Poll: Casual Sex, Feminism, and You!

[Damien Granz]

What gave you that idea? The needing more than one partner, not the increased chance of pregnancy.

When you say "just intercourse" - are you suggesting intercourse without foreplay, or that it actually takes more than one male to get a woman off? Cause, unless he's a 30-second man, regular intercourse can get a woman off, repeatedly, within, say, ten minutes.

A strap-on works too. Or any dildo, really.

It's all about angle and position. Any guy, at the right angle, can pull this off (if he can last more than 30 seconds anyway). Personally, I recommend the girl being on her back, with her legs up, resting on his shoulders. This gets everything to the right angle. Well, it does for me anyway. And two other women I know, one of whom I can say this with certainty about (I believe I mentioned that strap on earlier).

So yeah, I have no idea where you got that data, but it is not correct. Not if either party knows what they're doing.

I want to point out that either party 'knowing what they're doing' is a relatively new thing, and I'm talking about just regular intercourse without any foreplay and what not. And certainly obviously not including things like strap-ons.

I'm not saying those things are bad or 'cheating', mind you! Whatever gets you off!

But I don't think evolution had strap-ons in mind, so that's not what I was commenting on at all. I hope that clears it up a bit.

 

[Verlander]

It's sexist to assume that any encounter is essentially a male transaction, against both men and women. You know, equality and all that...

 

[Saelune]

Ever heard of the word slut?
Men are pigs
Women are sluts
Thats basically the bad words.
Casual sex is casual sex. Men do it. Women do it. As long as both people know its casual sex, there is no issue.

Though I think the depressing truth is it's much more; Women are sluts, men are "players".

The people who think men having lots of sex makes them better....are the same men who are pigs...or "players". I dont think a man having lots of sex is cool. Do you? If a bunch of pigs want to be pigs and think being said pigs is cool, thats their issue. If you and I dont look high on them, then it doesnt matter.

 

[SilentCom]

It isn't just sex that people will find disgusting when over-indulged. You had mentioned when people gorge on food and sit on their ass and watch tv all day they aren't viewed badly. I would have to disagree. When people gorge on food they are perceived as gluttonous or fat and those who sit around watching tv all day are seen as lazy and have no life.

Anything done with a high degree of over-indulgence can be seen in poor light. How I see it, any of those things are fine with moderation, but there is a limit for the sake of health and what not.

Also, sex has repercussions. For one, people can have children, even if they do not intend it to happen. Second, STDs are real. Third, emotions can grow between people in intercourse even if the sex was meant to be casual.

The more sex you over-indulge in, the higher the chances of the above has to occur and the more shallow or vain you may be perceived as in a relationship if you're just in it for the sex.

 

[CODE-D]

My male friend is a male whore and I let him know i disagree with it, so what now feminist?
I love how you make sure we know your feminist, my dog is feminist. I also support female equality (as long as they do equal work and dont accept leniency) but im not gonna call myself a feminist.

 

[veloper]

You don't have one-nighters out of love or respect.
Therefore casual sex does objectify. Objectifies both men and women. And that's not a problem.

 

[Gigano]

I support any and all sex going on between consenting adults.

And no, being acceptant of going about sex in a casual manner doesn't objectify anyone; on the contrary, it supports the liberation and free choice of the women who wish to do so, and its existence have no bearing on those who don't.

...

I'd be much more worried about shopping for groceries; It's incredible to what extent cashiers are objectified as being nothing but payment automatons, looked upon as though they weren't human at all. Of course, if you've ever just gone ahead and used a cashier that way, then you really don't get to complain about objectification and others viewing you as merely the means for their end do you now?

People use each other all the time for mutual gain. Nothing wrong with that. So even if "casual sex" between people had the effect of objectifying either of the sexes, it would pose as little trouble for the quality and standards of human interaction as "grocery shopping" - with its far greater element of pure "use" - does.

...

Also, "feminism" - in the original moderate version - isn't about any particular kind of behaviour; it's about passing equal judgement on either sex for identical actions. Hence;

If you think women who sleep around are sluts, and men who sleep around are studs, well then you're a sexist, a hypocrite, and a judgemental puritan bigot who need to stay the fuck out of other people's lives and choices.

If you think all people who sleep around are sluts, then congratulations, you're a feminist and logically stringent; But you're still also a judgemental puritan bigot who need to stay the fuck out of other people's lives and choices.

Really sad when women fall for the delusion that "feminism" is about them not being sexual beings, and not openly being considered so by anyone; I.e. pretty much the exact fucking thing they rebelled against in the first place. Guess there's no need to swing the warhammer of chastity against them when you can use carefully masked poison to the same effect. But if people want to wear their chains as jewellery, fine by me; so long as they don't ask anyone else to call them such, and don't ever berate those who won't.

 

[Sangreal Gothcraft]

These questions! How i love them<.< for the pictures they paint of men being this horny ejaculation Screw machine..and their brains are just wired to do that and just only that..<.< I don't engage in causal sex anymore...and i don't think it objectifies women. It's there lives and bodies i say they can do what ever the hell they want with it. I don't care who or what they sleep with.

