Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum
Stryker_A

How should a discriminating young man approach/view sex if no one he e

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Just to provide a counter view, I'm going to throw out there that it is possible to have sex before 33 with "Not The One" and make no mistake doing so.

 

Yes, I actually do agree with the above to an extent. By the time I was 33, I had been to 21 countries around the world and had sex with women in every one of them. I went with women of every color, every race, every age. I did not discriminate, except to the extent that she had to be clean and decent. I even bedded two women at the same time (which, I learned, is not what most men imagine it to be).

 

When I wrote that I waited until 33, I meant that was when I thought I had found the right woman and got married. It took 8 years to learn that it was a mistake. Unfortunately for both of us, I discovered Objectivism during our marriage and learned then that we were so philosophically incompatible that it was unfair to both of us to continue.

 

So, perhaps JASKN has the right approach; which, if I understand it, is: "Try it. You might like it." And, I don't mean that sarcastically. Sometimes you learn things about a person in a trial relationship that you would never discover in normal conversation from a barstool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am looking for a graceful, independent, confident, and dignified woman. A woman that will add some value to my life by not conforming to the concepts of most people or the in crowd. It is amazing how difficult it is to find a woman my age that adheres to those principles(even if you find her you might not be physically attracted to her). In today's world so many people are mindless Obama drones that do not think for themselves. Too many women are attention seeking, entitled, narcissistic, and whiny. Women at college devalue themselves by recklessly smoking, using drugs/alcohol, dancing raunchy, partying wildly, having sex commonly without seeing value in that person and doing what feels good in the moment.  I am looking for a woman that thinks because only a thinking woman will add value to my life by giving me something different. Of course not all of the women I come in contact with have all of the negative traits I described. For the most part the women I encounter either have some of these traits, too many of these traits, are people I am indifferent to, or mildly attracted to(but not attracted to enough).

 

I don't think sex is even great without some long-term ambitions or at least some personal connection. Not necessarily marriage, but at minimum: "I esteem this person, I enjoy this person's company, and want to see where it goes."

 

The issue is attempting to make sex a purely sensational experience -- it can't be done. Sex necessarily involves the mind -- whether that be your evaluation of the person -- or -- the setting in which the sex is taking place (e.g. behind a dumpster vs. in a comfy bed, or in front of your grandparents vs. alone in your bedroom). Your mind affects how good that sex feels.

 

So, I think you generally have the right attitude towards sex, especially the fact that you'll have more fun experimenting with someone you actually care about. I would just say that I think you need to loosen up a bit -- why does this woman need to be a "thinker"?  By thinker, I assume you mean philosophically. Does a dancer need to date a dancer? You can find value and good in all types of people -- so I suggest not shutting everyone out just because they don't know what words like "epistemology" mean. 

Edited by thenelli01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, perhaps JASKN has the right approach; which, if I understand it, is: "Try it. You might like it." And, I don't mean that sarcastically. Sometimes you learn things about a person in a trial relationship that you would never discover in normal conversation from a barstool.

I'd say your phrase is a nice, simple way to sum it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Your "help, women are throwing thrmselves at me" narrative doesn't strike me as true.

 

Why not?

 

I'm also in a similar situation to Stryker_A. I'm twenty years old at the moment, and there is not anyone available at the moment who I would want to have sex with.

 

I think the only thing you can really do is hold on, get used to jacking off, and try to meet more women. (Although this last point means dealing with all the crazies you will encounter on the way to finding someone you love.) I suppose short-term dating relationships are an option as well. I do have some aversion to this idea, because I like to think of love as something permanent. But I can see the argument for considering it as an option as long as there is at least a likelihood of remaining friends in the long term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Due to my pickiness I have no sexual experience and I fear that I am losing out on an important aspect of life.

You're going about it backwards.

