Casual Sex - Discussion

[Ceoli]

I do see how others can get their hackles up. I don`t believe two wrongs make a right, however. As stated earlier, it`s a individual`s choice. Thanks for the educational link though. While I have seen it before, I am sure others will benefit from it.

As for leaving forums, that's another personal choice, Good luck to you in all areas.

Stating prejudicial assumptions as fact is indeed a personal choice. It doesn't change the fact that it is still dead wrong. And also, calling out a choice as wrong does not automatically mean that hackles are up. It's doing what it says on the package: calling out a personal choice as wrong. Wrong choices, personal or not, do indeed exist, even if such wrong choices work quite well for the person making such choices.

 

[immaterial]

It does seem somehow that HMA's basic argument, that casual sex is not in and of itself harmful, but that there are people who harm each other sexually through other means, got lost in the shuffle here. HMA, my apologies if I misinterpret what you are trying to say.

Let's say that sexual expression happens along a spectrum from extremely exploitative, violating and unquestionably harmful on one extreme end to the highest level of spiritual and creative union and blissful, meaningful and transformational encounter of two or more people on the other. It seems everywhere along this spectrum will be a great many varieties of sexual experiences. Depending on set and setting, each individual stands to experience different parts of the spectrum differently. A hot foursome among total strangers might be just the thing for a certain person at a certain time along his or her journey on this crazy planet. I once met a woman on the dance floor and fucked her in the alley behind the club an hour later and it was a spiritual experience. (We actually ended up together for 4 years and I was lousy in bed with her the entire last 18 months, it was just terrible).

Maybe, apart from the obviously harmful end of the spectrum and the obviously blissful Tantric union of souls, all along the way there is just good sex and bad sex. Exciting and rewarding sex that is vital and where we are glad to be alive versus dull, empty experiences that make us feel diminished and lonely. The first thing I'd want to know if a friend of mine said "I had casual sex last night" would be "was it any good?" There are many imaginable situations where the answer would be a resounding YES.

So I think most of the opinions expressed in this thread about "casual sex" have actually been opinions about either harmful behaviors or just plain boring and bad, unpleasant, hollow sexual experiences. As HMA has mentioned, I have experienced and been responsible for some pretty bad sex within the context of a committed relationship and I've also had incredibly creative, uplifting, inspiring and spiritual sexual experiences with women I hardly knew.

Immaterial

 

[SourGirl]

Associating prejudice with evil (i.e., 'wrong doing') is a natural regular occurrence, which seems to be your viewpoint in this instance.

Prejudice can be both a positive and negative thing, is my viewpoint.

It is negative when people paint a whole world with one brush, no matter what side of the belief system you are on.

If your hackles are not up, then I am not sure why you are commenting on this topic, while also making sure to state your exit from the forum. You offer a viewpoint from another angle of the subject. Forums need that.

I don`t endorse nor accept your blanket statements, but I am ultimately a 'To each their own' type.

If you want to debate more, I am available back to this subject from Thursday onward. Work calls tomorrow! I would be very interested in discussing the link you posted. I was curious why those stats surprise people. 'Business decisions' vs personal decisions seemed a likely outcome to sway at the pros.

Excellent points, Immaterial.

With that, I am off to bed!

 

[NeonKaos]

Your mothers' opinion, is not wrong, just different then yours. Many who are poly, hold the same beliefs about stable relationship choices.

Another thing is - I don't see how "many who are poly" agreeing with HMA's mother makes it true either. Polyamorous people can be full of shit just like anyone else.

 

[redpepper]

Superjast, I am assuming you are talking to Ceoli in your post. Would you please talk to her about her link in PM, or start another thread if the link relates to poly? Thank you. Just trying to keep us on topic. I'm sure it's an excellent link, but it seems to be a different theme from what we are talking about here.

 

[Ceoli]

Associating prejudice with evil (i.e., 'wrong doing') is a natural regular occurrence. Which seems to be your viewpoint in this instance.

