Casual Sex and Its Discontents

[SycamoreCircle]

Listen, I know a lot of people blame the seventies for everything, but it was the music renaissance of all time. The best music ever came out in that era and just before in the mid to late sixties. It was one big creativity explosion. People thought of having birth control and the changing times (including a lot of drugs) as a key unlocking their prison door. For us it was exploration and experimentation, and we felt privileged to be the first generation of women who could do it -- and knowing we were the first, it almost felt like a duty to to explore.

 

The tone was so much different then. One of my bosses once said he'd never hire someone who didn't at least have enough curiosity to have tried pot. I agree with him. Movies were edgier and sexier without being as overtly sexual or violent as they are today. There were a lot of firsts. And that period and some time in the late sixties were a time of first freedom for women and a whole lot of them embraced it fully. I mean, if you're in a position for the first time in the history of the world to be able to have sex without fear of pregnancy, aren't you kind of a squid not to think that's a pretty big deal and that you ought to at least see what it's all about? My generation, at least in my wider circle, were dedicated to not getting knocked up and were anxious to exercise the choices this provided in the way of career. I think things were better balanced then than they are now in many ways. And it was in that atmosphere when gays first began coming out as well, paving the way for what happened last week. Even racial tensions seemed to be lowkey during those years, at least in the urban areas.

 

One of my favorite movies of that period was "Eyes of Laura Mars."

I have the sentiment sometimes that current day sexual expression in small ways, whether it is aware of it or not, is reacting directly to the evolution of the 70's. Not necessarily in an affirming way, either. There's an authenticity missing. Why the 70's? Because, as you said, there was a real renaissance happening.

 

It's sort of like we're trapped under the shadow of that. We're compelled to create new modes and to break existing models but the best we can come up with is...50 Shades of Grey? That doesn't even seem like a sexy film. It's not a film about sex. More a tale of the apocalypse. A film about how to live without sex.

 

I'll have to check out Eyes of Laura Mars.

[Just a Guy]

With all this discussion about women not being able to enjoy or go through with casual sex I'd like to ask ; What about the so called Hotwives? From what I have read about it these women are able to have sex with approval from their husbands, with multiple partners without batting an eyelid. In fact the whole idea seems to hinge around the fact that emotional attachment is not on the cards. That it happens sometimes is the proverbial exceptions proving the rule.

 

As far as men are concerned rakes, Don Juans' et al have always been around. I would think that for men(as also for women) it is the intensity of their libidos that plays a part. There is also the factor of pheromones. If a man's libido is high he probably exudes a stronger concentration of pheromones which has a complementary effect on his woman partner of the moment. It will probably help to reduce or suppress her inhibitions to the extent that she would succumb to his seduction. There is of course the fact that in the modern day and age there is a very liberal attitude towards sex. What used to be frowned upon in the nineteenth and early century was overturned during the period of the second world war. The physical, social and emotional upheaval that resulted from this war, forever changed the attitude of people towards sex and many other ingrained beliefs.

 

I think alcohol fueled casual sex is also a significant occurance. When a woman has had more alcohol than she can properly handle, she loses her inhibitions to a significant degree. In such a case she may consent to sex with someone she barely knows and probably met at a bar or some such place while out for the evening on her own or with other women friends.

 

So I guess there are a number of contributing factors where both men and women can have casual sex without emotions getting in the way and these experiences may be pleasant or otherwise, it just doesn't matter.

[Grumpybutfun]

When religion and society stop making women sluts or whores for enjoying sex, it will be different. I'm often surprised at the rhetoric girls get at a young age and their desire to inflict severe modesty on them

G

[loveweary11]

I also prefer a more committed sex life, but beggars can't be choosers, so I play the hand I was dealt, which seems to be casual sex at this stage in life.

[elaine567]

When religion and society stop making women sluts or whores for enjoying sex, it will be different. I'm often surprised at the rhetoric girls get at a young age and their desire to inflict severe modesty on them

G

 

Agreed.

 

This is still why women are loathe to continue down the casual sex route, else they be labelled and be deemed worthless.

 

Men can be understood, "oh he is lonely...", "he has never found 'the one'", "he was badly hurt", "men have needs"...

 

Women do not get that same degree of understanding "filthy tramp", "whore", "slut", "skanky b*tch"...

[GoodOnPaper]

I also prefer a more committed sex life, but beggars can't be choosers, so I play the hand I was dealt, which seems to be casual sex at this stage in life.

 

Is it really that bad? I come from the other end of the spectrum. Zero casual sex experience - always had to get into a relationship to get any sex. Attracting someone for a ONS would be a bucket list thing for me.

