• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

The 'hook up' culture

cantata

Queer non-theist, with added jam.
Feb 20, 2007
6,215
683
38
Oxford, UK
✟32,193.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Errr there is no such thing, you are either monogamous or you are not. :p

Well, people tend to read "non-monogamous" as "open", which is not how I'd describe our relationship.

He sees certain other people with my agreement; we see other people as a couple; I don't see other people. I don't know what you'd call that.

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. ;)

Amen to that!

Incidentally I'd like to add that I'm not one of those smug polyamorists who thinks that all monogamous people are deluded, but I do dislike being told that my relationships are meaningless or selfish because they happen to be different. I can only explain it by saying that if I like someone and I'm attracted to them, I'm quite likely to want to sleep with them, in the same way that I'm quite likely to want to have dinner with them or go to the theatre with them or sit in the park and read with them. Sex is not in a special category for me. I would only do it with people I like and trust, but the levels of liking and trust I require are just on a sliding scale with all the other things I want to do with people I like and trust, although as it happens, for me those levels with regard to sex happen to be pretty high.
 
Upvote 0

HaloHope

Senior Member
May 25, 2007
506
165
✟17,438.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
While I myself can't condone casual sex etc... , I don't feel I can judge it either.

I myself can't understand the desire for multiple partners or to have sex for fun and I'd be lying if I didn't say it saddens me that people can take such a light hearted approach to sex, but at the same time if people feel it's how they want to approach it, it's not my business what they do. My main concerns about casual sex is that it does seem to encourage callousness, a lack of respect and just give people an excuse to be non-commital, but again I can't paint all casual sex with the same brush as everyone is different.

I may have an older "romantic" view of sex, but for me it's something so special for as long as I remember I felt it should be something if possible that you only share with one person, the love of your life. Of course, relationships obviously don't always work out but for me at least I still believe you should only sleep with someone if you intend to only have sex with that individual from that moment on. So far this has worked out for me, I've only been sexually intimate with one person, the relationship is in it's third year and we are happy. I really hope that I will only have sex with my partner and vice versa as thats the way we both think it should be.
 
Upvote 0

quatona

"God"? What do you mean??
May 15, 2005
37,512
4,302
✟182,802.00
Faith
Seeker
Would any of those who hold sex as somewhat "sacred" (as Mark puts it) or as a "special category" (as cantata puts it) be willing to entertain the idea that such creeds and attitudes tend to be self-fulfilling, self-confirming (the same would be true for the opposite creed "sex is not a special category in itself but basically just one of the ways I interact with people whom I like", of course)?
 
Upvote 0

Eudaimonist

I believe in life before death!
Jan 1, 2003
27,482
2,738
58
American resident of Sweden
Visit site
✟126,756.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Libertarian
Would any of those who hold sex as somewhat "sacred" (as Mark puts it) or as a "special category" (as cantata puts it) be willing to entertain the idea that such creeds and attitudes tend to be self-fulfilling, self-confirming (the same would be true for the opposite creed "sex is not a special category in itself but basically just one of the ways I interact with people whom I like", of course)?

Sure, I'll admit that this is a possibility that I find difficult to rule out completely. I don't claim to have perfect knowledge of human psychology, and of course I can be fooled. My views are simply the best conclusions I am able to draw.


eudaimonia,

Mark
 
  • Like
Reactions: cantata
Upvote 0

quatona

"God"? What do you mean??
May 15, 2005
37,512
4,302
✟182,802.00
Faith
Seeker
While I appreciate the tolerance and "different strokes for different folks" attitude your post displays, I would like to correct a misunderstanding:

I myself can't understand the desire for multiple partners
I think it´s not so much a "desire for multiple partners" that´s behind it. It is usually the desire to have sex with one partner (but this desire is not always directed at the same partner). :)

I´d also like to ask a couple of questions, if I may:

or to have sex for fun
So what would you expect people to have sex for?

and I'd be lying if I didn't say it saddens me that people can take such a light hearted approach to sex
I personally can´t make much sense of the "sex is serious business" approach.
What is wrong with taking things light heartedly? What would be the alternative - taking things heavy heartedly?
In my experience it is always great to manage to take things (whatever it is) light heartedly.
But maybe we just connect different ideas to "light hearted"...

