Sex as Payoff

[AliceInWonderland]

Chiaroscuro,

I'm curious. Who did you stick around with longer, the girls who would give it up (sex) or girls who wouldn't?

I used to hear during my dating days that a guy would keep dating a girl who would not give it up. Once they got the sex, they'd drop the girl and move on. However, I always experienced guys who would date me once and move on even though I never give it up. Of course, I was meeting the majority of guys I dated in bars that my friends and I would go to. So, I have always been curious about what is the truth. I don't know if where I met them would make a difference or not, though.

I'd like to know your thoughts.

[Chiaroscuro]

All of my girlfriends were long-termish, regardless of the sexual component. The only short-term ones were instances where the connection just wasn't there on one side or the other. We were able to figure that out after one or two dates (and in only one of those was there sex involved).

I can't speak to the "typical" guy, obviously... if there is such a thing I don't know what that is. I yearned to have sex with all of my girlfriends, but that yearning was for what I described earlier... consummation and confirmation of our mutual desire, not a "score" that was valuable in its own right, and with all of them I was willing to wait until it felt right to both of us. Not to say I didn't press my case :)

-Chiaroscuro

[AliceInWonderland]

Actually in thinking about it, since my original post in this thread, when I've used the term sex, I'm thinking of intercourse and assume you are too. So I think I should not assume and be more specific and say that I WOULD have sex like petting, etc. but just not intercourse. So, all of the instances where I've referred to sex, I meant sexual intercourse.

For me, it was a month with dating for two guys - different times of course. I did have intercourse once with one of them, but that had little to do with my feelings for him - just that by then, I was afraid I might die as a virgin. I dated my husband for longer, but actually in thinking about it, we never went out that much, but we saw each other a lot. I always had the desire for sex and wanted to have intercourse a couple of times when asked and felt like I knew in my heart it would be good if I did (one was a one night stand who I knew, the other was in a relationship), but said no because I was afraid that I'd get pregnant (even while on the pill) due to the circumstances in my life at the time. I wish I had not set so many conditions for myself and just let go. I'll admit that I used to be more neurotic than I am now and was under a lot of pressure at that time. I've never been that socially interactive, but I have to peel back the layers to see why - was it because I was that scared or something else? Does that make sense - in other words when an obstacle is removed, are there others behind that or would I have had sex? I think I would have, but I can't go back to that and know for sure.

I'll have to admit that now I'm sexually aroused more easily than I used to be. I don't know what the difference is now, but I definitely have more energy than I did when I was younger not just with sex but just in general, and now there are less limitations and I'm better informed.

I know noone asked me all of this, but I think whenever I share info., it helps me realize who I am. I'm mostly a shy and private person, so I don't really share much. So, here's the opportunity for me to share.

Where I wrote above about the guy always dropping me after the first date, I should have written most of the time instead.

Thanks for your reply.

[Rabger]

But that does not mean that sexual desire is a socially constructed issue. It's a fundamental human drive that clever advertisers are manipulating to their advantage.

Sexual desire and sex drive are two completely different things. While sexual desire is not a completely social construct I'd have to say at least half of most people's sexual desire IS a social construct. Thinking that sex is the most important thing is social. Believing that sex and love are the same thing is at least half social. Linking sexual desire or attraction to power is half social. Believing that you have to have a high level of sexual desire is social. Believing that high level of sexual desire makes you a "real man" is social. Encouraging people to seek out sex for social status is social. Desiring sexual subserviance is social. I could go on and on.

[mdw]

But that does not mean that sexual desire is a socially constructed issue. It's a fundamental human drive that clever advertisers are manipulating to their advantage.

Sexual desire and sex drive are two completely different things. While sexual desire is not a completely social construct I'd have to say at least half of most people's sexual desire IS a social construct. Thinking that sex is the most important thing is social. Believing that sex and love are the same thing is at least half social. Linking sexual desire or attraction to power is half social. Believing that you have to have a high level of sexual desire is social. Believing that high level of sexual desire makes you a "real man" is social. Encouraging people to seek out sex for social status is social. Desiring sexual subserviance is social. I could go on and on.

