Question on casual sexual relationships

Page 1 of 1 [ 14 posts ] 

JohnisBlind
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jul 2010
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 974

30 Jul 2010, 8:55 am

Hi, this question is about relationship and whats going on with regard to that more than it is about sex per se.

My understanding of sexuality is so liberal that I simply don't get people who believe in anything less than "free love" mentality, which seems to be everybody. I want to know what is going on though because I don't have any intuitive sense of what people value. How much of peoples sex lives is what can be called "casual sex." I mean how much of that is going on in society? Yes, I know that "casual sex" is not easy to define, and that one persons definition of "casual sex" might sound like a normal monogamous relationship to another person. But what kind of research is out there that will help me get the big picture I need? Based on what I keep hearing from pundits you would think that everybody under the age of 25 was having constant one night stands but I know a lot of research indicates that is not the case at all. So what are peoples feelings on this subject? What are the beliefs of women in particular on casual sex since that's the group of people I will most likely be hitting on? I know that their is a generation gap on this issue but I also think that the generation gap may also have to do with the language that people use to talk about sex and that might create an exaggerated impression of that gap.



Michael_Stuart
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jul 2008
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 500

30 Jul 2010, 9:59 am

Being asexual, I see absolutely no value in casual sex. What's the point of sex if there's no intimacy or romance? I'm not saying it's wrong, merely saying it I don't see it.



JohnisBlind
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jul 2010
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 974

30 Jul 2010, 10:25 am

Michael_Stuart wrote:
Being asexual, I see absolutely no value in casual sex. What's the point of sex if there's no intimacy or romance? I'm not saying it's wrong, merely saying it I don't see it.


Everybody has different experiences and those experiences inform their perspective on life. Some people may enjoy sex for other reasons beside intimacy and romance.



dynastus
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jun 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 30

30 Jul 2010, 10:47 am

Michael_Stuart wrote:
Being asexual, I see absolutely no value in casual sex. What's the point of sex if there's no intimacy or romance? I'm not saying it's wrong, merely saying it I don't see it.

Well you pretty much already gave my opinion for me :P except that I am a heterosexual.
Also if I want to have 'fun' I would just masturbate.



Willard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Mar 2008
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,647

30 Jul 2010, 12:56 pm

Michael_Stuart wrote:
Being asexual, I see absolutely no value in casual sex. What's the point of sex if there's no intimacy or romance? I'm not saying it's wrong, merely saying it I don't see it.



Mixing up sex and romance is a recipe for tragedy every single time, because one has nothing to do with the other. Erections don't experience romance, and if emotional intimacy is tied up with the act of rutting, its not going to run very deep - but it will lead to a lot of possessiveness and petty jealousy.

A bonded relationship should develop because you have mutual interests and values, not because you shared an orgasm. Best relationships I ever had were FwB. No expectations, no demands, no disappointment, just the semi-regular booty call, NSA.

I was reading a review of a book just the other day in which a couple of Anthropologists were theorizing that early humans actually bred by group sex, thus the disparity in duration between excitement and orgasm in men and women. The idea was, women take longer to climax because in the earliest days of human evolution, they took on several partners in succession - and that the feminine tendency to open vocalization (screaming and moaning) during sex was like a mating call to signal to the other guys in the tribe to que up for their turn. I think the whole thing sounds kind of silly, but it would explain the stubborn survival of the Autistic genes - our Aspergian ancestors didn't have to socialize well to get laid, they just got in line. :D



Surya
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jul 2010
Age: 54
Gender: Female
Posts: 437

30 Jul 2010, 2:44 pm

Willard wrote:
Mixing up sex and romance is a recipe for tragedy every single time, because one has nothing to do with the other. Erections don't experience romance, and if emotional intimacy is tied up with the act of rutting, its not going to run very deep - but it will lead to a lot of possessiveness and petty jealousy.

A bonded relationship should develop because you have mutual interests and values, not because you shared an orgasm. Best relationships I ever had were FwB. No expectations, no demands, no disappointment, just the semi-regular booty call, NSA.

