sex discussion
+bonifartius 𒂼𒄄
sex discussion
@bonifartius @kaia
They aren't two years into their married life and just want to let each other get some sleep — if they aren't attracted to each other sexually at this stage, chances are letting each other get some sleep would be all they would be doing to each other in their married life.
This might work for some too — there are couples who live happily together for decades and never have sex, but they are certainly not in the majority.
@bonifartius
> you just don't have to follow through?
Why?
> you will likely be able to do so years later
Most married couples manage even without taking such tests early on 😅
"Not having sex" isn't something valuable in its own right, you aren't getting any bonus points for that — you're just depriving yourself (and presumably the other party too) of some fun and for a rather spurious reason 🤷
@m0xee @kaia
> "Not having sex" isn't something valuable in its own right, you aren't getting any bonus points for that — you're just depriving yourself (and presumably the other party too) of some fun and for a rather spurious reason 🤷
not smoking crack also is depriving myself of some fun for the spurious reason that some people can't handle it and will choose smoking crack all the time instead of long term goals in the future.
sex isn't just some fun, even if 60 years of propaganda say otherwise. the spurious reason is that not giving in to every impulse is good for the psyche.
like, you can just communicate that you don't want to have sex. if there is nothing else to do or this request invokes drama, it's not long term anyway. that goes for both sexes.
@bonifartius
So having sex with the one you like and who presumably likes you is wrong because "sixties propaganda" and because smoking crack is wrong? That makes a lot of sense!
How does this interfere with your long term goals though?
You aren't getting sex out of the way with this, it's the opposite — you might be fueling interest solely with unfulfilled promise of sex, which might play a cruel joke with young people not good at communicating their intentions.
@bonifartius
> you can just communicate that you don't want to have sex
Sure you can! But with this we are back to square one: if one of you genuinely wants physical intimacy and the other one doesn't, of course this isn't suitable for long term relationship, neither it is for short term — and you won't turn it into long term by sleeping in the same bed, it simply doesn't work and it's best to not get romantically involved at all, this was @kaia 's original point!
@m0xee @kaia
> So having sex with the one you like and who presumably likes you is wrong
not what i wrote
> "sixties propaganda"
60 years of
> because smoking crack is wrong?
smoking crack it isn't wrong, it's trading short term happiness for long term happiness.
the "sex is cool, but ..." meme is true. sex has been inflated by decades of media. especially the "first time" stuff and getting pressured into having sex to finally be in the cool in-group.
> You aren't getting sex out of the way with this, it's the opposite — you might be fueling interest solely with unfulfilled promise of sex, which might play a cruel joke with young people not good at communicating their intentions.
i wrote: "like, you can just communicate that you don't want to have sex. if there is nothing else to do or this request invokes drama, it's not long term anyway. that goes for both sexes." i am not sure where you get the "unfulfilled promise" out of that.
what _really_ would interest me is why you seem to advise that young people have to fuck (and it's precisely the right wording here) at all cost and that it would be bordering on evil ("cruel joke") to not want to fuck.
@bonifartius
When the "right time" comes you might suddenly discover that physically you aren't very comfortable with each other, young and inexperienced people tend to idealise the object of their romantic interest, but with part of that magic gone this would lead to disappointment and invoke way more drama.
@kaia