Anyone who thinks that should be shot. Using someone who thinks that sex is the most important thing is using an amazing corner case, using an exception to prove something that you don't believe is the exception, but rather the rule.

[AliceInWonderland]

"....using an exception to prove something that you don't believe is the exception, but rather the rule.

Hmmm. Just curious, but did you mean to write, "....believe is NOT the exception..." instead? I'm hung up on the grammatics here. It doesn't read right to me. Am I missing something? Please explain.

[Tool1989]

:( not everybody thinks that way, even when they are straight though!

[AliceInWonderland]

:( not everybody thinks that way, even when they are straight though!

I agree that not everyone including sexuals think this way - that sex is the most important thing. Actually, I'm not sure that anyone really thinks that, but I guess there is the spectrum thing though.

[Chiaroscuro]

know noone asked me all of this, but I think whenever I share info., it helps me realize who I am.

I agree with this sentiment absolutely, Alice. I come here to help me understand myself as much as I do my non-sexual wife. The fact that sex is such a taboo subject in our society means that it's difficult to discuss it publicly (at least it is for men). I find Aven especially refreshing, because I find my assumptions challenged here in ways they wouldn't be elsewhere. I believe that helps me move closer to a true understanding.

1. While sexual desire is not a completely social construct I'd have to say at least half of most people's sexual desire IS a social construct.

2. Thinking that sex is the most important thing is social. Believing that sex and love are the same thing is at least half social.

3. Linking sexual desire or attraction to power is half social.

4. Believing that you have to have a high level of sexual desire is social.

5. Believing that high level of sexual desire makes you a "real man" is social.

6. Encouraging people to seek out sex for social status is social.

7. Desiring sexual subserviance is social.

1. I'd dispute the idea that we can know what percentage of sexual desire is socialized. Socialization is an element in everything we think... in HOW we think. Quantifying it as a percentage of this or that isn't possible. It's the context we live in.

2. First of all, I don't know of anyone for whom sex is the most important thing. Maybe high school boys after the prom... Second of all, sex and love are as much disconnected as connected by western society. We're told by the media that casual sex is cool and fun at the same time we're told by the church and state that monogamy is the only moral way to live (monogamy being a sexual definition).

3. Agreed, but sex and power are part of the animal kingdom as well, so if it's social, it's not a uniquely human form of socialization.

4. ...or pathological.

5. Agreed, but there are a lot of ways in which men are made to feel like failures if they don't "measure up": sports, being handy around the house, stoic to pain, stoic in the face of suffering. I don't see sex as being singled out particularly.

6 & 7. Both are also mirrored in the animal world. And the subservience thing is more about power and less about sex, I believe. Man built a world in which women were kept down in many ways, one of them, of course, sexually.

My point here is that, while socialization forms a context for how we integrate sexuality into a modern society, it isn't some sort of bizarre rule-book, specifically targeted at sexuality, and not at anything else. Sexuality is a core human function, so of course societies are going to consider its regulation. I thoroughly agree with you, Rabger, that such regulation can form odd perversions in large groups of people, but it doesn't change the fact that sex and desire are fundamental, universal human experiences.

[mdw]

"....using an exception to prove something that you don't believe is the exception, but rather the rule.

Hmmm. Just curious, but did you mean to write, "....believe is NOT the exception..." instead? I'm hung up on the grammatics here. It doesn't read right to me. Am I missing something? Please explain.

No, I meant what I said. I was pointing out a flaw in logic. She is using a situation which is obviously an exception (believing sex is the most important thing), and then projecting that point of view out on everyone who is sexual.

[Rabger]

I was pointing out a flaw in logic. She is using a situation which is obviously an exception (believing sex is the most important thing), and then projecting that point of view out on everyone who is sexual.

Umm, actually, you guys are jumping to insane conclusions and its rather ridiculous. I never once said that all sexuals think sex is the most important thing, and to try and imply that I did simply shows youre lack of paying attention. Secondly, I have had the unfortunate luck of hearing a number of people describing sex as one of the most important things in life. It may not be the majority, but its a good sized minority. So, there is no flaw in the logic, just in your conclusion. And since that's socialized, that makes it social. Anyone that studies sociology, psychology, biology, and anthropology can figure that out. Much of the behavior humans act out is socialized. Now, our species being susceptable to socialization is biological. Wouldn't argue that.

