The World's Largest Coalition of Nontheists and Nontheist Communities!

Promiscuity

Looking at sexual behavior as rationally as I can, I come to the conclusion that safety and consent are the only things that make sex moral or immoral. Because of this realization I tend to be far more casual about sexual encounters than probably anyone I know. Of course, this leads me to be branded a slut- in a good-natured teasing way among friends (though it still kinda hurts), and in a cruel way by other people. Even among my more sexually liberal friends, promiscuity is, for the most part, seen as something negative, and I find this puzzling; this view contradicts statements they have made regarding the morality of sex.

Input? Is there, in fact, anything wrong with satisfying my desires in any safe, consensual way that I can? Why the divide between what my friends say they think and how they act on this subject? Are there other things you can think of that affect the morality of sex?

0 members like this

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by TNT666 on October 15, 2010 at 4:09pm

Tho your account is true for some human groups in the last 10,000 years, it is by no means true of all. Women did, generally speaking, lose a lot of power to men since agricultural days. But agriculture was not the custom of all human groups, and to those who weren't, monogamy was actually rare. Even within agricultural groups, there have been matriarchal societies, polyandrous societies, and polygynous ones. But lets say for the sake of conversation that we have 10,000 years of female subjugation through sedentarisation...

On an evolutionary scale, 10,000 is merely a pimple. Biologically speaking, our evolutionary history predates agriculture, predates us painting on cave walls, it even predates us diverging from chimps 5-7 million years ago.

Female subjugation is NOT a biological fact, it is a mere social artefact of a technological lifestyle.

As for "killing" other's offspring, tho this on occasion happens, killing of own offspring happens just as much. Even in lion prides at the changing of the guard, it was once thought that the new male would kill off any previous young offspring. But since genetic studies have demonstrated that there is very little "killing of others offsping" going on, in lions or in other species. Infanticide by non biological fathers is more a social lore rather than a biological fact.

Tomorrow, if we decided to undo social norms regarding behaviour of females and males, within a couple of generations, leaving biology and reproduction to do their thing, females would regain their proper place in human history, beside men, instead of subjugated by men. It is all a matter of social norms.

Permalink Reply by Prog Rock Girl on September 23, 2010 at 8:02am

I don't think there is anything wrong with people doing what they genuinely want. I probably would be considered promiscuous to some people (being polyamorous...and not one of the polyamorous types who has to discuss things for a year before being allowed to have sex) but I think like with most things there are positives and negatives to promiscuity.

What I see as the negative side of promiscuity (and this has everything to do with consent) is sexual pressure. (I am not saying it is everywhere; I have also met plenty of sex-positive people who were very respectful of boundaries, and didn't put people down if something was beyond their comfort level.) But there is sometimes sexual pressure in things that are supposed to be sexually liberating. People who lived through the "free love" era have said that they were labeled prudes or frigid or squares if they didn't want to participate. Yes that was a long time ago but the lesson learned from free love was mainly "the pill doesn't protect you from STDs", not so much "hey, don't make people feel pressured". I am almost as skeptical of the word "prude" as I am of the word "slut", because some people automatically label someone as sexually repressed, uptight, close-minded, etc if they aren't into promiscuity or observe something negative about the world of casual sex.

I agree some people are purely physical. If people are into that, fine I guess, but it creeps me out b/c sometimes it looks literally like a meat market. (Casual sex ads/sites where everyone posts pictures of their genitals?) A friend of mine who experimented/went along with swinging b/c of her (soon to be ex) husband's interest has said she has met a few nice people but in the long run it has been bad for her body image (strangers viewing naked pictures and saying "we don't find your wife attractive/we don't like overweight women"...and then her husband angry at her for getting in the way of more attractive women) and left her feeling used and objectified. In a way I think it's sad that she went along with it and that her husband pressured her, but I think there is also self-pressure to relax, live it up, don't be so uptight, sex is no big deal, etc. In my younger days even I have done this and it has led also to some damaging experiences. Sex is lots of fun and people can enjoy it as strangers or soul-mates but I don't think it's ever "no big deal".

