Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[wierd]

Again, I direct you to the issues reported in the literature, where such casual sex results (ultimately), in a reduction in ability to form lasting pairbonds.

This is detrimental to a desired long-term relationship, and contributes to a raft of psychological ailments in such relationships.

That knowledge is not widespread, and if this discussion is any indicator, is actively suppressed when brought up.

[ChairmanPoo]

tbh I was more concerned about stds

[martinuzz]

Going for years without hugging or sex has a more negative impact on future pair bonding than having casual sex every now and then.

[wierd]

Equally applicable.

It is just not very healthy for you to engage in that kind of behavior, so you shouldn't.  Really, it's that simple.



@martinuzz

That's a strawman.  The notion of "DONT HUG! DONT FUCK AT ALL!" only exists in your mind.  If you review my posts, you will see that I fully encourage sex between romantic intimate partners of all kinds, but discourage casual sex.

I openly admitted my bias against sexual contact in the opening salvo; what is good for me, is not good for thee.  Just accept the inverse as true, too, and see where we find middle ground.   I looked at actual human health issues stemming from the behavior as the basis for my policy decision advocacy.  Not my "EWW, SEX IS GROSS!" internal reaction.  Try to have the same courtesy in the other direction.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

You yourself argued not a few pages ago that temporary sterilization was something you wanted more normalized, because you thought the odds of that failing were sufficiently low compared to hormonal and barrier methods to be distinctive. Now deciding to be pregnant and have sex are the same?

Take a page from your own book, wierd - if you're going to strut your asexuality as giving you a better risk assessment of sex, then you also must accept that your asexuality leaves you bereft of fully understanding the social and personal significance of sex to the allosexual majority of humanity. Why exactly should I or anyone else even give your position the time of day, even in the case that it really did give you better risk assessment? We must all accept some degree of risk and the inevitability of age and death in our behaviors, and so even that which is destructive should not necessarily be shunned, as is accepted every time someone turns on their car.

Also, you're just straight up wrong about the meaning of the pair-bond thing. You cited a study about prairie voles that mentioned they suffered when their partners were lost to them and lost Oxytocin. But this is not the source of their bonding changes. As the summary states:

However, as the explanations get passed on by word of mouth, the pitfall of oversimplification can turn quickly to misunderstanding and inaccuracy.

The truth is that people can damage their ability to bond, but it is not because of a decrease in Oxytocin production.  It is a much more complicated process involving brain molding, other neurochemicals and higher brain functions.

I take umbrage with the use of the word damage here - it is a value judgement and bad science to use it, since they go on to state:

However, when an individual choses to engage in casual sex, breaking bond after bond with each new sexual partner, the brain forms a new synaptic map of one-night –stands. This pattern becomes the “new normal” for the individual.

That's not "damage". That's "use it or lose it", which we have known was a fundamental principle of brain function and growth for a long, long time. It doesn't have anything more to do with sex than changes in language skill do.

What I'm saying is: You're going to Science Hell for your words and deeds wierd, repent!

[martinuzz]

@martinuzz

That's a strawman.  The notion of "DONT HUG! DONT FUCK AT ALL!" only exists in your mind.  If you review my posts, you will see that I fully encourage sex between romantic intimate partners of all kinds, but discourage casual sex.

It's not.  I just said that there are more and more singles in the world. Over here, around 35% of all adults between age 18 and 40 are single.  They have no romantic intimate partner.  With casual sex they can still fulfill a need, and help the other party with fulfilling theirs.

[wierd]

I am sure you find your reply clever and witty MSL, but you are arguing at phantoms.

See not just 5 posts up, my replay to Martinuzz.

The pathways that open up and turn on during orgasm are like hoover damn opening up, compared to the small tributary of a hug though.  The neurochemistry involved is damned elaborate and complicated.  If anything, the same reasons why you don't just go hug on random strangers is why you dont just go fucking random strangers. (or at least, why you shouldnt be), turned up to 11.

