The 'hook up' culture

[Steezie]

Let's say that you were to have that encounter. Why would you have it? What would you seek in it? What would you get out of it? What would it mean to you?

Were you just looking for sexual release and a pleasant memory, or hoping for something more?

I know the question wasnt directed at me, but I'd like to answer just the same to help give some scope. The questions are answered with the understanding that both my partner and I would be single at the time of the event. I frown very deeply on cheating and my fiancee is not polyamorous

Why? It depends on the person the encounter is with. If we are both single and we like each other, the physical aspect is un-deniably positive. The physical comfort of being close to another human being, the pleasure of the sex itself, the intimacy. Or if it was with someone I was unfamiliar with (Not likely to happen, I like to know who my partners are and that they are clean) it might be for the fun of it. Sex is fun, this is an un-deniable fact that even the most hardcore anti-sex people have to admit. Rolling around in bed with someone else is fun.

As for what I would seek, again it depends. If Im looking for physical comfort, just being skin to skin with someone, that could be a driving factor. It depends on who the other person is, what my state of being is at the time.

What do most people get out of sex? What you get out of sex is something you cant really answer until you're done. The vast majority of the time, at bare minimum, it feels good. A great sex metaphor I heard once was "Sex is like pizza, when its good, its REALLY good. And when its bad, its still kinda good."

Meaning and sex do not necessarily have to go hand in hand. Having a sexual encounter without infusing it with a deep emotional meaning is possible and if you keep your head about you its not going to send you off the rails. What the problem becomes is people who take it too far and either get too emotionally tied up with sex (ALL sex takes on emotional meaning, which gets old QUICKLY) or they let go of ALL emotion in regards to sex completely (Which, again, gets old quickly).

People are so afraid to deviate from the standard ideations of sex that they shut themselves out from important lessons like humor, open-mindedness, variety, honesty, and actual LUST. Then sex gets old, boring, repetitive, and relationships suffer.

 

[sidhe]

I can understand having casual sex as a way of preparing oneself for a serious relationship later on, but I don't think it is good to treat all sex as casual with no thought about preparing for a future relationship. I see this failing as a kind of immaturity or an overly casual attitude towards one's life. It might not be harmful per se, but it strikes me as a wasted opportunity.


eudaimonia,

Mark

In the spirit of our recent "Let us compare and contrast Thelema & Eudaimonism" exchanges, we've just hit a difference.

Properly viewed, there is no such thing as casual sex. If I could grab Liber Aleph without waking the rest of the family, I'd get the exact quote, but there's a big thing about making no difference between one star and another in your treatment of them. In other words: If you'd sleep with one person because your will moves you to do so, you'd better be willing to sleep with all of them if your will so moves you. Add in the whole religious aspect to sexual contact, and it's definitely something to be shared.

My experience has generally been that sex is a "growing-closer" (I'm re-reading Stranger in a Strange Land...can ya tell?). Some folks, even as they claim to reject Western sexual morality, still judge by it. I recommend against the hook-up culture for a different reason - most people I've met don't deal with it well. In the proper group, though, go for it.

Again. Babalon Rising. The "Token Game." It definitely freaked me out at first, but were I not being monogamous (or were single), I'd play to win. I also really want to go this year because of the qadesh training sessions. I am a divine harlot, I should be trained as such.

 

[Eudaimonist]

In the spirit of our recent "Let us compare and contrast Thelema & Eudaimonism" exchanges, we've just hit a difference.

That spirit is well-taken.

Properly viewed, there is no such thing as casual sex.

That's an amazing claim. The distinction seems evident to me. I am willing to entertain the possibility that some people are "natural polyamorists" and are capable of finding meaning in their sexual activities, but I find it incredible to believe that everyone already transcends a shallow hedonism (which is to say, already follows their "will") when having promiscuous sex.

If I could grab Liber Aleph without waking the rest of the family, I'd get the exact quote, but there's a big thing about making no difference between one star and another in your treatment of them.

I'd think that exception-making is the very heart and soul of any romantic relationship. If one treats every star as interchangable, one doesn't really value any star in particular. It would be like Elsworth Toohey refusing to make an exception and help Peter Keating by proclaiming: "Oh, Peter! Of course I'm your friend. I'm everybody's friend. I'm the friend of humanity!"