In this instance, I'm associating prejudice as something that keeps people misinformed, thus encouraging them to make judgements and decisions about practices and other people that are most likely incorrect, i.e., "wrong."

Prejudice can be both a positive and negative thing, is my viewpoint.

Great. In this instance (i.e., the context of making erroneous assumptions about the nature of people who engage "casual sex"), I don't see this particular kind of prejudice as a positive thing. And since this is what we're discussing, I'm not going to say that this kind of prejudice is useful or indeed a good thing.

It is negative when people paint a whole world with one brush, no matter what side of the belief system you are on.

Indeed, which was the exact kind of thinking that HMA was describing in his post. And that's the kind of thinking that I consider to be wrong, and by wrong, I mean a misinformed inaccurate view. If people want to cling to that kind of misinformation, that's fair enough. I just won't think much of their opinions in the future.

If your hackles are not up, then I am not sure why you are commenting on this topic, while also making sure to state your exit from the forum. You offer a viewpoint from another angle of the subject.

Umm... because this is a discussion of a topic that I'm interested in? And because there was a post that I disagreed with? Do you involve hackles in every disagreement you come across? I wonder what your continued interest in my hackles is here.

And I only made the statement about my exit from the forum in order to explain the fact that I'm posting here after not posting here for a very long time. And I did say at the end of the post that *I don't know* if I will continue to participate in the forum. I will, however, participate in this discussion. And I'm not sure why you seem more interested in my motivations for posting rather than just engaging what I'm talking about.

I don`t endorse nor accept your blanket statements, but I am ultimately a 'to each their own' type.

I think there is a limit to that statement. For instance, I'm not going to say "to each their own" to a person who feels the need to eradicate people of other races. I'm happy to say "to each their own" to people who wish to cling to assumptions and misinformation in order to protect their world view and not have it challenged. They're more than welcome to keep those views. But that doesn't mean I'm not going to state what I feel is incorrect about it. To each their own, right?

Superjast, I am assuming you are talking Ceoli in your post. Would you please talk to her about her link in PM, or start another thread if the link relates to poly? I'm sure its an excellent link, but it seems to be a different theme...

Since the link is about STI risks among people who practice casual sex, it seems pretty on-topic to me. I posted it in response to earlier posts that brought up that issue of STI risks as a factor in deciding whether to engage in or engage with people who practiced casual sex.

 

[AutumnalTone]

"... people who are willing to get involved in casual sex relations are more likely to be the problematic types, and people looking for steady relationships are more likely to be stable. I cannot stress enough that that type of thinking is dead wrong."


Your mothers' opinion is not wrong, just different then yours. Many who are poly, hold the same beliefs about stable relationship choices.

His mother's statement includes claims of fact that simply aren't true. So, while it may be her opinion that folks willing to have casual sex are problematic types, that claim is factually incorrect and can be stated to be incorrect. It may be her opinion that folks seeking steady relationships are more likely to be stable--that is not factually correct and saying it's wrong is accurate.

Yes, folks hold all sorts of silly notions forth as facts. Calling those claims of fact wrong is part of holding an intelligent discussion. It's the very same situation as if she claimed the Earth were flat--it's verifiably wrong.

With the topic at hand, she can avoid having casual sex because she fears running into a troubled soul. She can't claim it as fact that folks wanting casual sex are troubled souls and expect reasonable people to not challenge that claim. She can look only for folks seeking steady relationships because she likes to think they're more likely to be stable; she just can't claim that to be a fact.

It's quite simple: If you claim something as fact and that claim is verifiably wrong, expect to get called on it in a serious discussion. You can still base your opinions on personal preferences ("I'm not comfortable getting involved with somebody who would want casual sex") and offer personal judgements ("I think casual sex is wrong") without question. Claims of fact that are incorrect are going to be questioned.

 

[HappiestManAlive]

Some of you make my brain hurt. This is the second time in a week that one of my posts has caused a minor uproar because somebody read something into it that wasn't there. And after doing so, took it apart and twisted the hell out of it. It's annoying.