There's this popular notion that everyone needs to be with someone; that you're only as good as your love life, and that anyone who isn't with someone (or Galt forbid, has never been) must be seriously defective in some horrible way.  It's one of those side effects of the mystic-altruist philosophy.

 

So I think the first thing you should do is to ask yourself whether you genuinely want affection that badly or if you're simply worried about being one of those freaky individual-things.  And if you truly feel deprived of a woman you're waiting to find, then speed up the process!  There are upwards of three billion women on Earth right now; go out and start talking to them!

 

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/GHFY2iER1oI?feature=player_detailpage" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=GHFY2iER1oI

 

There's a certain sense of life in this song.  Hold it in the back of your mind and then reexamine the problem; repeat as needed.

Edited by Harrison Danneskjold

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's this popular notion that everyone needs to be with someone; that you're only as good as your love life, and that anyone who isn't with someone (or Galt forbid, has never been) must be seriously defective in some horrible way.  It's one of those side effects of the mystic-altruist philosophy.

 

I don't see how that quote says that at all.

 

Are you trying to say that love/sex aren't "important aspects of life" or are you just going on a random rant? (Like usual)

Edited by thenelli01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thenelli01:

I have not yet found a woman who has the values I admire in her and am extremely picky with my partners.

"Admiration" refers to some of the most profound evaluations a human being can feel.  "Picky" also refers to evaluation, but with almost derogatory connotations.  Look at how he chose to string them both together.

 

I have raging hormones and it is highly frustrating to get offers from tons of girls (many who are very attractive), but decline due to me not being attracted to their personality.

He did not attribute that frustration to the girls' personalities; he said that his frustration was due to himself; specifically his own pickiness.

 

I have not yet found a woman who has the values I admire in her and am extremely picky with my partners. . .

I have raging hormones and it is highly frustrating to get offers from tons of girls (many who are very attractive), but decline due to me not being attracted to their personality. Due to my pickiness I have no sexual experience and I fear that I am losing out on an important aspect of life.

"Due to my pickiness" means "due to my principles" and this isn't about his frustrated urges; this is about an aspect of his entire life.

 

I don't see how that quote says that at all.

Thank you for your sincerity.  :thumbsup:  

 

Are you trying to say that love/sex aren't "important aspects of life" or are you just going on a random rant? (Like usual)

 

 That is an excellent question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a chance that almost everyone who is around you is an idiot, such as by being stuck in a narrow college environment.

Is there not also an equal chance that they're not? Whats the point of this statement? Are people more idiotic in college?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there not also an equal chance that they're not? Whats the point of this statement? Are people more idiotic in college?

It seems you stopped reading before the very next sentence, where I wrote, "...there is also a chance you're cutting people off before you have a chance to find things you like about them." I was making the point that judging people and your own interactions is tricky, so make sure you consider both sides adequately.

And yes, people *are* more idiotic in college (*caveats and qualifiers*). Have you been to a college campus lately? I live two minutes down the road from the world's largest, OSU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thenelli01:

"Admiration" refers to some of the most profound evaluations a human being can feel.  "Picky" also refers to evaluation, but with almost derogatory connotations.  Look at how he chose to string them both together.

 

He did not attribute that frustration to the girls' personalities; he said that his frustration was due to himself; specifically his own pickiness.

 

"Due to my pickiness" means "due to my principles" and this isn't about his frustrated urges; this is about an aspect of his entire life.

You still didn't convince me. How do you get from: Sex/Love are important aspects of life (which they are) to him claiming that "everyone needs to be with someone"?

 

Again, just another random rant by you. Are you saying that they aren't important aspects of life, which is relevant to what the poster actually said, or not?

Edited by thenelli01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You still didn't convince me.

 

I do not feel responsible for that.

 

How do you get from: Sex/Love are important aspects of life (which they are) to him claiming that "everyone needs to be with someone"?

Your inability to make such an inference is not my problem.  You may form whatever conclusions you wish -and bear whatever consequences follow- or you may ask me for help. 