My main concerns about casual sex is that it does seem to encourage callousness
Could you try to explain how that would follow?
I mean, you don´t even seem to have personal experiences with casual sex (which would at least make for anecdotal practical evidence).
So how exactly do you get from casual sex to callousness theoretically?
a lack of respect
What makes you think and say that? What do you mean saying "respect" here (I am asking because I can´t think of any commonly applied meaning of "respect" in which this statement of yours would make any sense to me)?
Whose respect for whom is lacking?
In which way does closeness and intimacy of two persons who desire the closeness and intimacy with another person point to lack of respect?

Plus one objection:

and just give people an excuse to be non-commital
Casual sex (non-commital sex) gives an excuse to be non-commital.
That´s merely a tautology. What do you mean?

On another note I´d point out that - although often being used almost as synonyms - there are different forms and ideas of "commitment" than "sexual exclusivity".
 
Upvote 0

quatona

"God"? What do you mean??
May 15, 2005
37,512
4,302
✟182,802.00
Faith
Seeker
Sure, I'll admit that this is a possibility that I find difficult to rule out completely. I don't claim to have perfect knowledge of human psychology, and of course I can be fooled. My views are simply the best conclusions I am able to draw.
Fair enough.
I guess what I am trying to spot is: When you speak of conclusions, what do you start from, what are the premises, what are the points you accept as relevant on the way from the starting point and the premises to the conclusion?
You know what I mean?

Where in the process are your personal experiences, how were these personal experiences possibly forced by your creeds (that may or may not have been that which you have been naturally brought up with), those creeds that shape our expectations and therefore the valuation of our experiences?
Was there a time when you didn´t feel that sex is sacred, and acting accordingly lead you to frustration, or was it more like this creed/feeling has always been the basis on which you entered sexual relationships?
What part does jealousy play in all this?

(I´m not asking these questions because I want you to answer them. It´s just to give you an idea where I see the complexity in matters of creeds.)

Speaking for myself, I have been brought up with the idea of sexual exclusivity, but it never made sense to me - neither conceptually nor from my feelings.
Unlike cantata, I wasn´t gifted with lack of jealousy, though - so sexual exclusivity at least provided me with a reason not to look into this negative emotion, and into the somewhat inconsistent emotional situation that I couldn´t see any reason to have a bad conscience for sleeping with someone, but felt quite a bit hurt if a girl I liked slept with someone else (or was in any other way "too close" to him).
That said, I was in a couple of partnerships in which sexual exclusivity was part of the agreement, and in these times I have always kept to this agreement. It always felt wrong, though. For the life of me I could - neither theoretically nor emotionally - find a reason not to be as close to somebody else as the situation and mutual feelings suggested, and I have never understood how being close to someone else would take away from the closeness I had with a partner.
Add to that that I finally took a deeper look at my jealous parts and for all I can tell managed to overcome them.
So, if asking myself the question I have asked you above ("What was the starting point and that which detemined my experiences and the way I valuated them?") I would have to say it was my feelings. The fact that I don´t see any rational argument for holding sex sacred is an aspect, but certainly not the most important one on the way to my conclusion.
 
Upvote 0

cantata

Queer non-theist, with added jam.
Feb 20, 2007
6,215
683
38
Oxford, UK
✟32,193.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
I myself can't understand the desire for multiple partners

In my experience, it's not that one starts out with a desire for multiple partners. What actually happens is that one meets someone and finds oneself attracted to them, and, upon discovering that the feeling is mutual, desires to engage in sexual intimacy with that person. The important part is that one can have these feelings about lots of people. Some folks think that once you've made your bed with one person, you have to lie in it. Others of us think that our relationships with one person make little or no difference to our feelings about other people, so we don't see any inherent reason not to act on those feelings towards more than one person.
 
Upvote 0

Bombila

Veteran
Nov 28, 2006
3,474
445
✟28,256.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
Sexuality and partnering don't come under the 'one size fits all' category. Sex for one person comes under the heading of fun and intimacy, for another it means eternal/sacred commitment. I'm personally of the opinion that most of us do take sex too seriously. If sex is at the centre of your relationship, what happens when one partner is no longer capable of enjoying or participating in sex? Does intimacy die? Does love? A more light hearted approach to sex might reduce the immeasurable harm now caused by jealousy, guilt over personal behaviours, and rejection.
 