In other words: If you'd sleep with one person because your will moves you to do so, you'd better be willing to sleep with all of them if your will so moves you.

This only begs the question of what one's will will will.

If will is assumed to contain a superior source of wisdom and "rightness" for oneself, then perhaps it would advise (serial) monogamy.

Add in the whole religious aspect to sexual contact, and it's definitely something to be shared.

I personally wouldn't draw that conclusion.

My experience has generally been that sex is a "growing-closer" (I'm re-reading Stranger in a Strange Land...can ya tell?).

Well, I will simply admit here that I've never quite groked polyamory. My experience has generally been that non-casual sex is a "growing-sacred", and not merely a growing closer. And the sacred is exclusive, not inclusive.

For me, personally, polyamory would be like having a split personality, and my sense of personal unity and the sacred would fight that every step of the way.

It's possible that I'm simply "wired differently" than polyamorists. I've often wondered if some people are natural polyamorists, just as some people are naturally homosexual. In that case, perhaps polyamory really does suit some people, and their will could actually be correct in leading one on in that direction.

Some folks, even as they claim to reject Western sexual morality, still judge by it.

Yes, I'm sure. That doesn't make me one of them.

Pet peeve -> polyamorists who insist that if I support serial monogamy, I must be unduly influenced by "Western sexual morality". Drives me crazy. It ignores the possibility that there are independent reasons to support serial monogamy.

In the interests of intellectual fairness, I will admit that perhaps if I had grown up in a culture with divine prostitutes, I would make some sort of exception for such a "spiritual encounter". Then again, I could have been mistaken.

I don't claim to be able to prove that serial monogamy is preferable to polyamory. I still strongly suspect that it is, because "free love" strikes me as arising from one end of a false mind-body dichotomy. (Guess which end? ) But I could be mistaken here as well.

I recommend against the hook-up culture for a different reason - most people I've met don't deal with it well. In the proper group, though, go for it.

Fair enough. Even though I am freely expressing my views here, I'm not particularly moralistic. I generally live and let live, and assume that adults are capable of managing their lives on their own. The law of cause-and-effect shall be everyone's judge.

Again. Babalon Rising. The "Token Game." It definitely freaked me out at first, but were I not being monogamous (or were single), I'd play to win. I also really want to go this year because of the qadesh training sessions.

You surpass my knowledge of Thelema here. I don't quite know what you are talking about.

I am a divine harlot, I should be trained as such.

Oh, baby!


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Bombila]

`Hook-up Culture` just sounds like an updated circa 1968 `Free Love` to me. (Nothing new under the sun...)

People IMO often attach too much baggage to sex, having it or not having it. Some people enjoy having sex with complete strangers now and then. Others need a close relationship to even consider getting physical. It`s possible to have a long and happy close relationship without ever having sex. It`s possible (even common) to change your attitude towards sex over the course of a lifetime.

Wrong is not letting your partner know where you are on the continuum of casual to committed.

Right is doing what feels comfortable to you and your partner(s).

 

[sidhe]

That's an amazing claim. The distinction seems evident to me. I am willing to entertain the possibility that some people are "natural polyamorists" and are capable of finding meaning in their sexual activities, but I find it incredible to believe that everyone already transcends a shallow hedonism (which is to say, already follows their "will") when having promiscuous sex.

It's not that everyone already transcends a shallow hedonism, it's that everyone has the potential to. We'll get more into this later...

I'd think that exception-making is the very heart and soul of any romantic relationship. If one treats every star as interchangable, one doesn't really value any star in particular. It would be like Elsworth Toohey refusing to make an exception and help Peter Keating by proclaiming: "Oh, Peter! Of course I'm your friend. I'm everybody's friend. I'm the friend of humanity!"

Not so much interchangeable, but willing to be treated equally. It's not a denial of the uniqueness, but a willingness to admit that each unique star is beautiful in its own way. Being a natural qadesh, it's the kind of thing that makes sense to me.

This only begs the question of what one's will will will.

If will is assumed to contain a superior source of wisdom and "rightness" for oneself, then perhaps it would advise (serial) monogamy.

You just hit the nail on the head. Will is will is will, and each is unique. I have a bad habit of talking from my own perspective of Thelema. I'd consider Eudaimonia a new aeon path, and your will is quite different from mine. Neither of us are wrong, just different.