And if you ask me for help then make no mistake about the nature of that action.  I am not responsible for your ignorance; of my time and my effort you are entitled to absolutely nothing. 

 

So if you ask me any question again, ensure that you ask me nicely; I will accept no other terms.

Edited by Harrison Danneskjold

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Eamon Arasbard:

 

I think there are some ideas worth expanding on in your post.

One is that masturbation is a sufficient substitute for sexual desire. If a person merely wants a sexual release, that's fine. But the difference between sex and masturbation is not a matter of degree where you can at least get some satisfaction. They both can be appreciated on their own terms in different ways, so they can be differentiated as different activities entirely. Now, if your sex drive is low, then masturbation may really be able to satisfy some sexual desires, and at least be not as bothered. If you have a high sex drive, it probably won't help the desire for sexual intimacy. In any case, I doubt masturbation makes a notable difference to anyone, and at best is separate from sexual desire. Sex isn't masturbation plus one person -  adding a person changes a lot.

Another question is hold on for what? The right person for Stryker to be satisfied with? If I understand the OP correctly, holding on (read: suffering through) is not working anyway. People don't simply appear, and some pro-activity is needed. Meeting more people is good, as you say, although crazies is an unfair term when it doesn't seem to add anything helpful.

Personally, I don't think the short/long-term distinction is important. If you like someone, then that's all there is to it. If it lasts a month or 2 years, it is not any less important. Permanency is not important really, as long as love is present. Non-permanency though is why at the very least I want to remain friends with someone I enjoy a lot. Also, monogamy isn't a requirement, just in case that is a reason to avoid finding more than one person to appreciate or love.

Edited by Eiuol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Meeting more people is good, as you say, although crazies is an unfair term when it doesn't seem to add anything helpful.

 

My comment regarding the crazies may have been unnecessarily negative. Although I have found in my own case that fear of encountering "crazy" women is a factor in my reluctance to hit on members of the fairer sex. I do not know if Stryker_A has a similar problem, and I believe I have constructed a rational basis for overcoming this limitation. I will share more if it will add to the discussion.

 

On your other points -- I find that masturbation, combined with building platonic relationships with women, has been satsifactory when I've been successful at it.

 

And I definitely support having multiple partners if you're in love with multiple people. I would at minimum regard a long-term relationship as having more meaning that a short-term relationship, but I guess a short-term relationship could have value as well. This is an area where I am working on figuring out my own beliefs.

 

What I despise is people who combine short-term relatiomships with discarding their partners entirely from their life after the relationship ends. I think that if someone is a part of one's life, and they have not done anything to forfeit that, then it is both irrational and unnecessarily cruel not to count them as a friend. And if you knew a sexual relationship was going to end, then it's dumb to blame the other person when it does end. I also think that a lot of the distress men feel after the end of a relationship is caused by being completely cut out from the life of someone they're still in love with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not feel responsible for that.

 

Your inability to make such an inference is not my problem.  You may form whatever conclusions you wish -and bear whatever consequences follow- or you may ask me for help. 

And if you ask me for help then make no mistake about the nature of that action.  I am not responsible for your ignorance; of my time and my effort you are entitled to absolutely nothing. 

 

So if you ask me any question again, ensure that you ask me nicely; I will accept no other terms.

 

Another random rant. I don't have any questions for you -- I almost regret asking you anything in the first place. But, your evasion and rant-like posts does highlight the nonsensical, dogmatic nature of most of your posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My comment regarding the crazies may have been unnecessarily negative. Although I have found in my own case that fear of encountering "crazy" women is a factor in my reluctance to hit on members of the fairer sex. I do not know if Stryker_A has a similar problem, and I believe I have constructed a rational basis for overcoming this limitation. I will share more if it will add to the discussion.

Ah. So I'd say such a concern is ill-founded. Plus I'm not sure what crazy means here. I am curious about what your way to overcome this concern, I think it relates to maybe any concerns about social topics.

