winter withered, warm
Kinda want to do a brief taxonomy here, just to calibrate our understandings.Why is there so much wank talk on dissensus? Why don't you freaks make your own thread to talk about it so that the rest of us don't get ambushed by your random spurtings every thread we go in?
As I use it, "libido" is largely synonymous with terms like vitality, energy, life force, passion potential, etc. Average all those together, and we have the basic idea.
Perhaps it is best to think of it as an energy potential, energy that remains potential until it is expressed.
I think the default expression is physiological, sexual - but even if we consider that the default expression, that doesn't mean it has a monopoly of such energy potential. It can also be expressed through violence, poesis/poetry, athletics, animalistic screaming, etc.
Are all of these expressions social?
Sexual is social, sexual is physiological. Not all social expression of libido is sexual (heated arguments), not all sexual expression of libido is social (masturbation), and not all physiological expression is sexual (kinetic violence)
Depending on how we set the parameters for "physiological", perhaps we can conclude that not all social expression is physiological (think digital communication - would you consider that physiological? At what point do the parameters of "physiological" become so broad as to be useless?)
Poesis/poetry (as artistic creation most broadly) is a social expression of libido in so far as poetry necessarily presupposes a reader, thus making the poetic act a roundabout social one. If one is able to create without presupposing a reader/viewer, if one is able to transmit without expecting to be received, what do we make of that?
Or if one's social instincts can be calibrated beyond other humans, beyond even other organisms, deterritorializing the socios such that one is effectively addressing the cosmos as a body without organs - can that let one reach heights inaccessible to the conventional social expression?
In that sense, it may as well be called the postsocial libido. Which would necessarily be a postsexual libido, no? As I've said, wanking doesn;t cut it. It equates to the expenditure of only a fraction of the budget available.
Also the thread now officially allocated for Wank Theory. Two birds with one stone.
But the major point is that libido, as passion/energy potential, is not necessarily reducible to sexual expression, social or otherwise.