I personally wouldn't draw that conclusion.

Rephrase: To be shared with those who grok it as holy.

Well, I will simply admit here that I've never quite groked polyamory. My experience has generally been that non-casual sex is a "growing-sacred", and not merely a growing closer. And the sacred is exclusive, not inclusive.

For me, personally, polyamory would be like having a split personality, and my sense of personal unity and the sacred would fight that every step of the way.

Will is will is will. Crowley had a thing against threesomes. Not kidding. It's in Liber Aleph...the arts of love are to be reserved to be practiced between two and only two. We each have our path.

It's possible that I'm simply "wired differently" than polyamorists. I've often wondered if some people are natural polyamorists, just as some people are naturally homosexual. In that case, perhaps polyamory really does suit some people, and their will could actually be correct in leading one on in that direction.

Ah, but polyamory is different from the "hook-up culture." Polyamory is a serious committed relationship between more than two individuals. The "hook-up culture" is sex for the sake of sex. I don't believe in sex for the sake of sex, I believe in sex for the sake of religious ecstasy.

Yes, I'm sure. That doesn't make me one of them.

Pet peeve -> polyamorists who insist that if I support serial monogamy, I must be unduly influenced by "Western sexual morality". Drives me crazy. It ignores the possibility that there are independent reasons to support serial monogamy.

I was more referring to those who take part in serial monogamy (not of the series of long-term relationships, but in the series of short-term relationships way), and condemn polyamory/"hook-ups" as immoral. You aren't declaring either immoral objectively, just not in tune with your world-view (or will).

Fair enough. Even though I am freely expressing my views here, I'm not particularly moralistic. I generally live and let live, and assume that adults are capable of managing their lives on their own. The law of cause-and-effect shall be everyone's judge.

Pretty much. Folks who are responsible about whatever they do will fair better than those who are not.

You surpass my knowledge of Thelema here.

Babalon Rising is the biggest Pan-Thelemic (all orders, influenced groups, independents, etc.) festival in North America. The "Token Game" is the reason you have to be over 18 to set foot inside. Upon entry, you're issued four tokens..."Hug", "Kiss", "Grope", and "Something More." The goal is to exchange those actions for more tokens...you offer a hug for the "hug" token, etc. He/She with the most tokens at the end of the festival, wins. It's not mandatory to play, and no one looks down on those who don't, it's just an added activity. Were I single, and able to go, I'd play to win.

Oh, baby!


eudaimonia,

Mark

Tell the Fellowship of Reason to add naked priestesses and temple prostitutes.

93s,
sidhe

 

[Eudaimonist]

Not so much interchangeable, but willing to be treated equally. It's not a denial of the uniqueness, but a willingness to admit that each unique star is beautiful in its own way.

Each star is beautiful in its own way.

You just hit the nail on the head. Will is will is will, and each is unique. I have a bad habit of talking from my own perspective of Thelema. I'd consider Eudaimonia a new aeon path, and your will is quite different from mine. Neither of us are wrong, just different.

I think we are in very close agreement on this point. I will simply add that I accept the possibility of having a mistaken view on what is right or best for myself. Of course, I could conclude that such a mistaken view is not in fact my "will", if I take my will to be supremely wise.

Will is will is will. Crowley had a thing against threesomes. Not kidding.

So now Crowley is on my side! I win!

(Just kidding. )

The "hook-up culture" is sex for the sake of sex. I don't believe in sex for the sake of sex, I believe in sex for the sake of religious ecstasy.

I accept that there is a meaningful distinction here.

I was more referring to those who take part in serial monogamy (not of the series of long-term relationships, but in the series of short-term relationships way), and condemn polyamory/"hook-ups" as immoral.

Our disagreement shrinks with every word. I suspect that we are in amazingly close agreement on the fundamentals.

Tell the Fellowship of Reason to add naked priestesses and temple prostitutes.

Perhaps I will, assuming that it is my will.

Until then, I've added a temple priestess to my avatar. She isn't naked, but if the avatar creation tool and CF would allow it, she would be.

93s,
sidhe

eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[praying]

semi-monogamous relationship,

Errr there is no such thing, you are either monogamous or you are not.

