Pleasure/displeasure and their relation in voluntary and involuntary identity (quite a brainfart... my appologies for the verbosity)
More and more I am realizing that, ultimately, the depth of the dialog between an individual and reality is limited almost solely by the amount of pleasure one feels they are able to withstand.
The more an individual claims responsibility and ownership of the involuntary reality surrounding the individual's consciousness, the more the effects of voluntary actions are perceived as inter-permeating the involuntary reality of consciousness. The more voluntary responsibility we take for involuntary reality, the more pleasure we claim for ourselves. Pleasure and displeasure exists in the interaction between the voluntary and involuntary. The interaction between pleasure and displeasure is a necessary one for the presence of an identity as this is the primary language of dialog between self and non self. The more reality we allow ourselves to be, the greater the surface area of this interaction and the greater the depth and span of pleasure available to us.
The more a personality matures, the more involuntary reality is accepted in a voluntary embrace, and the more voluntary the dialog of pleasure and displeasure becomes. Thus a mature personality no longer is exclusively defined by the involuntary interaction of pleasure and displeasure, self and non-self. Instead, mature personality is defined as an interactive dialog between pleasure and displeasure with both claimed in the particular relationship that is involuntary reality embraced by voluntary personal responsibility. Thus the role of self and non-self in the mature personality is voluntarily held for the sake of dialog between pleasure and displeasure, without which neither would have a domain to exist. Self holds non-self in a feminine, voluntary embrace given definition by an invitation for responsibility to the pleasure and displeasure that flows out of the involuntary domain. Responsibility is the common bridge element to the masculine claim to responsibility for the voluntary penetration of pleasure and displeasure that is pushed into the involuntary domain. Voluntarity voluntarily allows involuntarity to be involuntary whereas involuntarity allows and permits voluntarity to claim the experience of pleasure and displeasure which is needed to support the structure of self and non-self. Voluntarity gives pleasure and displeasure a place to impact because involuntarity can never voluntarily lay claim to it. Thus, the masculine spirit likes to feel responsibility for the generation of pleasure and displeasure whereas the feminine spirit likes to feel responsibility for the receiving of pleasure and displeasure. The intersection of voluntarity and involuntarity is where this interaction occurs and the self and non-self are the bodies in the borders where this intersection is chosen to exist.
Every exchange of pleasure I have witnessed in my lifetime can be expressed and understood within the essential dialog of being between my lover and me, correlated to the particular depth or level of interaction whether expressed in chakra theory or spectrum of consciousness language. Or it may be thought of as simply expressed in a non-differentiated embrace of presence, as per the tastes or desires of the individual's need for categorization and organization. But our union is an archetypal demonstration of this pure dialog.
An individual will limit their pleasure in order to feel that the pleasure that they do feel has been earned or generated through suffering. This is a fundamental confusion manifest in the psyche of modern man. The true interaction is between pleasure and displeasure with suffering being an attribute derivable (but necessarily so) from either or both. Suffering is optional and is symptomatic of personal monitoring and moderation of the pleasure/displeasure interaction under the psychosis that all character, feeling and expression should be an intentional and voluntary conclusion of consciousness.