Upvote 0

PassionFruit

I woke up like dis
May 18, 2007
3,755
313
In the valley of the wind
✟28,050.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Democrat
I myself can't understand the desire for multiple partners or to have sex for fun and I'd be lying if I didn't say it saddens me that people can take such a light hearted approach to sex, but at the same time if people feel it's how they want to approach it, it's not my business what they do. My main concerns about casual sex is that it does seem to encourage callousness, a lack of respect and just give people an excuse to be non-commital, but again I can't paint all casual sex with the same brush as everyone is different.

While I understand what your saying overall, I don't understand the part of having the desire for multiple partners. Just repeating what cantata and quatona have said is there really is no desire for multiple sex partners, you meet someone that you attracted to and you discover your attracted to them and if that person is attracted to you, there's an opportunity to pursue a sexual relationship. Usually in my experience I never had the desire to have multiple sex partners at the same time.

Could you explain how casual sex gives a lack of respect, to relationships?
 
  • Like
Reactions: cantata
Upvote 0

HaloHope

Senior Member
May 25, 2007
506
165
✟17,438.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Quite a few responses for me to respond to here so bare with me, it's a fairly new experience for me to be on the more "conservative" side of a debate for once ;)

While I appreciate the tolerance and "different strokes for different folks" attitude your post displays, I would like to correct a misunderstanding:


I think it´s not so much a "desire for multiple partners" that´s behind it. It is usually the desire to have sex with one partner (but this desire is not always directed at the same partner). :)

I appreciate the correction drawn by you and other posters. I do get this but it is hard for me to understand fully from a personal standpoint, I've only had the desire to be sexually intimate with one person, and I only wanted to do that after a lot of getting to know that person and becoming a huge part of their life. I couldn't sleep with someone unless I was a huge part of a persons life and new them extremely well beforehand, but again that is just the way I personally am. I'd have to be in an exclusive relationship with someone to have sexual feelings to that extent about them. I'm not sure if thats just how I naturally or due to my religious beliefs but its how I've felt about it for as long as I can remember.

I´d also like to ask a couple of questions, if I may:[/quote[

But of course


So what would you expect people to have sex for?

While sex is fun (no denying that and I should have phrased it better), for me it only works souley as an expression of love and commitment in a commited monogamous relationship. I realize not everyone feels that way.



I personally can´t make much sense of the "sex is serious business" approach.
What is wrong with taking things light heartedly? What would be the alternative - taking things heavy heartedly?
In my experience it is always great to manage to take things (whatever it is) light heartedly.
But maybe we just connect different ideas to "light hearted"...

I dont feel I take sex heavy heartedly, I just see it as something thats so special and wonderful I believe it's meant to be for relationships, and ones that both parties intend to stick with.

Could you try to explain how that would follow?
I mean, you don´t even seem to have personal experiences with casual sex (which would at least make for anecdotal practical evidence).
So how exactly do you get from casual sex to callousness theoretically?

I'll try and explain, while I have no personal experience with casual sex, I have freinds who have it a lot, and have spent most of their lives having it. Most of them spend their time panicking over pregnancy/people liking them too much and wanting to have sex more than one time/std's and the like but when it comes down to the sex itself they seem to forget all these problems, and concerns callously then start all over again once their one night stand is over.


What makes you think and say that? What do you mean saying "respect" here (I am asking because I can´t think of any commonly applied meaning of "respect" in which this statement of yours would make any sense to me)?
Whose respect for whom is lacking?
In which way does closeness and intimacy of two persons who desire the closeness and intimacy with another person point to lack of respect?

Again this of course boils down to my personal view, I feel it's fairly unrespectful to the act itself to reduce it to something based purely on desire with no long term involvement for either party.

Plus one objection:


Casual sex (non-commital sex) gives an excuse to be non-commital.
That´s merely a tautology. What do you mean?

It gives an excuse to plough through lots of partners irrespective of both consequences and the feelings of others.

On another note I´d point out that - although often being used almost as synonyms - there are different forms and ideas of "commitment" than "sexual exclusivity".

Thats true yes. I of course do mean sexual exclusivity when I say commitment. I do understand others may have different views on that of course such as commiting to multiple partners etc.. which I can never really fathom myself, but if its the way someone feels is the way to go for them sexually then we can agree to disagree on what sex is all about :)

I apologise if I come across as judgemental at all in my post, I can respect people have different views on sex and this is down to my perception of what I feel/believe and what I perceive in the actions of those I know.
 