[AliceInWonderland]

I'll just write this in short because I need to decide on what I'm going to have for dinner, but if you ask my asexual husband what the most important thing in my life is right now, he'll probably tell you it's sex. Do I really think that's the most important thing in my life? No, but it might be like asking a smoker if smoking negatively affects his health. He'll tell you, "no, it does not". In other words, it's a matter of how you look at it. A smoker might be less stressed out if he is smoking, so which is really healthier for him? Anyway, there is the spectrum thing I keep hearing about, and I guess I seem like a waffle, but I'm going to have to go back and say that in my mind, it's theoretically possible for sex to be the most important thing for someone out there. Maybe it's only if you're feral? I don't know. I hope I didn't just offend a feral person. I will say that if I ever got separated from my husband, I'd put sex as number one on my list of what I want in a guy, but that could be only because I'd be on the rebound, as it were. Of course, I'd put that as number one only because I know that the guy will want to eat food and drink water and exercise and work like me and must do so in order to survive, so all of that is just a given. Anyway, this doesn't seem to me as though Rabger's statement was directed at any one group in particular and didn't seem derogatory, just objective. It was just a statement, but I suppose I cannot really speak for anyone else but me. I can only interpret. "See" ya later. :)

[Chiaroscuro]

Much of the behavior humans act out is socialized.

I agree. A lot of it is also hardwired. Look at the variety of societies in the world, and see which things remain constant. It's a good indicator of what's hardwired and what's unique to the society. Female circumcision, for example, is socialized. It's unique to a certain society. On the other hand, the importance of sex holds true in all societies, even in those which attempt to repress it. That's not a socialized phenomenon.

-Chiaroscuro

[mdw]

Umm, actually, you guys are jumping to insane conclusions and its rather ridiculous. I never once said that all sexuals think sex is the most important thing, and to try and imply that I did simply shows youre lack of paying attention. Secondly, I have had the unfortunate luck of hearing a number of people describing sex as one of the most important things in life. It may not be the majority, but its a good sized minority. So, there is no flaw in the logic, just in your conclusion. And since that's socialized, that makes it social. Anyone that studies sociology, psychology, biology, and anthropology can figure that out. Much of the behavior humans act out is socialized. Now, our species being susceptable to socialization is biological. Wouldn't argue that.

I still am amazed that somehow there are so many people on this forum who can say that they know a "good sized minority" (and some say a majority) of people who describe sex as one of the most important things in their life.

[Lucy Locket]

Umm, actually, you guys are jumping to insane conclusions and its rather ridiculous. I never once said that all sexuals think sex is the most important thing, and to try and imply that I did simply shows youre lack of paying attention. Secondly, I have had the unfortunate luck of hearing a number of people describing sex as one of the most important things in life. It may not be the majority, but its a good sized minority. So, there is no flaw in the logic, just in your conclusion. And since that's socialized, that makes it social. Anyone that studies sociology, psychology, biology, and anthropology can figure that out. Much of the behavior humans act out is socialized. Now, our species being susceptable to socialization is biological. Wouldn't argue that.

I still am amazed that somehow there are so many people on this forum who can say that they know a "good sized minority" (and some say a majority) of people who describe sex as one of the most important things in their life.

All right then, how many people do you know who believe sex is one of the most important things in their life?

[Chiaroscuro]

All right then, how many people do you know who believe sex is one of the most important things in their life?

What Rabger wrote was "Thinking that sex is the most important thing is social." Not "one of the most important things".

Most adults believe that sex is "one of the most important things" in their relationships. Unhappiness with sexual relations is one of the primary reasons given for divorce. Nobody I know would say that sex is "the most important thing."

That's an important distinction

-Chiaroscuro

PS - I'd guess that most asexuals would also say that sex (or lack thereof) is one of the most important things in a relationship. How many of you good folks have broken up over sexual incompatibility issues?