 

If you can regularly attract women for short-term things, you always have the option of turning it into a relationship. If you struggle with the attraction stage, even in a relationship you just never know if you're completely measuring up on the physical front. You deal with women being lukewarm or having significant sexual hang ups and insecurities. Finding a real physical connection is far far tougher than anything else.

[GoodOnPaper]

When religion and society stop making women sluts or whores for enjoying sex, it will be different. I'm often surprised at the rhetoric girls get at a young age and their desire to inflict severe modesty on them

G

 

Hypothetically, what would a world be like where everyone was freewheeling and shame-free with casual sex. I'd argue that it would be better for guys who are already good at attracting women and worse for guys who already struggle. Would that necessarily be a good thing?

[autumnnight]

Eh, I prefer for sex to mean something. I personally prefer not to offer my naked body as easily as I offer a handshake. That is MY preference. I do not expect everyone to share my preference. Everyone is different.

 

Neither do I expect it to be implied that I am somehow "dysfunctional" just because I don't want a parade of nameless men trotting through my memories.

 

I don't shame others. I don't expect to be shamed either.

[jen1447]

I disagree with what seems to be the prevailing trend in this thread, and I can say with certainty that I get a great deal of satisfaction and fulfillment out of casual sex. It's not automatically sleazy or vapid or cheap or whatever other expression you want to use.

 

Like autumn I don't expect everyone else to jump on my bandwagon, but I'd appreciate it if I was afforded the basics of respect and spared the stigma and generalizations.

 

edit - I see this isn't even the OT at all anyway lol ....to which my answer is "I don't know."

[RedRobin]

I don't enjoy casual sex, but not for the variety of reasons given here. I am a pretty deliberate person in most things I do. A controlled risk taker.

 

Like... I drive a GXSR 750. Am in the process of moving to Seattle, WA solo. (Yay me!). Am certified to charter sailboats... And am looking into buying my own so a I can sail the West Coast, then across the Pacific, and maybe even a circumnavigation... On my bucket list.

 

Sex is the same way for me. I am adventurous. Within limits. To answer your question... Yes... If I seriously didn't have to worry about running across someone who might harm me or worry about the guy being a grade A jerk, I likely would be taking more risks in that department... As it is, no.

 

To me, casual sex is like getting on that GXSR without checking the tires first... Stupid. You might have fun. You might get killed. These are things most men don't have to worry about once the specter of disease is reduced via condoms.

[preraph]

People who actively seek casual sex have managed to alter the way they see their partners, IMHO. I think they objectify them - almost dehumanizing them. I mean - that mate of my friend has already been sleeping with 20 something women already, this year alone - and we're only in July. I doubt he remembers all of their names... It takes a certain... disconnection, to be able to do it properly. Mental. Emotional. It's freakin' scary, if you ask me.

 

I do think that happens a whole lot, but when I was a woman in the '70s, most of the casual sex was with people I some way knew and thought they were cool and had things in common with, and these people would mostly remain my friendly acquaintances over the years because we ran in the same larger group. I did have more random hookups in my earliest years in my hometown because I was finding out what it was all about for my own purposes. I was dealing with some insecurities and building up my confidence.

 

When I moved to another city and found my niche and a large group of people I'd see over and over at music things, those people remained friends and if I happen to run into them decades later, they are still friendly respectful acquaintances. Saw a couple at a funeral recently. And we were never disposable objects to each other. We liked each other. We liked a lot of people and so we got to know a lot of people.

 

Of course, once you fall in love, the quality of sex hardly even matters because at that point your emotions are setting fire to your brain. And it did ruin casual sex for me for some time after love affairs. But not completely.

[candie13]

I do think that happens a whole lot, but when I was a woman in the '70s, most of the casual sex was with people I some way knew and thought they were cool and had things in common with, and these people would mostly remain my friendly acquaintances over the years because we ran in the same larger group.

 

Pre, I don't know anything about casual sex in the 70s. Not a thing. My observations are related to having casual sex today. Casual sex today - at least the one I see around me - means that there are no higher values shared. No taste in music. Not even a certain lifestyle - other than "being cool", hanging around the right spots., drinking and potentially doing some drugs. sometimes, just being in the right spot and with the "right" purpose in mind is enough. that is where the interpersonal connection stops.

 

And I am not talking about being with your mates to a fantastic music concert meeting the most amazing guy and hooking up with him to end the evening in flames. I'm talking about hooking up as a lifestyle. As the only way of getting laid. Not in a RS, take some time, see some people, have some casual sex, stay single, meet a girl and be in a RS again. Randomly fcking strangers on a string. With some variations.

 

I did have more random hookups in my earliest years in my hometown because I was finding out what it was all about for my own purposes. I was dealing with some insecurities and building up my confidence.

