Hear hear! It’s a strange, sad, limited world that these people inhabit, where Men Only Fuck Women, but Only Like Other Men. It really clarifies the source of certain misogynistic and homophobic assumptions.

I guess I never will get how there can be so many (supposedly) heterosexual men who really don’t like women at all. It’s totally bizarre.

On this not-so-delicate subject, I’ve heard plenty of my 40- and 50-something male peers complain that they were born several decades too early. But I have never, ever heard a woman say she’d prefer today’s hooking-up system to the dating rituals we grew up with.

pffft. I’ve been saying for years that hooking up is a much better system than dating, which is horribly awkward and fraught with stoopid rules that make everyone miserable. though I will admit that it works less well with Americans; with Americans, you first need to find an enclave of men who haven’t been raised to be misogynists, and only then can you go and enjoy the freedom and fun that is the casual hookup

Yeah, as a recent college graduate, it was hella weird when guys would take my roommate out on dates after hooking up. Much easier to just move from hooking up to being friends-with-benefits to being exclusive or whatever (which is what i did).

There’s plenty of time in our late 20s to get into the whole “internet dating” thing.

I guess I never will get how there can be so many (supposedly) heterosexual men who really don’t like women at all.

Really. The whole notion of wanting to have sex with a person you hate blows my mind.

Most men love women, contrary to what might be portrayed in the media.  There are, however, a sizeable number to whom women are nothing more than life support systems for pussies.  They will reap what they sow and will die lonely and bitter.

I’m with Steve and Ben.  I don’t get it.  If you aren’t gay and you don’t like women, I guess that pretty much makes you a jerk-off. 

Well, even if you are gay, it’s no excuse to be a misogynist who thinks women have nothing to offer the world but their pussies.

oh fuck, I just re-read that article (after just skimming over it earlier).

women use hook-ups to find husbands? men are a scarce resource? what the everglorious fuck?!

that’s not how it works. women use hook-ups to get sex, and most of the time that’s it. sometimes the chemistry is right and things move beyond hook-ups into friends-with-benefits or even relationships, but that’s incidental, not the goal.

For aeons, women were taught that they were sinful, stupid, parasitical; that even their prime function: having babies, was disgusting.  Women were sub-human.  that the only way to gain self-esteem, and the esteem of MEN was to deny and repress our feminine humanity and sexuality, all the while behaving and dressing to show off out feminine traits.  Crazy Making.

Feminism is beginning to undo these terrible viscous ideas.

Men have been taught for aeons that all they ‘need’ from a woman is sex.  And if the woman isn’t too hideous and disgusting she is allowed to feed them and clean up after them, and have “their” children, but they’d better have BOYS.

It’s pitiful that so-called intelligent men really seem to believe this shit.  What miserable, lonely and wretched lives they must lead, all the while boasting of how “free” they are. 

Somehow I can’t feel sorry for them.  They should know better, they DO know better, they just can’t admit it.

My marriage began as a hookup.  And I definitely resisted a relationship at first, my husband was the one who wanted me around.

Of course, I also play the videogames with him (Borderlands was made for my marriage). And I don’t really like shopping for pants. So I guess I’m not so hateful, even if I’m not hawt.

I have to still question what it is exactly that women are getting out of the hook up culture.  I’m not trying to be an asshole; I personally don’t see the appeal, but I’m willing to accept that other women get something out of it.  But when only 30 percent of women orgasm during one time/first time hook ups, what are they getting out of it, because it’s certainly not sexual gratification.