[Rabger]

On the other hand, the importance of sex holds true in all societies, even in those which attempt to repress it. That's not a socialized phenomenon.

I never said sex was a socialized phenomenon. I basically said that much of the behavior and way of thinking around it was socialized. And if you don't believe this, look in an anthrology book.

[AliceInWonderland]

Have you ever felt like someone was attracted to you, but realized later that they weren't, or didn't know if they were or not, or didn't know they were but realized later that they were?

I had a meeting with a male acquaintance one day and it appeared as though he had really dressed up for the meeting, I mean he looked really good and kept making direct eye contact with me. I wasn't sure if he was attracted to me, but I think I was suddenly attracted to him and felt a little akward about it because I hadn't anticipated that. I was supposed to talk to him and tell him why I didn't want to do what he was wanting me to do which was why we were having the meeting in the first place. Instead, I just froze and let him talk me into what I wasn't wanting to do, and even though I was against it originally, I suddenly convinced even myself why his decision was the right one. Anyway, I'm not sure if the feelings I had were because he was attracted to me, or if I justified my being attracted to him by thinking that he was attracted to me, or we were both suddenly attracted to each other. I've had meetings with him before and didn't feel anything for him and didn't think he felt anything for me either. If he was attracted to me, I don't know on what level. Was he looking for a one night stand, or a significant other? I don't know.

I've also had happen infrequently where a guy I know will suddenly have a conversation with me that's different from previous ones, more friendly, more direct eye contact and standing closer to me but I don't know why - in thinking about it later, I'll wonder if perhaps they were attracted to me.

Also, I know it sounds silly, but when I smile alot, I know that there's some sort of a connection going on.

I've heard that men are attracted by sight and women are attracted by touch. I don't know if that's true or not.

Usually, I don't see a guy and know that I'll be attracted to him if I do become attracted to him, I usually have to get to know him. It's like a cruel trick, I get really relaxed with the guy, and then it hits me that I have feelings for him. All of a sudden, I put up a wall. It's like the more feelings I have, the guiltier I feel.

But, some people just seem to be able handle these things with ease. I don't know why I haven't been able to.

My next step is to find things I like to do and meet new people. I hope I don't put up a wall again. I'm trying to make everything different this time.

I suppose this doesn't have anything to do with sex as payoff on a date, but I think you were asking for feelings in general, too. So, this could relate somehow.

[Chiaroscuro]

But, some people just seem to be able handle these things with ease. I don't know why I haven't been able to.

It sounds like maybe you're out of practice, Alice. It's one of the things that fascinates (and scares) me about possibly being single again in my mid-forties. Have all of my dating instincts atrophied in the last sixteen years? Would I know how to turn off my "don't flirt with other women" instinct? What about "don't touch her"? What about "Ignore all the signals she's sending out?"

I've developed all of those married-person skills for a third of my life now. Is it going to be a matter of just turning them off, and picking up my old single-person skills again? Doubt it. I expect you're caught in that odd middle ground, Alice, where your old instincts are warring with the new ones you need to develop.

-Chiaroscuro

[AliceInWonderland]

Would I know how to turn off my "don't flirt with other women" instinct? What about "don't touch her"? What about "Ignore all the signals she's sending out?"

-Chiaroscuro

Yes, I have learned, unfortunately, that just because I think my husband wants me to hug and kiss him and lure him into bed (-signals he's sending out in my mind) doesn't mean he really wants it. So, when I become single, when or how will I know what to do? I'm hoping that I learn something positive after being married to an asexual, but will I be scarred from it? I hope I just learn from this and can continue with my life being even more self-assured than I would have been otherwise and without regrets.

[scamper]

Most adults believe that sex is "one of the most important things" in their relationships. Unhappiness with sexual relations is one of the primary reasons given for divorce. Nobody I know would say that sex is "the most important thing."

That's an important distinction

Well put. I would never say sex was the *most* important thing, at all. However, if I had to spend the rest of my life without it, I would be deeply unhappy, and I doubt I'd ever choose a sexless existence willingly. That's just part & parcel of being sexual, I guess.