I think most people have done that at some moment in time, to a certain extant - of course, there's a difference between 2 partners and 20.

 

When I moved to another city and found my niche and a large group of people I'd see over and over at music things, those people remained friends and if I happen to run into them decades later, they are still friendly respectful acquaintances. Saw a couple at a funeral recently. And we were never disposable objects to each other. We liked each other. We liked a lot of people and so we got to know a lot of people.

 

Got it. My point is "causal sex with random strangers". And making a lifestyle out of it. of course, whomever finds that ok, should continue doing it.

 

Of course, once you fall in love, the quality of sex hardly even matters because at that point your emotions are setting fire to your brain. And it did ruin casual sex for me for some time after love affairs. But not completely.

 

Se, that is exactly my point. It fcks you up for love. It desensitizes you from an emotional connection, because you've had it for so long without it, that it's strange to have it when there are feelings. And furthermore, when there are feelings, you still yearn for novelty (on top of your current lover), new skin under your lips, new arms caressing your body, new partners to discover sexually. Variety. No partner, no matter how amazing, can substitute one's need for variety, which becomes pretty much like a drug... because you keep pushing those excitement barriers further and further. You need change constantly to keep it fun and exciting. Pretty much screws you for monogamous RS after that. And, to some extent, for love. True love. That sort of love that makes you ache when you breathe too deeply...

Edited July 4, 2015 by candie13

[jen1447]

Se, that is exactly my point. It fcks you up for love. It desensitizes you from an emotional connection, because you've had it for so long without it, that it's strange to have it when there are feelings.

No it doesn't - at least not universally. I have deep, fully sensitized love for my people, plus I enjoy casual sex. They're not mutually exclusive.

[candie13]

No it doesn't - at least not universally. I have deep, fully sensitized love for my people, plus I enjoy casual sex. They're not mutually exclusive.

If you are having the same partners, I could understand your statement. But you have different partners every night... I am afraid I cannot.

 

One thing's for sure: same partners or random strangers, settling to just one partner - and sharing that "love" only with one person doesn't look all that attractive anymore, does it ? So consequentially, it does screw you for monogamous RS .

[jen1447]

Who wants monogamous Rs?

 

I guess I understand that you can't understand candie but that doesn't invalidate my assertion. I'm not even advocating for my lifetstyle here, just defending it when claims that I know to be untrue are made.

[candie13]

Jen, I am not criticizing your lifestyle and I do understand the fact that you genuinely believe that you love your people - all 3 or 4 of them. I am not saying that one can only feel love in an exclusive monogamous RS, God, no !

 

I cannot talk or criticize something that I have never gotten to experience, can I ?

 

What I am saying is that this lifestyle affects you. It changes how you see and experience the world and RSs, after that. There are consequences of drinking from that poisonous drink (pun intented)... one mere consequence is the fact that you start craving for more, haha!

 

I think it all goes down to what you really want (out of a RS) and how much are you able to put yourself out there, hoping to experience love. How many risks are you willing to take ? To me, personally, sleeping with multiple people at the same time is shielding yourself from love, not experiencing love.

 

Again, I don't want to sound judgmental, as long as everyone's happy... but let's just call a spade a spade, for once, shall we?

 

Casual sex does change people. For the better or for the worse, debatable, but there are consequences. We're complex creatures, it is impossible to not affect us. And many times, in more ways than we are actually aware of.

[jen1447]

^ I disagree with some of that but fair enough. I like you candie and don't really want to get in any fights so you can have the last word.

[preraph]

Se, that is exactly my point. It fcks you up for love. It desensitizes you from an emotional connection, because you've had it for so long without it, that it's strange to have it when there are feelings. And furthermore, when there are feelings, you still yearn for novelty (on top of your current lover), new skin under your lips, new arms caressing your body, new partners to discover sexually. Variety. No partner, no matter how amazing, can substitute one's need for variety, which becomes pretty much like a drug... because you keep pushing those excitement barriers further and further. You need change constantly to keep it fun and exciting. Pretty much screws you for monogamous RS after that. And, to some extent, for love. True love. That sort of love that makes you ache when you breathe too deeply...

 

Well, everyone is different, but if that's what you got out of my paragraph about love ruining casual sex for me, that's the opposite of that I meant. When I'm in love, I don't even see other men. I don't cheat. I'm not looking, I'm not tempted, I'm not available and am pretty much blind to temptation. If this wasn't the man I wanted, then I wouldn't be in love. So casual sex didn't ruin me for monogamy at all (my disdain for domesticity did). When in love, monogamous. When love is over, eventually I'd get back to casual sex, which is not as good, but has its own merits and doesn't always come attached to eventual heartache.