Yes, I said her thinking was DEAD WRONG, and I will both stand by that statement and viciously defend myself in doing so from attacks claiming that I was the one making blanket statements - because that's just funny. When somebody makes a claim that other people are bad based on behavior the rightness ofr wrongness of which is open for discussion, that is DEAD WRONG. I explained that in detail in that post - which is probably why certain people are only quoting it in part, lol.

Thanks to some of you who took my post at face value and realized that I was simply stating a dislike for people making blanket judgments, in this instance as they apply to relationships and casual encounters.

So - to explain what all that was SUPPOSED to mean:

I was raised in a very loving, very liberal-minded home - by extremely conservative christian standards, that is. My family is awesome and I love them. Especially my mother. With whom I am in constant touch and have amazing talks and discussions about the world at large and all kinds of things; and with whom I also frequently fight like cats and dogs when her "my way is God's way and it's that way or the highway" views start to stall our talks.

When dealing with a subject like the one at hand in this thread, her incredibly well educated and open mind slams shut and the religious rhetoric starts flowing like the Mississippi, which generally includes an whole stinkin' lot of "YOU'RE WRONG BECAUSE I SAY SO" from her. And generally the discussion breaks down into an argument REAL fuckin' fast from there, because I don't tolerate that kind of dismissive BS from someone I expect intelligent discourse with.

And as it turns out, that's one heck of an analogy for this thread, lol.

Wow - Ceoli - way to steal the thunder from MY triumphant return to the boards, LMAO. Nice to hear from you.

 

[immaterial]

Sign of intelligent discourse: brain pain.



I think it's a dead end to ascribe character defects to people based on their sexual behavior, except for the most extreme of examples. As a friend of mine would say, "watch the movie with the sound off." Sexual behavior in general that is unconventional often becomes the target of sex negative folks who want to use the behavior of others as a way to judge their character, their ethics, their morals or their quality as people. This is just ad hominem shaming BS and is a distraction.

I keep working to hold every single person's path in the light, within reason. "Be kind to everyone you meet, for each is fighting a great battle." This kindness would include simply speaking for myself, speaking my own truth. It would also be an open-mindedness and willingness to hear opposing viewpoints and adjust my perspective accordingly if this seems warranted by facts.

Your mother's statement is factually incorrect. It's actually not saying what it seems to be saying. I love those.

Immaterial

 

[eskimo]

I never considered myself one for casual sex really, I had never really had any until last week. The idea of it never excited me.

I had been drinking, and met someone and had a "hook-up" and haven't heard from her since. Oddly though, now that I've experienced it, I did find it exciting, and would like to do it again.

The idea of it has always turned me off as being empty, but having experienced it, it was exciting and somehow comforting in a strange way. I don't really understand why I fell the way I do about it, which is probably the reason I'm seeking casual sex more now.

 

[SourGirl]

Wow ! Some of you had quite the BBQ !

We`ll have to agree to disagree on this one. I thought about what some of you had to say, I did let it roll around in my head for awhile, and view the various points. A couple of you really understand the true nature of debate, that was great to see.

Truth is, at the end of the day, I cannot agree with most of the arguments that came back towards me. I did some sorting, so I could base it on the actual point, but much doesn`t seem feasible. (Based on the info available at the time of my 1st post about 'wrong'. Not the tidbits that came thereafter.)

If someone crosses a line, and becomes self-righteous, sure, hold your ground.

Returning that self-righteous attitude ? I guess I don`t want to be that person. Lead by example, as they say.

 

[Ceoli]

If someone crosses a line, and becomes self-righteous, sure, hold your ground.

Returning that self-righteous attitude ? I guess I don`t want to be that person. Lead by example, as they say.

What do you see as the difference? At what point does holding a clear view become self righteous? I'm not sure if you're referring to perceived self-righteousness in this thread or in general.