 

[Corey]

I've been hearing a lot about this 'hook up' culture, especially from conservatives who believe that it is harmful to women. While I agree with them that this culture exists (like on college campuses and such) I don't agree that it's entirely harmful.

I don't even agree it exists to any extent beyond that which it always has.

It used to be called one night stands...

 

[quatona]

I don't even agree it exists to any extent beyond that which it always has.

It used to be called one night stands...

Yeah, but that was prior to the time when each and everything was given more weight by adding "culture" to it.

 

[praying]

It sounds to me like the hook up culture is entirely different than a one night stand. For myself I can’t (if I wasn’t married) imagine having a one night stand. Sleeping with a stranger, just the possibility of disease no matter how remote if all precautions were taken is enough for me to say no thanks. On the other hand the hook-up culture as most have described here seems to me to be anything but casual informal sex. It might be looser than a long term relationship that involves sex but I believe everyone has stated they would need to know the person, at the very least call that person a friend. It just seems to me form the descriptions it is not as casual as one might think. There may be no long term emotional investments going on but it isn’t wham bam thank you mam either.

 

[sidhe]

Each star is beautiful in its own way.

Especially the white dwarf that's crystallized into a gigantic diamond.

I think we are in very close agreement on this point. I will simply add that I accept the possibility of having a mistaken view on what is right or best for myself. Of course, I could conclude that such a mistaken view is not in fact my "will", if I take my will to be supremely wise.

The majority of Thelema is devoted to examining whether or not what you're doing is in accordance with "will." All the meditation, etc., is all arranged around developing the ability to ID the will.

So now Crowley is on my side! I win!

(Just kidding. )

That is my all-time favorite Crowleyism...just because it's stuck in at random. Almost like he'd just had a really bad threesome, and was in a foul mood.

Our disagreement shrinks with every word. I suspect that we are in amazingly close agreement on the fundamentals.

We are. Just the end expression differs.

Perhaps I will, assuming that it is my will.

I'd say pitch it just to see the reactions.

Until then, I've added a temple priestess to my avatar. She isn't naked, but if the avatar creation tool and CF would allow it, she would be.

I have an idea for the avatar creator...but I'd need a while to do it.

eudaimonia,

Mark

93 93/93,
sidhe

 

[Autumnleaf]

The problems with the hookup culture are, as with most other moral problems, very pragmatic.

1. Spread of VD, some of which can kill you.
2. Unwanted pregnancy.
3. Single parenthood.
4. Poorly raised children from broken homes and the trouble they tend to get into.
5. A hypersexualized society which objectifys women.
6. And this is up and coming... Single/divorced people are poorer on average than married people. When the economy really hits the skids people might start to get hungry.

 

[PassionFruit]

1. Spread of VD, some of which can kill you.

Practice safe sex.

2. Unwanted pregnancy.

Again use safe sex.

3. Single parenthood.

How so, many people who engage in casual sexually activity don't end up becoming single parents.

4. Poorly raised children from broken homes and the trouble they tend to get into.

Can you provide some evidence as to how 'hook up' culture is responsible for this? There are children who come from normal nuclear families and end up being poorly raised.

5. A hypersexualized society which objectifys women.

How so?

6. And this is up and coming... Single/divorced people are poorer on average than married people. When the economy really hits the skids people might start to get hungry.

Again, how does the 'hook up' culture contribute to this?

 

[Verv]

Hook up culture devalues the relationship of a husband and wife and people essentially begin engaging in as much from young ages; being perpetually unfaithful to someone certainly doesn't start off with setting good standards for how one would behave in their future marriage.

Furthermore, what percentage of people drink before engaging in sex? A lot of people on the weekends drink heavily and the fact stands that some of these people will risk sex without condoms.

We've had things like condoms since the medieval era yet we still have VD. It tells you something, doesn't it Passion? They do not always work and more than that some people when drunk or whatever choose not to use them.

 

[Bombila]

Hook up culture devalues the relationship of a husband and wife and people essentially begin engaging in as much from young ages; being perpetually unfaithful to someone certainly doesn't start off with setting good standards for how one would behave in their future marriage.

Furthermore, what percentage of people drink before engaging in sex? A lot of people on the weekends drink heavily and the fact stands that some of these people will risk sex without condoms.

We've had things like condoms since the medieval era yet we still have VD. It tells you something, doesn't it Passion? They do not always work and more than that some people when drunk or whatever choose not to use them.