I think another problem with the Zimmerman account is that it takes behavior that exists strictly in the hot house environment of college and the college age years as identical to all male/female relationships everywhere at all times.  College is not very like other social organizations—same age people are cut loose from family and other friends and responsibilities, are working towards individual goals (graduation, a good job) and are expecting to move on, alone, afterwards.  Many of the things for which people come to depend on a spouse are taken care of by their parents or their college for the entire duration. They are also free to make and keep friendships around study and leisure time. This is completely different from the world men and women face outside of college.  As far as I can see both men and women are looking for different things in college than out—its not the case that men want to have sex and women want to find a “meal ticket” or a “boyfriend” or a husband.  Both men and women experience college life as a time to experiement socially and sexually before starting the very different world of adult work and socialization.  Both men and women can and do rely on the college itself, or their roomates, for many of the social and emotional supports that adult men and women find in their mates.  Its not surprising that some portion of male undergraduates think or say that they don’t “need women” for anything other than sex.  For the moment their emotional, social, and other needs are met by the group as a whole. But wait a year, until they are out of school? They’ll find that they need women for a whole lot more than sex and that their guy friends don’t even begin to touch the surface of the emotional and familial needs that they have.

aimai

I have to still question what it is exactly that women are getting out of the hook up culture.  I’m not trying to be an asshole; I personally don’t see the appeal, but I’m willing to accept that other women get something out of it.  But when only 30 percent of women orgasm during one time/first time hook ups, what are they getting out of it, because it’s certainly not sexual gratification.

That’s probably not significantly lower than the percentage rate of orgasms for any discrete sexual encounter between a man and a woman, even in a relationship.  Relationships are far from a guarantee for orgasms; on the contrary, if you establish a pattern where he gets off and you don’t, then you’re often stuck with it.

The appeal is the same as it is for men.  Turns out men and women are remarkably alike!  You’re horny, and your inhibitions are lowered by that and often by alcohol.  You hook up.  If it’s not really appealing, you go your separate ways.  If it’s appealing, then you stick it out.

In other words, it’s dating.  The only difference between “hooking up” and dating is how soon you have sex.  That’s it.  In both, you’re spending time with someone for sexual reasons.  In both, there’s an understanding that if it’s not working, you’re free to go without a fuss.  It’s the same, except you get to know them naked sooner.  And that can often mean getting to know if they’re willing to bring you to orgasm way before you waste many dates on them that could be spent with someone better.

aimai, to add to what you’ve said, more reasonable observers of the college “hook-up” culture find that non-committing is equally driven by women, usually because they, like men, can’t really be bothered to invest in a relationship they expect will be a drain on their time and energy that they need to get ahead in the world.

And it turns out—surprise, surprise—that most guys don’t want the second part, so long as they get the first.

My guess is that this guy doesn’t actually know any guys.  I’ve been “hooking up” since before I even knew there was a term for it.  When I was a teenager and liked sex but clearly wasn’t ready for marriage, it just seemed most sensible to have friends with benefits rather than commit to a long-term relationship.  However, at least half of the boys I hooked up with wanted more than just sex, and a few of them even brought up the L-word or even marriage proposals.  I remember this because it was a problem I never expected to have, because I had been convinced that men only want NSA sex.  There were many times when I felt tremendous guilt about not returning the feelings men had for me, even though I knew I had made my intentions as clear as possible.

But when only 30 percent of women orgasm during one time/first time hook ups, what are they getting out of it

Orgasm is not the ultimate goal of sex.  For women, sex can feel amazingly, awesomely awesome the entire time.  It’s really indescribably ecstatic regardless of an orgasm at the end.  If you don’t know this, then I feel very sorry for any woman unlucky enough to sleep with you.

But I have never, ever heard a woman say she’d prefer today’s hooking-up system to the dating rituals we grew up with.

How could he possible hear women say anything when he doesn’t bother to listen to them?  I’m sure he’ll never listen to me, but I’ll say it anyway: I prefer my current hook-up culture over the terrible system my parents’ generation grew up with.

“No real commitment, no real feelings involved, this is like an immature guy’s paradise,” Bogle said one male student told her. “I mean this is what guys have been wanting for many, many years. And women have always resisted, but now they are going along with it.”

Fixed that for him. Tastes amongst people who are into NSA vary, of course, but I personally find it more satisfying to hook up with women whom I genuinely like as people (what, casual affection and sympatico aren’t feelings?). I’m more of an FWB guy, but even for standard NSA I’m not gonna play with someone I dislike any more than I will play with a girl I don’t have physical chemistry with.