Upvote 0

HaloHope

Senior Member
May 25, 2007
506
165
✟17,438.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
In my experience, it's not that one starts out with a desire for multiple partners. What actually happens is that one meets someone and finds oneself attracted to them, and, upon discovering that the feeling is mutual, desires to engage in sexual intimacy with that person. The important part is that one can have these feelings about lots of people. Some folks think that once you've made your bed with one person, you have to lie in it. Others of us think that our relationships with one person make little or no difference to our feelings about other people, so we don't see any inherent reason not to act on those feelings towards more than one person.

As I said in my reply to Quatona, thank you for educating me a bit more on this. As I said myself, while I can appreciate we just have entirely different views its hard for me to "get" entirely as I just can't place myself in those shows. I'm incapable of having those feelings for more than one person it seems, as I place extremely high priority on my relationship over pretty much all other things. Even if I could have feelings for multiple people I'd feel too bad about myself for doing so, so Im glad I dont.
 
Upvote 0

HaloHope

Senior Member
May 25, 2007
506
165
✟17,438.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
While I understand what your saying overall, I don't understand the part of having the desire for multiple partners. Just repeating what cantata and quatona have said is there really is no desire for multiple sex partners, you meet someone that you attracted to and you discover your attracted to them and if that person is attracted to you, there's an opportunity to pursue a sexual relationship. Usually in my experience I never had the desire to have multiple sex partners at the same time.

Could you explain how casual sex gives a lack of respect, to relationships?

Forgive me for not replying directly but see my above replies to Quotona and Cantana, hopefully they will answer your questions.
 
Upvote 0

quatona

"God"? What do you mean??
May 15, 2005
37,512
4,302
✟182,802.00
Faith
Seeker
Firstly, thanks for your explanations, HaloHope.
Secondly, and just to get that out of the way once and for all: I am working from the assumption that neither of us wants to convince the other or change his attitude towards sex. You don´t come across as judgemental, and I hope neither do I.
We could easily conclude that we just feel differently - no problem.
Yet, once you have tried to give some sort of rationalizations (which on top occasionally go a bit beyond making mere statements of personal preferences) I am trying to understand this reasoning.
I can live with people having different feelings just fine, but I am frustrated when I don´t understand a supposedly reasonable/rational line of thought.
So my reason for asking all these question is primarily my wish to understand something I don´t understand (and possibly can´t even understand).

It´s not like I am unfamiliar with your approach to it - it is the predominantly held view in our societies, after all.

If you want to walk a mile in my shoes you can do that easily by reading your post, imagining someone else had written it, and replacing "sex" by, say, "playing a tennis match with someone".
If you are willing to do that I am pretty sure you find out why your answers do not help me one bit in understanding. :)

I couldn't sleep with someone unless I was a huge part of a persons life and new them extremely well beforehand, but again that is just the way I personally am.
I am wondering how you know that. I am also wondering what "couldn´t" practically means.
In the attempt to understand this, the closest I can come is comparing it to my heterosexuality. I never had the desire to sleep with a man, but I wouldn´t know why to replace "I don´t desire to..." by "I could not...", partcularly since I have never even tried.

I'd have to be in an exclusive relationship with someone to have sexual feelings to that extent about them.
I find the "to that extent" particularly interesting in this sentence. It implies (correct me if I am wrong) that you do have sexual thoughts/feelings/desires about men you are not in a committed partnership with; just not "to the extent" that so far motivated you to have sex with them.
My question: What do you do with other desires that you have, but only to a small extent? Say you find some food you don´t know somewhat attractive or intriguing? Do you feel "I feel like eating it, but not to the extent that I would - and therefore I can´t."?
What I am trying to get at again is my creed-question: Is it really that your feelings prevent you from trying it - or is it more the creed you have been brought up with? (I don´t know about your place, but here it is still a common idea passed on from generation to generation that women "can´t" do that.)
Don´t get me wrong: I find no fault with having creeds and convictions, I don´t even find fault with the convictions being the result of our education - I am just wondering what is at the core. It´s none of my business, but I am curious. I am often asking similar questions to myself concerning strongly held convictions or secure feelings.

I'm not sure if thats just how I naturally or due to my religious beliefs but its how I've felt about it for as long as I can remember.
Aren´t you interested in finding out? :)




While sex is fun (no denying that and I should have phrased it better), for me it only works souley as an expression of love and commitment in a commited monogamous relationship.
What I find intriguing about this statement is that it incorporates so many detailed conditions. To me, it doesn´t sound like the expression of a feeling, it sounds more like a creed. Just saying.