Again, you are reading only what you WANT to read.  Even in the cited document.

which contains this tidbit, right in the forward:

Many studies done on pair-bonding have used prairie voles as research animals. Critics of Hooked have argued that what happens in prairie voles has little to do with humans. They also argue that although prairie voles are considered monogamous, some individual voles are promiscuous. However, researchers continue to use prairie voles in search of answers to questions about bonding in humans. It is not simply that prairie voles are monogamous creatures, but rather that the neuroscience of bonding involves the same areas in the brain and the same neurochemicals that are found both in humans and prairie voles. 2

So, BZZZT-- Nope. If I am going to science hell, I will see you there, clearly.

[wierd]

@martinuzz

That's a strawman.  The notion of "DONT HUG! DONT FUCK AT ALL!" only exists in your mind.  If you review my posts, you will see that I fully encourage sex between romantic intimate partners of all kinds, but discourage casual sex.

It's not.  I just said that there are more and more singles in the world. Over here, around 35% of all adults between age 18 and 40 are single.  They have no romantic intimate partner.  With casual sex they can still fulfill a need, and help the other party with fulfilling theirs.

Social isolation is a real problem.  It is more complicated than sex though.  It has much more to do with our current culture of fear, and in-crowd ostricism than it does sex.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

@martinuzz

That's a strawman.  The notion of "DONT HUG! DONT FUCK AT ALL!" only exists in your mind.  If you review my posts, you will see that I fully encourage sex between romantic intimate partners of all kinds, but discourage casual sex.

It's not.  I just said that there are more and more singles in the world. Over here, around 35% of all adults between age 18 and 40 are single.  They have no romantic intimate partner.  With casual sex they can still fulfill a need, and help the other party with fulfilling theirs.

Yeah, that's the other thing: This is probably the least relevant time in history to be discouraging sex. The horror of late-stage capitalism has deflated more dicks than religious extremism ever managed.

wierd: Responding to every post with "you didn't understand my position!" isn't very productive. Even if that's true, though I think that it is not, it only proves that you haven't accurately communicated your position.

[martinuzz]

The neurochemistry of eating an apple is damned elaborate and complicated too

[wierd]

MSL:  I have been actively having to tear down strawmen as they pop up like mushrooms.

That is not conducive to being able to provide a cogent statement-- but to your discredit, I actually did provide such a cut and dry disambiguation several times.

You have just failed to read it and understand what was written.  Instead, you have run with your interpretation (which, via the blowback effect, is completely 100% off base, and has been from the start), and i have been trying futilely ever since to correct, and you wont budge from it.

If you note, less emotionally charged people totally got it-- such as Dunam and Naturegirl. 

[wierd]

The neurochemistry of eating an apple is damned elaborate and complicated too

Eating an apple does not make you subconsciously crave the company of the apple tree.

casual sex has that exact effect on humans.  It's why a vast number of such "relationships" "Get weird".

[scriver]

@martinuzz

That's a strawman.  The notion of "DONT HUG! DONT FUCK AT ALL!" only exists in your mind.  If you review my posts, you will see that I fully encourage sex between romantic intimate partners of all kinds, but discourage casual sex.

It's not.  I just said that there are more and more singles in the world. Over here, around 35% of all adults between age 18 and 40 are single.  They have no romantic intimate partner.  With casual sex they can still fulfill a need, and help the other party with fulfilling theirs.

Yeah, that's the other thing: This is probably the least relevant time in history to be discouraging sex. The horror of late-stage capitalism has deflated more dicks than religious extremism ever managed.

wierd: Responding to every post with "you didn't understand my position!" isn't very productive. Even if that's true, though I think that it is not, it only proves that you haven't accurately communicated your position.

MSH: *unreasonably refuses to listen*
People: Please listen
MSH: Me not listening only proves you are bad at communicating

[ChairmanPoo]

@martinuzz

That's a strawman.  The notion of "DONT HUG! DONT FUCK AT ALL!" only exists in your mind.  If you review my posts, you will see that I fully encourage sex between romantic intimate partners of all kinds, but discourage casual sex.

It's not.  I just said that there are more and more singles in the world. Over here, around 35% of all adults between age 18 and 40 are single.  They have no romantic intimate partner.  With casual sex they can still fulfill a need, and help the other party with fulfilling theirs.

One is the loneliest number that you'll ever do

[MetalSlimeHunt]

scriver, I understand you are upset about the Late Stage Capitalism thread. You don't have to follow me around the forum being mad, I understood the first time.