with this fetish.

I.

A problem that the depressed and despondent through the ages have had to come to terms with is the “paradox of hedonism” - the fact that we cannot obtain happiness by seeking it directly. In other words, happiness cannot be reverse-engineered. Imagine you’re sad, and you observe that people who garden or play music tend to be happy, so you take up gardening or saxophone with the end goal of you becoming happy. It probably won’t work. Happiness is only a byproduct in the pursuit of other end goals such as having a nice garden or writing a cool song. In the words of William Bennett: "Happiness is like a cat, if you try to coax it or call it, it will avoid you; it will never come. But if you pay no attention to it and go about your business, you'll find it rubbing against your legs and jumping into your lap."

Or more simply put by Victor Frankl: "Happiness cannot be pursued; it must ensue.”

Starting to remind you of something?

II.

The essence of any good fetish (or dream, ambition, or story for that matter) is what psychoanalysts call objet petit a - the object cause of desire. Not to be confused with the actual things we want, like ice cream or an orgasm, objet petit a is the fantasy that guides that persistent little psychic force we call desire. It can never be attained, its function is to just keep producing and reproducing desire itself. 

An illustrative example given by philosopher Slavoj Zizek is this: A married man takes a liking to another woman. He constantly fantasizes about his wife leaving the picture so he can finally be with her.  However, if for some reason his wife disappeared and he did get together with the new woman, he would not be satisfied in the way he thought he would be. When he is actually with her, her element of fantasy dissolves, she can no longer be his objet petit a, and he does not want her like he did anymore. The cause of his desire is gone. If he loses the wife, he also loses the mistress.

This is why Zizek says that the word for a fantasy that is realized is nightmare. Another example of his involves a woman who sexually fantasizes about being raped. He argues that really being raped would probably be even more traumatic for her than it would be for a woman who didn’t share this fantasy. This is a dramatic illustration of the fact that an actual fantasy enactment can never match up with the fantasy, which is infused with the power of an objet petit a, and that this can be existentially devastating.

I’ve never had the perfect full-blown, humiliating, ecstatic, helplessly desperate public accident that I often dream of and read and write stories about. Maybe if I ever do, I'll need to find a new fetish. That’s not to say I’ve never wet myself, sometimes even in public. I have, and I’d be lying if I said it didn’t feel good. But I’ve always sensed that there was something essential missing from the experience. I get the feeling that that wasn’t enough, that couldn’t have been all there is, and then inevitably think something like I let myself do it, I planned it, it wasn’t a true accident. 

So the simple fact that I want it to happen prevents it from ever really being accidental. The pleasure I fantasize about has to come unbidden, like Bennett’s cat. It’s the paradox of hedonism, omorashi-style. And I think that this is why I keep going, why soaked panties will inevitably end up in my laundry again. Because my fantasy accident can never be realized, it can remain as my own personal objet petit a, and I can keep desiring it and striving for it.

III. 

Albert Camus thought that the best symbol for our human existence can be found in the myth of Sisyphus, a king condemned by the gods to the futile task of rolling a boulder up a hill for all eternity. You are born into a universe that has no inherent meaning or purpose for you. The only logical alternative to suicide then is to “imagine Sisyphus happy” - imagine that even a fate like his, like ours, can be enjoyed. Camus’ hero is the one who revolts against the absurd meaninglessness of life by embracing it as an opportunity to create and apply their own meaning, their own source of happiness.

Desiring to take part in an unintentional act which your desire itself prevents from ever being completely unintentional - and which would surely become a nightmare if it really were to come to pass - is a Sisyphean project if ever there was one. But we still can and do take pleasure in every awkward, amateurish wetting that falls painfully short of the fantasy. I’d gag if I tried to say that pissing yourself makes you an existentialist hero, but I could call it a pretty good metaphor to help you become one.

I just wanted to point out that I'd love to have had this submitted to me when I was teaching philosophy.

I think that the archetypal wetting accident may be impossible, but only because most situational-based fetishes may be impossible. Ok, on reflection I don't think impossible is the correct word, but challenging. The difference between an orchestrated or controlled wetting and a real accident is consent. Even when the orchestrated accident is orchestrated such that we chose to give up our consent (like locking your pants and house, leaving your house with a full bladder and putting the key in a time controlled safe), you ultimately consent to give up your choice in the matter. Though as an aside discussions of consensual non-consent may become circular and confusing very quickly. 

I've had both real accidents, controlled/orchestrated accident, and role played out scenarios. I've got something out of all of them but something different.

To focus on the question of real accidents, I've never become aroused at the moment of a real accident. These unplanned and unwanted situations are not desirable for whatever reason. Thinking about them later, now that is very hot, and I've recalled horrific accidents (and still do) while bringing myself to a blissful orgasm. Can one say that one wants an accident? Delving into your second premise, if you want it, can it be an accident, or rather, does it cease to be an accident? 

But now that I ponder on this, another interesting question arises: can you change the nature of an incident by simply changing the way you think about it? 

The line between planned or orchestrated accident and real accident is really just in your mind. If midway through having a real accident (when you pass from like a 8 to a 9 or a 9 to a 9.5, and you think, fuck it, I'm going to 'take control of this situation' and embrace the inevitable so to speak. Assuming one were able to control ones emotions in such a way, could we then say that you changed the nature of the situation simply by changing your way of looking at it? 

On reflection it seems to be the case. Take three examples - all of them are on a school bus, and feature an accident prone teenage Rachel. She is desperate to pee, but the bus is not going to stop (stuck in traffic, busy highway whatever reason). Should have went before leaving the field trip location Rachel. Silly girl. 