Depending on your sex drive, that may be sufficient - my main point is that even then, neither friendship nor masturbation will eliminate lingering desire. Sex is too different to compare on equal terms. You seem to agree at least on my main point. At the same time, it's one reason for me to say that sex is morally appropriate outside of a romantic relationship sometimes. I'm not sure if you meant to imply that labeling a relationship as romantic one is necessary.

I agree about what you said about short-term relationships. I mean, I personally see it as a uncertainty past the short-term, but cutting out someone as a friend is needlessly cruel. Define relations to people individually, not to what "relationship" means! Anyone at all would feel distress, perhaps men may feel worse because the social norm/expectation is to be non-emotional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm not sure what crazy means here.

 

Irrational, hates men, thinks she's entitled to childish emotional outbursts whenever anything doesn't go her way -- unfortunately, there are a lot of women who share these traits. And the fact that the media portrays these as representative of women in general, and a sign of female "empowerment" doesn't help.

 

 

I am curious about what your way to overcome this concern, I think it relates to maybe any concerns about social topics.

 

Well, just that women are individuals, who are capable of making their own decisions, just like men are. Plus most women have probably encountered men who disrespected them.

 

I think a lot of the way women act has to do with false premises which a lot of people accept related to gender. But women have as much reason to overcome these false ideas as men have. The efforts to overcome these notions have been skewed somewhat by an excessive focus on the female side of the coin, but this does not mean that individual women act with an intention of screwing men over, and there is no logical reason to make this assumption. In addition, it is unjust to judge individual women based on the actions of other women. Instead, women who act immorally should be condemned, while women who act morally should be treated with respect and, if they reflect our ideals in the right way, considered as sexual partners.

 

 

Depending on your sex drive, that may be sufficient - my main point is that even then, neither friendship nor masturbation will eliminate lingering desire.

 

I agree, but it can help make it more manageable.

 

 

Define relations to people individually, not to what "relationship" means!

 

Yes! Exactly! :D

 

 

Anyone at all would feel distress, perhaps men may feel worse because the social norm/expectation is to be non-emotional.

 

That, and men are also encouraged to develop an attachment to sex which is unhealthy, and judge themselves based on whether or not they can get laid. (This actually reminds me of Francisco's speech to Rearden about sex in AS.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i can certainly believe that you haven’t met a woman who is really worthwhile yet. and i don’t think the solution is to change your attitude on sex.

 

the key is realizing that you don’t need to find a perfect woman- you can create one. look for someone you’re attracted to physically and that you see some admirable qualities in (if it’s one of these girls who are already interested in you that’s even better), and work with that. a person can be introduced to Objectivism, they can be convinced by rational arguments, they can choose to focus, they can develop new interests, they can change their mind on important issues, they can completely alter their values, demeanor, and behavior. most people have bad philosophy because they just haven’t examined it. give them a real chance. if this is something you want, you can’t sit around and wait for it to fall into your lap- especially not in this culture- you may have to put some work in. expect the best in people, and help bring it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

keep in mind too that a lot of girls are fighting against themselves trying to become the type of person the culture expects them to be, when it isn’t who they really are. they may even be starting to realize on their own that it’s making them unhappy, or be trying to find the courage to give it up. pay close attention and you’ll see that much of the sluttiness, abrasiveness, and narcissism is forced. you can gauge this by comparing how someone reacts when they're caught off-guard to how they act most of the time socially.

 

if you have female friends that you want to point in the right direction, and can find a way to do so tactfully, i have found this blog, RulesRevisited, to be really helpful: http://www.therulesrevisited.com/2012/08/femininity-authenticity-and_5.html (it’s not Objectivist-approved or anything, it’s just good advice, written by a guy, for women.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you truly haven't found anyone who you are interested in sexually, there's not much to do except to shake your fists at the universe, perhaps change your strategy for how you meet people, and then hope for the best until you happen to meet "The One." But as Eiuol suggested, there have probably been plenty of people who have attracted you on at least a couple levels. Why wouldn't you have sex with those girls?

