Sexual Repression

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Just a random thought (it is 7AM here but Sleep is for the weak and I'm bored and in my introspective mood)...

Popular and to a large degree "intellectual" (whatever that means) discourse about sex often, if not explicitly invokes the concept of repression. There is a simple model here; we have a singular 'natural' sexuality that is clear and obvious to us and that we should try to, within the bounds of reason (however defined) and the law try to fulfill those desires associated with it (that we know a priori). To deny one's desires is repress one's sexuality and this is bad because it means we not only fail at life (so defined) but become angry and irritable and possibly (if we are men at least) more aggressive and violent. Per this theory, celibacy being 'unnatural' is likely to lead to, at least unhappiness, if not so transformations (Isn't this some Freudian remnant?) of one's sexuality into other, less benign (it is so supposed) areas. Certainly following some discussions on related issues (in many places, I'm thinking here of thinking like Priestly celibacy not to mention the boring eruptions of nerds, pseudo-nerds and wannabes about 'friendzoning') I would find it hard to argue that a lot of these views aren't commonly held even if they are never stated as such.

Now I would like to know - and I know I'm in the wrong place here but I'm treating Atlas as a tabula rasa to my thoughts - is whether this is any actual evidence to it. I mean serious evidence - not just we did this experiment with 25 US undergraduates and they confirmed some folk wisdom type evidence. I'd say it's quite likely that a lot of the above is true but would that make it any less than the superstition that it has largely become?

*Now wonders how long it will take before the Mikado makes a Foucault reference*

[afleitch]

A two minute search will give you screeds of stuff about the psychological and social effects of repressing one's homosexuality and I'd be a little concerned if you thought that didn't qualify.

[opebo]

Now I would like to know - and I know I'm in the wrong place here but I'm treating Atlas as a tabula rasa to my thoughts - is whether this is any actual evidence to it. I mean serious evidence - not just we did this experiment with 25 US undergraduates and they confirmed some folk wisdom type evidence. I'd say it's quite likely that a lot of the above is true but would that make it any less than the superstition that it has largely become?

Are you being serious?  There is no need for evidence that people get hungry - we have all been hungry when we missed lunch.  

Likewise the experience of sexual frustration is virtually universal for the human male:  at some point we have all been sexually frustrated.  Thus to ask for evidence of it is asinine.

I for one have never experienced anything worse, and that's in the face of a society that never ceased in telling me I shouldn't want sex.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I for one have never experienced anything worse,

Then you've led a truly, truly, truly charmed life.

[Velasco]

Likewise the experience of sexual frustration is virtually universal for the human male:  at some point we have all been sexually frustrated.  Thus to ask for evidence of it is asinine.

Frustration and failure are aspects of life. Human beings have to deal with them and to develop some tolerance towards them in order to reach some maturity. And, for God's sake, Atlas posters, stop contemplating your belly buttoms! Women have sexual frustrations too, do you realize?

[opebo]

Likewise the experience of sexual frustration is virtually universal for the human male:  at some point we have all been sexually frustrated.  Thus to ask for evidence of it is asinine.

Frustration and failure are aspects of life. Human beings have to deal with them and to develop some tolerance towards them in order to reach some maturity. And, for God's sake, Atlas posters, stop contemplating your belly buttoms! Women have sexual frustrations too, do you realize?

We have no evidence of the underlined.

As to the rest of your point, the original poster suggested that perhaps we haven't a 'natural' desire for sex, not that we should just suck it up and bear the miseries of not getting it.

[Velasco]

Likewise the experience of sexual frustration is virtually universal for the human male:  at some point we have all been sexually frustrated.  Thus to ask for evidence of it is asinine.

Frustration and failure are aspects of life. Human beings have to deal with them and to develop some tolerance towards them in order to reach some maturity. And, for God's sake, Atlas posters, stop contemplating your belly buttoms! Women have sexual frustrations too, do you realize?

We have no evidence of the underlined.

As to the rest of your point, the original poster suggested that perhaps we haven't a 'natural' desire for sex, not that we should just suck it up and bear the miseries of not getting it.

Yes, you have. For example, those million of women that never reached climax while having sex with their husbands. Another question is if you don't care about it. See, it's not that I care about what you think of women's needs, but we have impressionable kids on here whom never treated them. As to the original post, I didn't give an opinion, actually.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I don't think there's such a thing as a "natural" sexuality, except maybe from the drive for sexual pleasure itself (although Nathan or Beet could testify against this as well). Most of our desires probably stem from socialization and the way our life experiences shape our personality. Of course, this doesn't make one's sexual preference any less real or deserving of respect.

As for the main point, we all do repress our sexual desires to some extent - and that's by and large a good thing. We would be animals if we didn't. Obviously, excessive sexual repression can be extremely dangerous and oppressive (especially so when, as is often the case, this repression targets more harshly a certain gender or a certain type of sexual attraction).