Now Rachel 1 (shy Rachel), is too shy to ask for the bus to stop, or she does but doesn't press the issue. She then goes back to her seat in desperate agony, trying to avoid anyone noticing her, she puts a jacket in her lap and holds herself. But the inevitable happens and she has a large accident. She blushes bright red, and tries to hide her face, but the drip dripping of the pee pooling under her seat gives her away, and even without this, her body language would reveal something embarrassing.

Now Rachel 2 (bold Rachel), similarly asks for the bus to stop and is refused. She puts up a fuss, complains loudly, telling everyone around her that she is desperate and the bus should stop to accommodate her needs. When it doesn't stop she stands up in front of everyone and says something like "well, if you aren't going to stop, I'm just going to go right here in my pants" and proceeds to piss herself with all of her fellow students watching. Some might giggle, but she owns it, and gets some cheers. Rachel, taking it to the man by pissing her pants. She becomes a bit of a sexy rebel character.

Now Rachel 3 (horny Rachel), has to go, and asks for the bus to stop. Secretly she doesn't really want it to stop, she wants an excuse to have a real accident. She plays up her desperation or doesn't try to hide it. While it makes her blush, her pulse also quickens when she tells a few friends around her that she has to pee really badly. When the inevitable accident happens, she blushes and is embarrassed, but doesn't quite do a good job hiding her wet spot. She is embarrassed but also aroused.

So Rachel's perception changes reality.  She can literally bend the way people see her and perceive her situation through her actions, all of which are determined by how she looks at a situation. 

In all of these situations, this Rachel would go home and later masturbate to the scenario (and I've had 1 and 3 happen to me, I've never been brave enough to do 2). 

So in a sense, if the way we perceive a situation changes it, why not later on, literally changing the past, suborning a horrific accident into a sexy event. Does this make reality and even memory relative and malleable?  

Could Sisyphus have simply changed his outlook on life and derived some kind of sexual pleasure from his task? Treating the hill like a teasable clitoris, forever striving to bring his lover to orgasm. Reveling in her mounting pleasure. Imagine the power of the orgasm, built up over an infinite time? What man would not want to be the author of the greatest explosion of pleasure knowable? Perhaps Sisyphus is the luckiest person of all? 

Prometheus, the ultimate sub, craving the bit of a beak, moaning with pleasure as his flesh is eaten in front of him. The ultimate act of love and pleasure from a masochist?


 

Link to comment

I'm not really educated on philosophy, but to me, the part about a fantasy realized is a nightmare really makes a lot of sense to me.

I've only ever done my holds at home, at night, when the rest of the house is asleep.. I fantasize about things like being stuck desperate in a car, or in class and not being allowed to go, and the feeling and fantasy really gets me going.

However, I am completely ****ing terrified of it happening to me in reality, which is probably why I find myself compulsively using the bathroom before I go anywhere, whether I need to go or not, because then I think, "oh what if my car breaks down, or I get stopped for some reason and can't wait." I did the same thing in high school; I would use the bathroom between every 90-minute class(and after lunch) because I was afraid of having an accident if the school went into lock-down or something. 

No matter how much I fantasize about it, how much I think I want it, I'm too scared to actually let it happen.. 

Link to comment
On 12/4/2018 at 2:08 PM, Mirzoza said:

My only exposure to Lacan has been via Zizek, but I definitely want to explore his stuff more now. I’d be especially interested in looking into how Foucault's idea of pleasure being derived from the exercise and evasion of power might be thought of in terms of Lacan's jouissance and our relationship with the Other. I haven't read Bersani either, but 'self-shattering' through contact with the Real sounds a lot like what Sartre describes as Nausea - as you said, there is an interesting existentialist connection there. 

That Lavey piece hurt my eyes a little to read. I imagined Foucault turning in his grave at that bit about secret wettings being a rebellious form of sexual expression back in a "repressive" age. Could you explain what you meant by this being an example of losing oneself in radical alterity?

The Lavey piece is cringy as hell (and about as anti-Foucauldian a position as it gets), but it was the one thing I could think of that had some kind of pseudo-spiritual component here. So by radical alterity I meant the big A, the Other which is not the self but can also be sort of divine. It's been awhile, but if I remember correctly, Lacan talks about jouissance in ecstatic mystics like St. Teresa d'Avila or San Juan de la Cruz, where the self-shattering pleasure opens to an encounter with the Real, which is utterly not the self, which is God. Another way people talk about radical alterity is the Other qua another person being radical in its difference to the self. In one way, wetting is one more avenue to the Real or in the other, wetting as humiliation is a way to be lost in the gaze of another, to be reduced to an act of self abnegation. Talking about wetting this way might be whack if we take it literally (wetting yourself will probably not make u a mystic!), but some of the formal properties echo.

I'm sure what I wrote just now was gibberish. I haven't thought seriously about Lacan in 7 years, but it's sort of fun to through these jargon terms around something like wetting oneself for sexual pleasure. And it makes me want to read more of that stuff honestly. I'm trying to remember a scatological Lacan quote I came across in an essay by Spivak.... found it: "Ask the writer about the anxiety that he experiences when faced with a blank piece of paper, and he will tell you who is the turd of his phantasy" (The Subversion and the Dialectic of Desire in the Freudian Unconscious," Écrits, 315). What a bonkers guy!

Link to comment
  • 4 months later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

holy shit this is some interesting stuff, not just about omorashi or even fetishes, but about sexual desire in general. I wish I could philosiphize like that. but, me, I'm a simple man of simple wants. I rarely think things out so thoroughly. usually leads to that whole not being able to find happiness thing, since the direct pursuit of it usually leaves it just out of reach.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...