If you want sex, then you should have sex. That's pretty simple. Try it out and have fun. Let yourself be OK with trying a different attitude and approach than you've given up until now. It's easy to construct rationalistic ideas about sex without any actual experience. With some experience, however, you can begin to validate or invalidate the things about sex which you've concluded so far.

I think you have a very good attitude towards this issue.

 

You have to find your likes and dislikes through experience. Values are found by experienceing life and not by some rationalistic process where you can sit, detached from the world, and just figure things out. Essentialy, you have to try things out and take risks. Not like some mindless idiot who bangs his head against a wall just to see if it hurts, but choosing what seems like the best course of action to achieve certain values. You will undoubtedly make mistakes, but those mistakes can be very important too.

 

I'd like to make a few personal anecdotes, to hopefully show you what I mean.

 

I've always been a romantic. My first conception of love was Cyrano de'Bergerac when I was around ten years old. I think Ayn Rand did a very good job of illustrating the ideals that I hold so very dearly.

I would not sacrifice that "ideal" for anything in this world. There is nothing that would ever make me settle or think "good enough". Sadly, because I don't think I will ever get what I want.

 

That may seem very idealistic, but it's all because I know. I have made mistakes, hade sex with the wrong girls and had my heart broken. Lots of mistakes. Certainly no regrets, but mistakes none the less.

 

When I was 21 and still a Virgin, I concluded that I just needed to experience sex. I was very introverted and did not get any attention from women. Still, I decided enough was enough. Some experiences you just don't want live without, and I figured as long as I managed the risks I would be reasonably safe.

 

I got lucky. More than ten years later I still think I got lucky. She had stunning looks and was very sweet and intelligent. I liked her. Not much more, but I liked her.

 

What I learned from that experience was that sex is not such a big deal. I don't mean to treat it cheaply, it's just that when you let go of all that baggage leading up to it, it just seems so simple. I was thinking what the hell all the fuss was about, while seeing the great potential it held.

 

That's the kind of experience you can't have sitting in front of your computer and just thinking about it. You can imagine all kinds of things and still have no idea. Wether it's good or bad you have to experience it before you at least have a clue. I'm not saying it's just so extra special and Amazing. The first time rarely is. But, unless you're really stupid about it, it's a valuable experience.

 

I have also experienced sex with women i've been in love with. It's a whole different dimension to sex. If you, for some reason, think that sex with someone you love is the best thing in the world.... well, you're right. It is. Nothing could compare.

The problem is, you don't actually KNOW it. You may think you do, but you don't. You haven't experienced it. I'm sure you can imagine some things. You can construct this whole idea in you head of how it is, perhaps even imagine everything in great detail, and base that on what others have told you. That's not the reality of it. If you have experienced sex as the physical expression of your soul, then you understand.

 

That does not mean that anything lesser than "the physical expression of your soul" is bad. It simply means that it's a lesser value. Those lesser values can get you closer though.

 

It's especially true for men. Normally, women have it a lot easier to get sex (love is a different matter). For a man, being the one who can pick and choose is important. It means not being limited to the scarce one who shows some interest. It means having oppurtunity and options. It means having much greater chances of finding someone who matches your values.

 

Speaking of values, how do you know what you value if you have no experience?

 

In my later years I have met quite a lot of women. It seems like I just go about my own business and run across someone. When it comes to sex i'm not too picky. If I like her and I find her attractive, we're probably going to have sex. I'm more picky these days than I used to be. It's mostly because I feel i'm getting old too fast and I don't want waste any time on things that don't lead anywhere.

 

However, the experiences i've had have been very valuable. I know a lot more about what I want than I did ten years ago. I've had my share of mistakes that tell me what to avoid. I've also had my share of good experiences to tell me what I really value.