 

[immaterial]

@Eskimo: I know precisely what you mean. I have had very uplifting short term sexual experiences. Very soul cleansing, mood brightening, releasing, trusting experiences. Love shows up in unexpected encounters.

Superjast, I share Ceoli's question. I am feeling particularly dense at nearly 2 am, but having trouble understanding your post.

Immaterial

 

[Magdlyn]

I find it interesting that a lot of women start their poly journey with casual recreational, sport sex and then, once ego is boosted they look for more romantic, more involved relationships. Men do the same thing sometimes it seems. The thing is that some men will fuck just about anything. This is what I realized anyway. It was really not an ego boost at all. Do women do the same thing? I don't hold much trust that women are really being admired when a guy they just met sleeps with them. To me I am wary of any man who wants sex.

Don't most people want sex? I guess you mean men who want only sex. What about women who want only sex? Personally after 33 yrs of a relationship, three kids, and finally a decade of arguments and therapy and a split, when I first started dating, I wanted to keep things light for a while. I wanted flirting, laughter, interesting conversations and sex, with a VARIETY of people.

I didn't want purely casual sex with losers. I was still looking for partners with things in common with me outside of a desire for wild creative sex.

I think it's funny actually, kind of pathetic, but not a compliment. Do men feel this way, that there is a chance they are being used and not actually admired? Are they objectified just as often, seen as a penis rather than a person, or even someone who is attractive? Do they even care?

I felt a bit hurt you'd use the word pathetic.

If anyone wants to check their ego, make a OKC profile that has a very distorted, ugly, photoshopped picture of yourself. List yourself as poly/swinger/open relationships, whatever. Sound as stupid and un-unique as possible, and watch the same amount of messages come in.

Same number of responses, maybe. From less desirable, "quality" men, surely.

 

[redpepper]

I felt a bit hurt you'd use the word pathetic.

I meant men that behave like that. I actually don't feel like that about women at all.

Why are you hurt? I find that interesting, as I would never think to direct this towards you. I think more of the swingers I swung with (is that the right way to say it?). In that environment I began finding men pathetic for various reasons. I'm afraid I have had one too many experiences in my life of men being pathetic around their sexual desire and how they attempt to get laid sometimes. That in no way means all men or even most men. I was talking about specific types.

 

[HappiestManAlive]

Apparently you've never had the pleasure of associating with some of the more... I'll use an old phrase and say "shameless hussies" I've met in my life. The desperate cougars, the overly outgoing and forward scantily clad fat chicks, the professional actress quality fake as a wedding cake gold diggers, or any of the myriad other female types that match those men you are so intent on denigrating move for pathetic move.

 

[Ariakas]

I think its funny actually, kind of pathetic, but not a complement. Do men feel this way? That there is a chance they are being used and not actually admired? Are they objectified just as often? Seen as a penis rather than a person or even someone who is attractive? Do they even care?

I have. It's rare but it has happened where this occurred. And honestly, it sucked. I have had moments where I realized I was nothing more than a living sex toy. This isn't how I treat the people I am with, and not how I like to be treated.

Apparently you've never had the pleasure of associating with some of the more... I'll use an old phrase and say "shameless hussies" I've met in my life. The desperate cougars, the overly outgoing and forward scantily-clad fat chicks, the professional actress quality fake as a wedding cake gold diggers, or any of the myriad other female types that match those men you are so intent on denigrating move for pathetic move.

I do believe both sexes can be pathetic in their pursuit of a living sex toy. However I would say, I find less women than I do men exploring the more pathetic side of desperation.

 

[MonoVCPHG]

fat chicks

Nice...

 

[Derbylicious]

Seems to me that there's a lot of terms being thrown around on this thread that are just going to lead to no one feeling good about themselves!

As my mother would say, if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all.

I don't think casual sex is about being right or wrong, it's about if it's right or wrong for you.

-Derby

 

[immaterial]

Desire is a beautiful thing, IMO, even if it warps our sense of perspective. I am a fool for sex, though. I like it.

Immaterial