So basically pressure either way (to be promiscuous, or be celibate) is a negative thing, and people should be sure they are doing what they want to do.

Permalink Reply by TNT666 on September 23, 2010 at 11:53am

To be an atheist "should" allow for people to lead a pressure-free life, the very definition of free thinker...

Permalink Reply by TNT666 on September 23, 2010 at 12:05pm

Woman I first dealt with your quandrie at the young age of 18! (and that was eons ago) I'm born in May so went to college at 17. My first year was full of wonderful sex with a couple of regular guys (which I dropped, cuz I wasn't THAT into them) and many one-nighters.

One day in Spring at our residence pool table, one of my best buddies mentioned I was getting a reputation of being "easy" (3 of my ex's were right there).

So I made a little speech:
-Did I hit on you or did you hit on me? Yess indeed, I hit on you!!!! Now you tell me who is easy!

And the noise ended there. BUT, from then on I lived in larger cities where casual sex stood a better chance of being anonymous. Yes our society still glamorizes untouched women and monogamy, saddly, since they are both extremely recent in H.sapiens history. On a side note... it worth having a good laugh Wikipedia's "hymen" page. A good example of how our knowledge is still highly influenced by religion, sheer laughter!

I do not accept "seduction" drinks from any men in bars, I do not "date" men who pursue me, I dislike being pursued immensely. Actually the more one pursues me, the nastier I get. NO IS NO, ALWAYS.

I like relationships that are based on equal footings, people coming together in a natural setting, without convoluted efforts.

Permalink Reply by Prog Rock Girl on September 24, 2010 at 9:33am

I like relationships that are based on equal footings, people coming together in a natural setting, without convoluted efforts.

This is how I feel too. I'm turned off by anything that seems contrived, whether it's seeking a relationship or just sex.

Permalink Reply by dr kellie on September 23, 2010 at 2:24pm

Good for you. Apologizing for wanting sex is like apologizing for being hungry. The only problem I have ever encountered with my lifestyle, is that sometimes girls (no matter how much you discuss it before and after) want more. They say they are fine with just sex, but sometimes they lie. You probably won't have as much of a problem with men, so carry on! The only real negative connotations that go along with the slut label are due to the association with low self-esteem, and that obviously doesn't apply to you.

Permalink Reply by TNT666 on September 23, 2010 at 2:46pm

That is a good point and is why I prefer one-nighters... If I'm having sex with a given guy several times, and it's good, I grow fond of him, but a one-nighter I don't need to like him. I like to stop at once.

Indeed, it seems that guys can go on having sex with someone they don't really like for longer than women, even I as a tomboy am not free of that particular stereotype!

Permalink Reply by TNT666 on September 24, 2010 at 7:10pm

In my experience this has been completely untrue. I stay away from "pretty boys" like the plague, they are vain as can be. Most of the guys I've known are average looking and have fun personalities. I'll admit I don't usually get with complete uglies, but, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and some of the guys I find cute are ugly to my girlfriends, and vice versa.

In a promiscuous world, charm goes a much longer way than looks.

Permalink Reply by Jezzy on September 24, 2010 at 9:57pm

I am so glad people have different tastes. What kind of a world would this be if there were only one way to be beautiful?

Permalink Reply by TNT666 on September 24, 2010 at 10:02pm

lol, I pick my girlfriends carefully so we don't enjoy the same men :)

Permalink Reply by Apeman Jim on September 25, 2010 at 6:10am

That is a wise survival strategy!

Permalink Reply by Apeman Jim on September 25, 2010 at 6:04am

Sadly, too many people focus on the superficial beauty promoted by magazine cover models and reality TV 'stars'. Even worse, people accept the shallow assertions and pedantic tirades of thsse human wastelands with good humor because they are 'pretty'.