 

But I do understand your point about it being different today. It is vastly different today. You have to worry about disease today. That's a huge thing. People don't seem to be as educated about birth control today as they used to be, and I guess that's because disease made condoms necessary (which often fail), so you have to worry more about pregnancy than you did then because no one wore condoms and no one wasn't on birth control unless they were planning a baby.

 

And not the least of it is social media, which is one big sea of opportunity for all the guys out there to shop as if from a catalog looking for hookups. And I'd say the majority of young guys do want to have a bunch of hookups and won't be ready to settle down for a few years. Social media made hookups, even in the midst of serious STDs, easier than it's ever been since before diseases. But it also has guys running in circles scrambling for the next hottest body.

 

Men are way more focused on just how close the body is to their visual ideal than in the 70s when big boobs were considered cowlike by many because natural ones are not perky. So men still liked boobs, but there were no perfect bodies around back then, even on tv, in the days before airbrushing, and so many more women were considered desirable.

 

You can get out of the social media rat race if you go do more real things instead of living out your whole existence on social media, and be far more likely to find love with someone you have things in common with if you do.

[candie13]

^ I disagree with some of that but fair enough. I like you candie and don't really want to get in any fights so you can have the last word.

 

like u too, jen and i didn't mean to appear as if I want to have the last word.

 

maybe there are other things that I am missing out from the bigger picture, i don't know. i do admit that as long as people making this sort of choice are honest with their partners, there should be no problem .

[candie13]

Well, everyone is different, but if that's what you got out of my paragraph about love ruining casual sex for me, that's the opposite of that I meant. When I'm in love, I don't even see other men. I don't cheat. I'm not looking, I'm not tempted, I'm not available and am pretty much blind to temptation. If this wasn't the man I wanted, then I wouldn't be in love. So casual sex didn't ruin me for monogamy at all (my disdain for domesticity did). When in love, monogamous. When love is over, eventually I'd get back to casual sex, which is not as good, but has its own merits and doesn't always come attached to eventual heartache.

 

But I do understand your point about it being different today. It is vastly different today. You have to worry about disease today. That's a huge thing. People don't seem to be as educated about birth control today as they used to be, and I guess that's because disease made condoms necessary (which often fail), so you have to worry more about pregnancy than you did then because no one wore condoms and no one wasn't on birth control unless they were planning a baby.

 

I understand your point, preraph. I guess anything is possible, including people that have casual sex to fall inlove and suddenly become exclusive . Both men and women. I was generalizing and that's not excusable, my apologies.

 

what's your point about "domesticity" ?

[SycamoreCircle]

I think women have only to make the choice to submit to casual sex, whereas men have to make the choice to engineer casual sex. Maybe I'm also only speaking in strictly heterosexual terms.

[preraph]

I understand your point, preraph. I guess anything is possible, including people that have casual sex to fall inlove and suddenly become exclusive . Both men and women. I was generalizing and that's not excusable, my apologies.

 

what's your point about "domesticity" ?

 

Only that I wasn't domestic enough to be motivated to seek a very long-term monogamous relationship. I wasn't housewife material. If I had been seeking a domestic situation or wanting kids, probably I'd have been more strategic and picked different men and been focused on that rather than just having fun.

[preraph]

I think women have only to make the choice to submit to casual sex, whereas men have to make the choice to engineer casual sex. Maybe I'm also only speaking in strictly heterosexual terms.

 

True for some, but I guarantee I "engineered" most of my relationships of any type, though of course not all. I was proactive in meeting people. Not saying I was going up and propositioning them, but I made sure I met anyone I might find interesting or attractive by going up and talking to them. And then down the line, maybe we got together. But they usually didn't feel I was just hitting on them, because I wasn't. I was interested in something about them: their talent, their style, their job, their taste in music, their good hair, their flair for drama or whatever.

 

The reason it's not just deciding to submit is because it's usually not the guys you think are the most desirable ones who are hitting on you.

[SycamoreCircle]

I think you touched on a trademark of casual sex. You said that you approached the people because there was something about them(and then you went on to name some things) that piqued your interest. It feels like with so much online dating today, people are looking for EVERYTHING to fall in line. I suppose also those people are looking for serious partners.

[preraph]

^ It's just impossible to tell if someone is the one online. They can seem perfect (much easier to seem perfect on paper than in reality for one thing) and then you meet and it's just not there. Or you can fall for someone unlike anyone you thought you'd fall for because your personalities just work well together but you may not have that much in common except a wonderful rapport.

 

It's great to have standards, but to me, those should be about the basics, like the person is respectful, gainfully employed, doesn't lie, etc.