 

Just to give you an example. I did not know how much I valued intellecutal discourse until I met a very good friend and collegue. She may not be what i'm looking for romantically, but I could truly never love someone lesser. She's fun, challenging and we bring the best out of each other. She's like a sister to me. Thanks to her, i've learned how important these things are to me.

 

Still, life is too short to spend with longing and unfullfilled desires. Life is fragile and precious. If you're unlucky you may be run over by a buss tomorrow (I certainly hope that's not the case). Is your life exciting and fullfulling today, or would you have wasted your days if tomorrow never comes? Have you had the excitement and adventure you crave, or would you find yourself lacking? Would you rather have had sex with plenty of women, than die tomorrow a virgin?

 

At 21 I hope you feel immortal. When you get older there's another sense of urgency. Not like desperation, but a realisation that we're only immortal for a limited time and there's so much of life to experience.

 

Don't waste that. Go out and chase girls. Have fun. get laid and find someone to keep.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

How should a discriminating young man approach/view sex if no one he encounters shares his values? 

 

I am a 21 year old male that is at a dilemma in my life. I agree with Rand in her belief that sex should be the physical expression of love between two people who admire values in each other. However, I have not yet found a woman who has the values I admire in her and am extremely picky with my partners. Throughout my life I have rejected dozens of offers from girls to be in relationships with them and I really do not think I will find this woman anytime soon. I have raging hormones and it is highly frustrating to get offers from tons of girls (many who are very attractive), but decline due to me not being attracted to their personality. Due to my pickiness I have no sexual experience and I fear that I am losing out on an important aspect of life. What advice would you give me to help my situation?

 

 

You need to rethink the importance of 'values' in terms of their particular seriousnesses. For example, is she an outright racist (unacceptable0, or is it simply a matter of political pov? Frequently, people really do share the same values, but envisige contrasting political solutions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And yes, people *are* more idiotic in college (*caveats and qualifiers*). Have you been to a college campus lately? I live two minutes down the road from the world's largest, OSU.

 Perhaps you would like to back this statement up with some type of evidence? Or just proclaim things as if they are fact. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The scenario:

Older, immature children are given a boatload of money they did not earn and freedom they did not previously have, virtually overnight. Wiser eyes do not keep tabs on the children's behavior as they had always done before, no longer interjecting or demanding changes. Then, thousands of these children are thrown together in hotel-like living quarters, which they do not own or care about, being known temporary holdings. Their supposed goals and reasons for existing are vague and distant: "grades," "career," "degree." They have no real stake in anything about their lives, as they are not working or paying for it. Most have probably not worked a day in their lives, and thus cannot truly appreciate much of anything around them. Nothing has legitimate context and nothing presses urgency or real-ness onto their persons. [Edit:] Oh, and their everyday peers and new social acquaintances can and do get the alcohol and keep it freely flowing. And the same with pot.

 

Does this sound like a recipe for smart behavior, or does it sound like a recipe for idiotic behavior?

Edited by JASKN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And yes, people *are* more idiotic in college (*caveats and qualifiers*). Have you been to a college campus lately? I live two minutes down the road from the world's largest, OSU.

 

This is an opinion based upon your own interpretation. What proof backs this statement up? I could give a specific qualifier to every circumstance and shape it the way I want to as well. Also, OSU is not the worlds largest campus. Not by enrollment nor area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is an opinion based upon your own interpretation. What proof backs this statement up? I could give a specific qualifier to every circumstance and shape it the way I want to as well. Also, OSU is not the worlds largest campus. Not by enrollment nor area.

I guess you forgot my second post which you objected to, where I literally wrote, "qualifiers..." What "proof" would you have me give? Should I go and interview each student? Their parents?

One hard fact which you could deny (though didn't provide evidence for yourself) is OSU's world size rank, which turns out is probably around 150 -- though at 50,000 attendees within a square mile, it's big enough for the points I made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...