And the assumption that women hate sex without commitment is as absurd as his implication that the “hook-up system” somehow tricks them into going along with it. I suppose I should be thankful for these clods, who make me look good by comparison, but they must be a trial for sensible women.

On this not-so-delicate subject, I’ve heard plenty of my 40- and 50-something male peers complain that they were born several decades too early. But I have never, ever heard a woman say she’d prefer today’s hooking-up system to the dating rituals we grew up with.

Clearly Zimmerman’s 40- and 50-something male peers are as blinkered and repressed as he is—either that or (more likely) they wish they were 20 years old again so they could hook up with 20-year-old girls they feel entitled to—girls who wouldn’t even look at their sloppy and sexist current selves.

Similarly, Zimmerman obviously doesn’t hang out with any women except those ring-chasers who are disciples of “The Rules.” If this dope widened his social circle to actual liberals he might find both women and men who understand that commitment can exist with or without feelings, and vice-versa. And that sex can exist without both or either.

I have to still question what it is exactly that women are getting out of the hook up culture.

How about sex without drama? How about some intimate physical connection with another person without the baggage of expectations?

It’s not all about the orgasm, for men or women.

It seems like the “hook-up” culture really isn’t that different from dating, you just have sex more than you go to dinner and movies.  Given the nation has an obesity problem maybe activities that burn calories rather than ones that consume oil covered popcorn and fried food at Chili’s should be encouraged.

I don’t know; for some women, having sex without orgasm can be more trouble than it’s worth, since it leaves you unsatisfied and resentful (if he didn’t put in the effort).  However, there are arguments for discovering if a man is a dud in bed sooner rather than later.

We were hooking up in college back in the early 80s—we just didn’t call it that. Nobody dated, as Zimmerman seems to understand the word; he says “the dating culture we grew up with” but that dating culture has been dead now for what, 25 years?

“Dating rituals,” sorry.

Or more Jenofiniquity.  I graduated from high school in 1989 and i didn’t know ANYone who actually “dated”.  that was more my parents’ generation, back in the 60s and early 70s and even then it was dying.

It isn’t just misogyny, it’s misandry, too.  The author accomplishes the seemingly imppossible task of insulting both males and females at the same time.  What you say about the author’s worldview of women is correct, but what in the hell does that say about men?

Orgasm is not the ultimate goal of sex.  For women, sex can feel amazingly, awesomely awesome the entire time.  It’s really indescribably ecstatic regardless of an orgasm at the end.  If you don’t know this, then I feel very sorry for any woman unlucky enough to sleep with you.

Keshimeshi is, of course, female, and doesn’t find the prospect appealing. Therefore, naturally, she is bad in bed. Nice.

I was always under the impression, really, that there had been “hooking up” ever since teenagers began driving/owning cars, even in the ‘50s, since that gave them mobility (as well as privacy) form their parents.

I think catgirl’s reaction was based on the idea that kesh is a straight male.  If you look at it from that perspective, the 30% number looks like a guy shrugging off responsibility to see that his partner has a good time, a responsibility that women take as a given when they go to bed with a man.  I’m sure it’s all a misunderstanding.

Agreed that an orgasm is not the end-all-be-all of sex. Some of the most fun and sexy and exciting encounters of my life didn’t end in orgasm (sometimes for me, sometimes for him). I’m only left unsatisfied and resentful if the entire encounter tends that way. If the dude is trying, attentively and responsively, most people (MOST) will feel respected and sexed-up regardless.

BUT, that aside, hooking up **in the context of current sexual politics** is not an unadulterated good for women, or even necessarily for men.

In a vacuum, yes, it’s a perfect win-win. Everyone has the fun they are looking for, no strings attached. But unfortunately we all bring our existant baggage to the setup, which means that yes, some dudes approach it like Zimmerman et al. And some women bring their guilt about female sexuality into it, and some women seem to think that it really *should* lead to a long-term thing, and if it doesn’t it means they aren’t good enough.