I dont feel I take sex heavy heartedly, I just see it as something thats so special and wonderful I believe it's meant to be for relationships, and ones that both parties intend to stick with.
"So special that it´s meant for relationships". This is one thing I don´t understand. It sounds like there is a scale of specialness of certain activities, and the higher they are on the scale of this specialness, the more they are meant for such relationships. Is there anything else (but sexual intimacy) that is not as high on the scale of specialness that it is only meant for such relationships, but pretty high, so that you´d almost say they are meant for such relationships, too? Like, say, talking honestly about one´s feelings, or going out for dinner, or whatever?



I'll try and explain, while I have no personal experience with casual sex, I have freinds who have it a lot, and have spent most of their lives having it. Most of them spend their time panicking over pregnancy/people liking them too much and wanting to have sex more than one time/std's and the like but when it comes down to the sex itself they seem to forget all these problems, and concerns callously then start all over again once their one night stand is over.
Well, ok. This does not really match the attitude I am thinking of, but if this is your experience with people I do understand why you arrive at this conclusion.




Again this of course boils down to my personal view, I feel it's fairly unrespectful to the act itself to reduce it to something based purely on desire with no long term involvement for either party.
Now, I really didn´t see that coming. :) If memory serves I have never before heard the idea of having "respect for an act itself". I have an idea what respect for a person is, I have an idea how we can perform an action respectfully - but respect to "the act of...itself" as an abstract statement doesn´t ring any bell whatsoever with me.
Out of curiosity: Are there other acts that should be performed only with certain prerequisites and conditions that are manifestations of "respect for the act itself"? Can you give me an example, so that I understand this idea better?

Anyways, I guess what is behind all of my questions: The interest to find out whether this is primarily a "view" (as you put it here) that determines your "feelings", or rather a "feeling" (as you mostly put it) that you rationalize in your "view".



It gives an excuse to plough through lots of partners irrespective of both consequences and the feelings of others.
Well, if an act has consequences you can´t do it irrespective of those consequences. That´s the nature of consequences, after all. :)
When saying "irrespective of the feelings of others" - whom do you have in mind? Let´s take the scenario that A has sex with B (with both of them not being interested in sexual exclusivity), next week B has sex with C (under the same conditions), and so forth. Who would be the one who acts irrespectively of someone else´s feelings, and who would be the one irrespectively of whose feelings is acted upon? Or are you thinking of persons who are not even participants?


I apologise if I come across as judgemental at all in my post, I can respect people have different views on sex and this is down to my perception of what I feel/believe and what I perceive in the actions of those I know.
Again, no, you don´t come across as judgemental at all.
In return, I hope I don´t come across as overly investigative. No need to mention that you are of course free to ignore all of my questions. :)
 
Upvote 0

cantata

Queer non-theist, with added jam.
Feb 20, 2007
6,215
683
38
Oxford, UK
✟32,193.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
For me, commitment to someone means making a concerted effort to ensure that all my dealings with them are loving, affectionate, thoughtful, and enjoyable. It doesn't have anything to do with anyone but them.

I find the idea that sexual exclusivity = commitment very strange.
 
Upvote 0

mpok1519

Veteran
Jul 8, 2007
11,508
347
✟36,350.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
You have a very pessimistic view of it -- you should remain open to other people and see if you can find something very special with someone else and then consider the step. Perhaps from the outside it looks like a bad idea and modern society can easily breed a cynical view of marriage.

I see where you are coming from but disagree with your conclusions. :)


Its more difficult than you can imagine; I find very special qualities in everyone I know and eveyrone I meet; would they want to share those qualities is their choice, its not mine.

Its always the woman's choice; she gets to decide if she wants to like me or not, she has the choice to say yes, and she has the choice to leave me as well. I get no choice I'd want to take.

In failed relationships its mostly the woman who leaves, but its the man who usually 'screws up'. ~shrug~ go fig.
 
Upvote 0

mpok1519

Veteran
Jul 8, 2007
11,508
347
✟36,350.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Sounds a bit pessimistic but understandably so. That's probably why the 'hook up' culture exist is because maybe people don't want to quickly get married, especially when there's a huge chance you can end up getting divorced. I guess people want to enjoy their sexual freedom first, before getting married. Then again, I don't know. :p


I agree; marriage slowly is becoming a joke, and children are being seen as liabilities rather than assets more and more, sociologists are saying.
 