I think the key difference is between a rational, self-imposed repression which is based on our personal sense of morality (the desire not to treat your fellow with respect and dignity) or on basic principles of the law, and an arbitrary repression imposed on us by social norms and traditions. The latter should be fought relentlessly, while the former is an indispensable foundation of society.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

For the little that it's worth, one scientist wrote that “societies forbidding premarital sex are plagued by acts of rage" and saw a link between sexual repression and killing/torturing people in countries that encourage it, but that hardly means there's only one factor at play.  I don't know if there's any hard evidence for it, but as afleitch said, it isn't difficult to find studies proving that repressing a person's homosexuality has detrimental effects to it.  I believe generally that when you stigmatize something to a certain degree, people are more likely to abuse it, especially when you make certain groups of people feel like outcasts.

[afleitch]

I for one have never experienced anything worse,

Then you've led a truly, truly, truly charmed life.

To pick up on that, Opebo may be on one extreme but you should always, when critiquing his stance take into careful consideration that you are on the other. To someone who sits happily in the middle both seem very bizarre to me

Opebo is also more candid when describing his fetishes and you are more guarded in what you reveal about yourself. And that’s okay. However as a person who enjoys sex (though in a very different context) then somewhat frustratingly I can ‘connect’ more with Opebo on that issue. Sexual pleasure is, for most people, something innate within them. When expressed an act it is intimate but it also exposes you and exposes a part of you that’s not often accessible to anyone but the person you are having sex with. So people want safety when having sex whether that safety is a literal privacy for it or and whether that safety is within a relationship/marriage or found through having sex with no commitment whatsoever. Some people are constrained by relationships and freed by casual encounters. There is nothing wrong in that in itself. Am I personally a little put off by what he does? Sure thing, but I’m also aware that far more men would find what I do personally more uncomfortable that what Opebo gets up to. Which is very sad but there we go.

Looking at the question, there is no such thing as ‘normal’ sexuality. There’s normative sexuality (usually heteronormative) in which certain cultural conditions impact upon sexual mores and these constantly vary. However as long as sex is consensual (and that is the most difficult thing to define) you cannot say that the person who is having sex within say a monogamous relationship is more ‘correct’ in their expression of sexuality (or strives towards a greater ideal) than someone who is sleeping with a different person every second night. That leads to all sorts of unhelpful moralistic pronouncements. Nor should monogamous sex within a single coupling be taken as the standard to which all other congress is measured or validated against. Yes, casual sex can be psychologically destructive but so to can sex within marriage. Selfless love for another person, as opposed to simple sexual drive is a very different animal and flits between these extremes.

I can only really talk about this from my own experience and I think discussions like this benefit from a certain frankness that, again, only Opebo has brought to the table so far and I’d rather that didn’t stand. I first had sex when I was 17 (part of me wants to say 16 but I can’t quite be sure) at a point at which I was physically and mentally prepared as I thought I could be. I’ve probably had about maybe eighty or so sexual partners. I’m not out to claim bragging rights or anything; I’m a married man so it’s a moot point for me now but I was always a considerate lover. I was always safe. I was always ‘me’; I was never anything but myself when having sex. Was hooking up with a guy for sex promiscuous by someone else’s standards? Perhaps. For me I was just having sex; I was making a brief but energising connection with another man. I met my first boyfriend at 20 and was with him until I was 26 and in those six years I only ever had sex with him. It’s like a ‘button’ that switches when you love someone. When that relationship broke down, it took me a little while to pick myself up not when it came to sex because I could do that. And that’s important. Some people can do sex easily and if they are lucky, well. For some that’s the only attractive feature about them or for them is a hundred times easier than falling in love. Sex is easy; it doesn’t require thinking.

After Chris called it quits did I have sex? Yes. Did I have a few failed attempts at relationships with sex as part of them? Yes. I met Michael at 27 and have been with him for two and a half years and we are monogamous.

So I couldn’t really take seriously someone who would critique my 80 sexual partners in a four year window as somehow being a ‘problem’ because I’ve spent nearly a decade in one of two monogamous relationships. Given that the only real heartache I have suffered is the result of being in a monogamous relationship when it comes to ‘damage’ I could say that technically it has caused more. I enjoy having sex. I also enjoy being in love and those things go very well together for me.

[DC Al Fine]

There's an element of truth to it, but hearing it from modern social liberals is like getting lectured about the dangers of anorexia by BushOklahoma.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Except we talk from experience...

The repression of healthy sexual drives is shown to seriously screw with people's heads.

[opebo]

Likewise the experience of sexual frustration is virtually universal for the human male:  at some point we have all been sexually frustrated.  Thus to ask for evidence of it is asinine.

Frustration and failure are aspects of life. Human beings have to deal with them and to develop some tolerance towards them in order to reach some maturity. And, for God's sake, Atlas posters, stop contemplating your belly buttoms! Women have sexual frustrations too, do you realize?

We have no evidence of the underlined.

As to the rest of your point, the original poster suggested that perhaps we haven't a 'natural' desire for sex, not that we should just suck it up and bear the miseries of not getting it.

Yes, you have. For example, those million of women that never reached climax while having sex with their husbands.

Its not the same thing, friend!  In the male case his parts work, he just can't get what he wants.

[traininthedistance]

Likewise the experience of sexual frustration is virtually universal for the human male:  at some point we have all been sexually frustrated.  Thus to ask for evidence of it is asinine.