How is hookups/free love among young singles translate to being perpetually unfaithful to someone? I was your age 34 years ago, and young singles acted pretty much exactly the same as they do now, experimenting with various partners, exploring relationships, and usually settling into serial monogamy or a long term marriage/cohabitation.

Yes, drunk people often do stupid things like having unsafe sex or driving cars or getting into fights with other drunk people. Very stupid, likely to have bad consequences - because of the drinking to excess, not because of sex.

You'll find most people as they age spend less time getting really drunk every weekend. The body rebels.

 

[Steezie]

The problems with the hookup culture are, as with most other moral problems, very pragmatic.

Moral problems are often subjective problems

1. Spread of VD, some of which can kill you.

Which can be prevented by using protection and knowing your partner's sexual history

2. Unwanted pregnancy.

Which can be prevented by using protection and birth control

3. Single parenthood.

Which can be prevented by using protection and birth control. Divorce and death of a parent can also cause this

4. Poorly raised children from broken homes and the trouble they tend to get into.

Poorly raised children can come from dual parent homes as well. Bad parenting knows no bounds.

5. A hypersexualized society which objectifys women.

Ask yourself if thats our society or our culture. Im curious why MEN are never objectified, or why that complaint is never made.

6. And this is up and coming... Single/divorced people are poorer on average than married people. When the economy really hits the skids people might start to get hungry.

Which, again, can be prevented by using protection and birth control. I also fail to see what more sex will do to influence this

 

[quatona]

Hook up culture devalues the relationship of a husband and wife and people essentially begin engaging in as much from young ages;

If a husband and a wife value their sexually exclusive relationship I fail to see how anything anyone else does could devalue it.

being perpetually unfaithful to someone certainly doesn't start off with setting good standards for how one would behave in their future marriage.

I´m afraid I don´t understand this sentence.

Furthermore, what percentage of people drink before engaging in sex? A lot of people on the weekends drink heavily and the fact stands that some of these people will risk sex without condoms.

So the actual problem would be the "drinking culture".
A lot of people drink heavily and the fact stands that some of these people will risk driving drunk and causing accidents. Not a particularly strong argument against cars.

We've had things like condoms since the medieval era yet we still have VD. It tells you something, doesn't it Passion?

Spell out what this is supposed to tell me. We have had a lot of means to protect ourselves from a lot of infectuous diseases, yet these diseases are still around. How come I never seen to see people rallying against the immorality of "hand-shake culture" with reference to flu and other infectuous diseases? How come I don´t see public toilets rallied against as immoral with reference to infectuous diseases?

They do not always work and more than that some people when drunk or whatever choose not to use them.

So?

 

[quatona]

The problems with the hookup culture are, as with most other moral problems, very pragmatic.

Makes me wonder why people keep emphasizing that they are "moral" problems and do not discuss the pragmatic problems right away.
So let´s see which pragmatic problems you have spotted.

1. Spread of VD, some of which can kill you.

If, as you claim, you are speaking pragmatically I don´t seem to understand why we shouldn´t deal with those health risks in the same way we deal with the risks of other activities.

2. Unwanted pregnancy.

A risk that could easily be minimized to a risk level that we would find perfectly acceptable with other activities.

3. Single parenthood.

See 2.

4. Poorly raised children from broken homes and the trouble they tend to get into.

Doesn´t make sense. In a casual sex relationship there is no home that can be broken, in the first place. See 2 also.

5. A hypersexualized society which objectifys women.

This sounds more like a moral argument to me. So those lame points you had above were all you had in the field of pragmatism?

6. And this is up and coming... Single/divorced people are poorer on average than married people. When the economy really hits the skids people might start to get hungry.

When the economy really hits the skids people might start to get hungry with or without casual sex. See 2 also.

 

[SallyNow]

If two people know that they are in a casual relationship, then who am I to stop them?

I do, however, think it's just tactless to enter into a relationship just for sex without the other party knowing it's just intended to be a casual relationship.

 

[quatona]

I do, however, think it's just tactless to enter into a relationship just for sex without the other party knowing it's just intended to be a casual relationship.

By the same token I think it´s tactless to engage in sex without the other party knowing that it´s intended to be the promise for sexual exclusivity.