I was reading a review of a book just the other day in which a couple of Anthropologists


YES!! I completely agree. If I had to wait for 'romance' to, in the words of dr hook, get my rocks off, I would be screwed - not in the good way

There was a post here that I was confused about, they had said 'felt romantic towards' I was not sure if they meant romantic =sexual/horny
or romantic = feelings
because so many seem to say romantic/romance and mean either or/both feeling/sex
to me, they are completely different.

I have had relationships that had no romantic side to it, but we had some mutual interests and values - they were FBs
I have been romantically interested in 1 person - there was no sex and we no longer speak (not because of the no sex or romantic feelings)

But, in some of my FB relationships, we called each other BF/GF for other peoples comfort - stupid I know

Also, why is it socially exceptable for males to be this way, but for a female, it is a big NONO -
and why do males sometimes assume that if a female is this way, it is a trap - she will think that sex will help him to develop feelings and they will become romantic
Sometimes for some people, that simply is not the case - sometimes a female just wants some, from a safe source..


OFF Topic - what was the book called?



Willard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Mar 2008
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,647

30 Jul 2010, 3:07 pm

Surya wrote:
Willard wrote:
OFF Topic - what was the book called?


:? I can't recall. Somebody sent me the book review in an email and after I read it, I deleted it. Now I can't seem to turn it up in a search. If I find it, I'll let ya know.



lotusblossom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Jan 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,994

30 Jul 2010, 3:24 pm

Ive had one night stands and I did not enjoy them, I find I have to know someone and feel comfortable with them to enjoy sex. Ive had one off sex with a long term friend and that was ok as I knew and trusted him, but it made the friendship awkward so i would not repeat that situation.

I prefer sex in a long term relationship or masturbation, I dont think sex with someone who i dont love is different from masturbation and I actually often find that masturbation is better than sex with someone you love lol! With masturbation you can do/think anything where as with sex you have to convince other people to do what you like which is more difficult.

I think its harder for women to get pleasure from one night stands as the guy is 'untrained' to your own specific needs/quirks.



JohnisBlind
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jul 2010
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 974

30 Jul 2010, 6:52 pm

Willard wrote:
Michael_Stuart wrote:
Being asexual, I see absolutely no value in casual sex. What's the point of sex if there's no intimacy or romance? I'm not saying it's wrong, merely saying it I don't see it.



Mixing up sex and romance is a recipe for tragedy every single time, because one has nothing to do with the other. Erections don't experience romance, and if emotional intimacy is tied up with the act of rutting, its not going to run very deep - but it will lead to a lot of possessiveness and petty jealousy.

A bonded relationship should develop because you have mutual interests and values, not because you shared an orgasm. Best relationships I ever had were FwB. No expectations, no demands, no disappointment, just the semi-regular booty call, NSA.

I was reading a review of a book just the other day in which a couple of Anthropologists were theorizing that early humans actually bred by group sex, thus the disparity in duration between excitement and orgasm in men and women. The idea was, women take longer to climax because in the earliest days of human evolution, they took on several partners in succession - and that the feminine tendency to open vocalization (screaming and moaning) during sex was like a mating call to signal to the other guys in the tribe to que up for their turn. I think the whole thing sounds kind of silly, but it would explain the stubborn survival of the Autistic genes - our Aspergian ancestors didn't have to socialize well to get laid, they just got in line. :D


I'm not sure that everybody agrees with you that a relationship shouldn't be based on the sexual element at all. A sexual relationship is a sexual relationship after all.



Shebakoby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Sep 2009
Age: 51
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,759

30 Jul 2010, 7:41 pm

Willard wrote:
Michael_Stuart wrote:
Being asexual, I see absolutely no value in casual sex. What's the point of sex if there's no intimacy or romance? I'm not saying it's wrong, merely saying it I don't see it.