Frustration and failure are aspects of life. Human beings have to deal with them and to develop some tolerance towards them in order to reach some maturity. And, for God's sake, Atlas posters, stop contemplating your belly buttoms! Women have sexual frustrations too, do you realize?

We have no evidence of the underlined.

As to the rest of your point, the original poster suggested that perhaps we haven't a 'natural' desire for sex, not that we should just suck it up and bear the miseries of not getting it.

Yes, you have. For example, those million of women that never reached climax while having sex with their husbands.

Its not the same thing, friend!  In the male case his parts work, he just can't get what he wants.

The parts usually work in the female case, too- they just have incompetents for a mate.

[LastVoter]

Likewise the experience of sexual frustration is virtually universal for the human male:  at some point we have all been sexually frustrated.  Thus to ask for evidence of it is asinine.

Frustration and failure are aspects of life. Human beings have to deal with them and to develop some tolerance towards them in order to reach some maturity. And, for God's sake, Atlas posters, stop contemplating your belly buttoms! Women have sexual frustrations too, do you realize?

We have no evidence of the underlined.

As to the rest of your point, the original poster suggested that perhaps we haven't a 'natural' desire for sex, not that we should just suck it up and bear the miseries of not getting it.

Yes, you have. For example, those million of women that never reached climax while having sex with their husbands.

Its not the same thing, friend!  In the male case his parts work, he just can't get what he wants.

The parts usually work in the female case, too- they just have incompetents for a mate.

Blame the man in either case, right?

[opebo]

Its not the same thing, friend!  In the male case his parts work, he just can't get what he wants.

The parts usually work in the female case, too- they just have incompetents for a mate.

You're displaying awful sexism, train.  Apparently you assume the woman is such a fainting weak flower that she can't simply tell her man what to do.  Nonsense.  I can tell you from experience only a large minority of women can o****m properly (that is vag*****y).

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

o****m properly (that is vag*****y).

Aaaand there's your problem. If just pounding away into her vagina won't make your partner orgasm, and stimulating her clitoris will, and you actually give a sh**t about her, then stimulate her [Inks]ing clitoris. Even I know that much.

[traininthedistance]

Apparently you assume the woman is such a fainting weak flower that she can't simply tell her man what to do.

Holy leap of logic, Batman!  How in the Sam Hell do you get that from what I said?

I can tell you from experience only a large minority of women can o****m properly (that is vag*****y).

There's no such thing as a "vaginal orgasm" you pale ponce, that was mostly an invention of notable quack and charlatan Sigmund Freud.  There's just an "orgasm", and the route to that is pretty consistently through the clitoris, I don't know if you've ever heard of it.  Even worse, the idea that this so-called "vaginal orgasm" is the "proper" orgasm (and that, by extension, other orgasms are "improper") is just so mind-bogglingly retrograde and idiotic that frankly I'm floored that even someone as ridiculously, consistently wrong on this subject as you still buys into it.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

What the hell am I reading?

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

I think that might be the single greatest sequence of posts in Atlas history. All it needs is Bushie talking about how he made Allison vaginally orgasm in Kenya.

[dead0man]

I think that might be the single greatest sequence of posts in Atlas history.

INDEED!  I'm not sure what a "pale ponce" is, but I love it anyway.

Excellent posts by Antonio, Scott and afleitch.

[opebo]

o****m properly (that is vag*****y).

Aaaand there's your problem. If just pounding away into her vagina won't make your partner orgasm, and stimulating her clitoris will, and you actually give a sh**t about her, then stimulate her [Inks]ing clitoris. Even I know that much.

No buddy, you do both yourself and the f****d lady a favor, and find someone else - a compatible partner.

There's no such thing as a "vaginal orgasm" you pale ponce, that was mostly an invention of notable quack and charlatan Sigmund Freud.  There's just an "orgasm", and the route to that is pretty consistently through the clitoris, I don't know if you've ever heard of it.  Even worse, the idea that this so-called "vaginal orgasm" is the "proper" orgasm (and that, by extension, other orgasms are "improper") is just so mind-bogglingly retrograde and idiotic that frankly I'm floored that even someone as ridiculously, consistently wrong on this subject as you still buys into it.

Tid, you simply don't know what you're talking about.  I've 27 years of experience and many a soaked bed to attest that you quite deluded.

There's a whole urban slang phrase about it: "knock the bottom out of h*r

[dead0man]

It's ok if you're a bed wetter, nobody should hold that against you.  I don't know if you should brag about it on the internet though.

[opebo]

It's ok if you're a bed wetter, nobody should hold that against you.  I don't know if you should brag about it on the internet though.

Sorry if you've never experienced the real thing, buddy... Have you never heard the phrase 'once she goes black, she'll never go back'?  Didn't it ever occur to you there was a real reason for that?

[dead0man]

Of course, but since both of my wives dated black guys before me (the last fella my first wife was dating threatened, to my face, that he "aughta put a bullet in your (my) phuquing head" when he found out I was dropping the hammer on what he thought was his) I've never put much stock in it.