Upvote 0

GeratTzedek

Meaning Righteous Proselyte to Judaism
Aug 5, 2007
4,213
339
64
Los Angeles area
Visit site
✟6,003.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
An Atheist Psychiatrist (Dr. Anonymous has been revealed to be Dr. Miriam Grossman working at UCLA) has written a formidable book on this subject: Unprotected: A Campus Psychiatrist Reveals How Political Correctness in Her Profession Endangers Every Student


http://www.amazon.com/Unprotected-Psychiatrist-Political-Correctness-Profession/dp/1595230254
1595230254.01._AA240_SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg



The following experpt is from pages 1-2 of Chapter 1:

Heather was a nineteen-year-old studying performing arts. She came in during her freshman year to see a Psychiatrist due to moodiness and crying spells that came out of no where. Normally upbeat and social, Heather was ready for a good time. But in the past months, she had often withdrawn to her room feeling worthless -- even self hate. These episodes were painful, and had started to interfere with school and friendships. She tried eating better and practicing yoga, but Heather couldn't get back to herself, and didn't know why. The Pscyhiatriswt sent her over to me.

As we talked, she stressed that her moods didn't really make sense, because life was good, and there was nothing to complain about. Heather liked school and had many friends. Her family was supportive. She had enough money. Her health was fine.

"How long has this been going on?" I asked.

"Oh, I don't know. Maybe... since the New Year. I've always had low self esteem, but now its really bad. "

"Did something happen to you around that time?"

She thought about it. "No, I don't think so.... I can't think of anything."

There are times when symptoms may appear without precipitant, but I decided to ask again. "Heather, please think about it carefully. In the fall or early winter did you lose someone you love or have a pet die? Did you go through something frightening or dangerous? Did any relationship begin or end?"

She thought it over. "Well, I can think of one thing. Since Thanksgiving, I've had a "friend with benefits." And actually I'm kind of confused about that."

"Really? Tell me more."

"Well, I met him at a party. And I really like him. But there's this problem. I want to spend more time with him, and do stuff like go shopping or see a movie. That would make it a friendship for me. But he says no, becuase if we do those things, then in his opinion we'd have a relationship--and that's more than he wants. And I'm confused because it seems like I don't get the "friend" part, but he gets the "benefits."
 
Upvote 0

PassionFruit

I woke up like dis
May 18, 2007
3,755
313
In the valley of the wind
✟28,050.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Democrat
An Atheist Psychiatrist (Dr. Anonymous has been revealed to be Dr. Miriam Grossman working at UCLA) has written a formidable book on this subject: Unprotected: A Campus Psychiatrist Reveals How Political Correctness in Her Profession Endangers Every Student


http://www.amazon.com/Unprotected-Psychiatrist-Political-Correctness-Profession/dp/1595230254
1595230254.01._AA240_SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg



The following experpt is from pages 1-2 of Chapter 1:

Heather was a nineteen-year-old studying performing arts. She came in during her freshman year to see a Psychiatrist due to moodiness and crying spells that came out of no where. Normally upbeat and social, Heather was ready for a good time. But in the past months, she had often withdrawn to her room feeling worthless -- even self hate. These episodes were painful, and had started to interfere with school and friendships. She tried eating better and practicing yoga, but Heather couldn't get back to herself, and didn't know why. The Pscyhiatriswt sent her over to me.

As we talked, she stressed that her moods didn't really make sense, because life was good, and there was nothing to complain about. Heather liked school and had many friends. Her family was supportive. She had enough money. Her health was fine.

"How long has this been going on?" I asked.

"Oh, I don't know. Maybe... since the New Year. I've always had low self esteem, but now its really bad. "

"Did something happen to you around that time?"

She thought about it. "No, I don't think so.... I can't think of anything."

There are times when symptoms may appear without precipitant, but I decided to ask again. "Heather, please think about it carefully. In the fall or early winter did you lose someone you love or have a pet die? Did you go through something frightening or dangerous? Did any relationship begin or end?"

She thought it over. "Well, I can think of one thing. Since Thanksgiving, I've had a "friend with benefits." And actually I'm kind of confused about that."

"Really? Tell me more."

"Well, I met him at a party. And I really like him. But there's this problem. I want to spend more time with him, and do stuff like go shopping or see a movie. That would make it a friendship for me. But he says no, becuase if we do those things, then in his opinion we'd have a relationship--and that's more than he wants. And I'm confused because it seems like I don't get the "friend" part, but he gets the "benefits."

..........and?
 
Upvote 0