 

[aakibar]

I disagree that it objectifies women as long as they are not inebriated some how when the decision for sex came. If they made a consious decision to say "what the hell i'll sleep with him" I don't really see the problem. But if for some reason she was forced into it well then thats rape now.

The better question is casual sex good for both parties it probably is not because theoretically sex comes with a bunch of emotional baggage etc. On top of that casual sex is part of the reason why about 1 in 4 of high school girls(in America) have some sort of std. Pleasant figure i know.

So this question's answer is a big fat maybe, kinda, sorta, depends on the situation type of deal.

 

[Slash12]

Men are pigs, women are sluts. It's a feminist issue, certainly, but in kind of a "false double standard" way.

Personal opinion: I don't really care about casual sex; it's just not for me.

Men are also "studs" for sleeping around.

That's because it takes serious skill for men to pick up women. It's an art form.

Women on the other hand don't need that much skill. They just need to be half attractive and flaunt around at a bar and there will be AT LEAST a few men interested in sleeping with her. They don't need charm, they don't need confidence and they don't need to have charisma. A highly successful "stud" does - at least a lot more than a woman does.

Pretty much this. I hate when everyone and their mom pulls this argument out of their hat to show how sexist society is. The fact is that in the majority of cases a guy has to try a lot harder than a girl for sex with someone, and that is the reason that its an achievement to get with a girl easily and vice versa.

For example: Say the norm is that a guy has to buy a girl a drink before she'll sleep with him. If the guy comes up and talks to the girl and she just gets with him right off the bat then its an achievement for the guy because the norm is that he'd have to buy her something first. On the other hand it makes the girl come off as easy for the exact same reason.

As for casual sex, I have no idea why its seen as a male thing. I know of more women who sleep around casually then men to be honest. I personally don't see anything wrong with it either, in fact I encourage it.

 

[WhyBotherToTry]

I don't think it's objectifying. Women can see men as pieces of meat as much as men can see women. I think the people who see it as an objectifcation don't approve of the the idea of casual sex in the first place, and as such they may be a bit biased, because they imagine that others would feel the same way that they would in such a situation.

 

[Avistew]

I said:
- I support it. I don't think it's a shameful thing. In the right circumstances, with the right person, it might work for me... what qualifies as "casual" anyways? Is it any sex outside of a committed romantic relationship? Do friends with benefits count as casual or is it only one-night stands with someone you've only just met?
Anyway, I think the only concern would be for STDs and, in fertile opposite sex cases, pregnancies. If these are taken care of, then I don't think sex should in itself be a more restricted activity than many others, and having sex with a friend like you'd play a game with them or something is fine by me. And with strangers too, I mean you can decide to play tennis against a stranger because you met on the court or something. Just because sex is physically pleasurable doesn't, to me, mean it's bad to have it with people unless you're married to them, or married-like, or committed, or in love, or whatever else restrictions.

- It doesn't objectify women. I picked that because it was closest. I think it doesn't objectify women in a negative way, but that sex, casual or not, can objectify people, and it's a good thing because that's what makes it hot. On top of that, it's certainly not limited to women. I think sex, casual or not, can be about objectifying each other and enjoying it. It can also not be about it.
In other words, casual sex doesn't in my opinion, objectify people more than non-casual sex does, and doesn't objectify women more than men. Specific scenarios can occur in which one partner objectifies the other without it being mutual, leaving the objectified partner to feel bad about themselves because they "were used".
However, you don't have to be upset about being used. When you play a co-op games, you're using each other as well. You couldn't play on your own and you want to enjoy the game. But using one another doesn't mean you lack mutual respect for each other as a person and a gamer (or a sexual being, in the sex example).

I think casual sex isn't right for everyone all the time, but it can be right for some people sometimes. Just like realtionships aren't right for everyone all the time but can be right for some people sometimes.

 

[Dags90]

Pretty much this. I hate when everyone and their mom pulls this argument out of their hat to show how sexist society is. The fact is that in the majority of cases a guy has to try a lot harder than a girl for sex with someone, and that is the reason that its an achievement to get with a girl easily and vice versa.

The reason it's harder for a guy to get sex from a woman is all the pressures we put on women not to have sex. So I don't see how that isn't showing how sexist society is.

 

[Slash12]

Pretty much this. I hate when everyone and their mom pulls this argument out of their hat to show how sexist society is. The fact is that in the majority of cases a guy has to try a lot harder than a girl for sex with someone, and that is the reason that its an achievement to get with a girl easily and vice versa.

The reason it's harder for a guy to get sex from a woman is all the pressures we put on women not to have sex. So I don't see how that isn't showing how sexist society is.

Because from what I see its mainly women pressuring other women to not have sex. The women themselves are actually still continuing to choose not to (to save face) which just further perpetuates the problem, nobody is making that decision for them and peer pressure isn't exactly the best basis for that decision either.

The point being that the double standard exists because some women decide that they have to play hard to get and then judge others when they don't. Nobody to blame but themselves.