Mixing up sex and romance is a recipe for tragedy every single time, because one has nothing to do with the other. Erections don't experience romance, and if emotional intimacy is tied up with the act of rutting, its not going to run very deep - but it will lead to a lot of possessiveness and petty jealousy.

A bonded relationship should develop because you have mutual interests and values, not because you shared an orgasm. Best relationships I ever had were FwB. No expectations, no demands, no disappointment, just the semi-regular booty call, NSA.

I was reading a review of a book just the other day in which a couple of Anthropologists were theorizing that early humans actually bred by group sex, thus the disparity in duration between excitement and orgasm in men and women. The idea was, women take longer to climax because in the earliest days of human evolution, they took on several partners in succession - and that the feminine tendency to open vocalization (screaming and moaning) during sex was like a mating call to signal to the other guys in the tribe to que up for their turn. I think the whole thing sounds kind of silly, but it would explain the stubborn survival of the Autistic genes - our Aspergian ancestors didn't have to socialize well to get laid, they just got in line. :D


I think it's more a case of autistic genes survived because the old "I wouldn't date you if you were the last man on earth!" turned out to be an empty threat in isolated populations where people figured out they didn't much have a choice ;)



Seanmw
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Jul 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,639
Location: Bremerton, WA

30 Jul 2010, 8:21 pm

Shebakoby wrote:
Willard wrote:
Michael_Stuart wrote:
Being asexual, I see absolutely no value in casual sex. What's the point of sex if there's no intimacy or romance? I'm not saying it's wrong, merely saying it I don't see it.



Mixing up sex and romance is a recipe for tragedy every single time, because one has nothing to do with the other. Erections don't experience romance, and if emotional intimacy is tied up with the act of rutting, its not going to run very deep - but it will lead to a lot of possessiveness and petty jealousy.

A bonded relationship should develop because you have mutual interests and values, not because you shared an orgasm. Best relationships I ever had were FwB. No expectations, no demands, no disappointment, just the semi-regular booty call, NSA.

I was reading a review of a book just the other day in which a couple of Anthropologists were theorizing that early humans actually bred by group sex, thus the disparity in duration between excitement and orgasm in men and women. The idea was, women take longer to climax because in the earliest days of human evolution, they took on several partners in succession - and that the feminine tendency to open vocalization (screaming and moaning) during sex was like a mating call to signal to the other guys in the tribe to que up for their turn. I think the whole thing sounds kind of silly, but it would explain the stubborn survival of the Autistic genes - our Aspergian ancestors didn't have to socialize well to get laid, they just got in line. :D


I think it's more a case of autistic genes survived because the old "I wouldn't date you if you were the last man on earth!" turned out to be an empty threat in isolated populations where people figured out they didn't much have a choice ;)

:lol: :lol:


_________________
+Blog: http://itsdeeperthanyouknow.blogspot.com/
+"Beneath all chaos lies perfect order"


Homer_Bob
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Jan 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,562
Location: New England

30 Jul 2010, 8:56 pm

I call it an addiction. Anyone who has casual sex with anyone is addicted to it, much like people who do drugs all the time. They have to get that high and with sex, they have to get that stimulation. I feel they are both dangerous acts. Eventually your health will be in trouble.


_________________
"The less I know about other people's affairs, the happier I am. I'm not interested in caring about people. I once worked with a guy for three years and never learned his name. The best friend I ever had. We still never talk sometimes."


Wombat
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Oct 2006
Age: 75
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,051

30 Jul 2010, 11:33 pm

Casual sex is fun. I wish I had more of it when I was young.

But on the other hand if you have had 100 partners by the time you are 30 then how can you expect to bond to one person "till death do we part"?



JohnisBlind
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jul 2010
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 974

31 Jul 2010, 12:47 am

Wombat wrote:
Casual sex is fun. I wish I had more of it when I was young.

But on the other hand if you have had 100 partners by the time you are 30 then how can you expect to bond to one person "till death do we part"?


Do you know what is going on in terms of how much casual sex is out there?