I have steered a couple friends away from hook-ups lately, simply by reminding them that when someone tells you they are Looking For NSA Sex, you should believe them. When they heard this and internalized it, they promptly announced “no more hookups for me, I’m looking for an SO”. The catch: one friend was a woman, and one was a man. There is confusion all ‘round.

It seems like the “hook-up” culture really isn’t that different from dating, you just have sex more than you go to dinner and movies.

It’s not even a question of favouring one activity instead of another—it’s taking away the patriarchal demands associated with one activity in particular, making it a heck of a lot more fun and relaxing in the process.

In other words, it’s nice when going to dinner and having sex is an acceptable alternative to going to dinner and watching a movie. Heck, do all three, although Applebees won’t be the best restaurant choice for that kind of evening—skip the popcorn, too.

he says “the dating culture we grew up with” but that dating culture has been dead now for what, 25 years?

More. The “dating rituals” he’s talking about are part of that 1950s-that-never-were that conservatives long for—my guess is that Zimmerman “grew up” with those rituals only to the extent that he watched the later seasons of Happy Days.

<forehead slap>

If the PARTNER is trying, attentively and responsively, most people (MOST) will feel respected and sexed-up regardless.

If only 30% of women have an orgasm during a ‘hook up’, I’d say that’s still a better success rate than dating. 30% of women hooking up get what they’re looking for. What’s the percentage of dates that end up with what you’re looking for (a long term relationship)?

Even then… women get horny. Just like real people. Imagine that.

Even if they don’t get fulfilled most of the time, if you’re horny you’re not exactly in a state of mind to lay down the long term investment to start a relationship to get some sex. You want it NOW, goddammit. That’s true whether you’re guy, gal, or anything in between.

And men look for relationships too. I’ve seen the ‘woman is after NSA sex and guy wants to date’ thing way often. In fact, because of these toxic gender roles these men expect to get what they want and will attack women who are only into the sex (slut shaming).

Its interesting to me that Zimmerman thinks that women want “what they always want” which is love, and men want what they could never admit to before, which is sex without strings. Its a very evo-psych pop culture story but it is, of course, totally divorced from the reality in which both men and women operate.

Previously, of course, we were taught that women wanted sex without consequences—that’s why it was so important to prevent women from gaining access to the pill, or abortion—while men really want *exclusive control* over their females (which is why men prefer to marry before they have children.)  Its really interesting that Zimmerman’s imaginary college age guys exhibit none of the desire for exclusivity and control that, in the real world, women confront every day.  I mean—who are the guys who call you every five minutes to make sure you aren’t seeing someone else? Or who follow you home from class? Or who threaten to kill themselves, or you, if you leave them? Do they just not exist in Zimmerman’s happy happy sex all the time world?  Are they not also guys? the MRA’s certainly consider themselves to be men. And there seem to be a lot of them.

aimai

BUT, that aside, hooking up **in the context of current sexual politics** is not an unadulterated good for women, or even necessarily for men.

Well, of course not.  But that could be said about anything, couldn’t it?  Therein lies the problem—-yes, women are at a disadvantage in the modern dating scene, but they were at an even more severe disadvantage in the older dating scene. The real problem isn’t that girls have sex; it’s that men have more power and social esteem than women.

I was always under the impression, really, that there had been “hooking up” ever since teenagers began driving/owning cars, even in the ‘50s, since that gave them mobility (as well as privacy) form their parents.

And before Henry Ford, there were wagons and horses. With the right horse, you could probably drive 30 minutes away from home, hop in the back, and arrive back home from “just a quick trip to town” without arousing suspicion.

“But I have never, ever heard a woman say she’d prefer today’s hooking-up system to the dating rituals we grew up with.”

Probably because it’d be the equivalent of saying “I’m a giant whore, please feel free to treat me even more poorly than is your wont” to either the author or any of his friends?

Excellent point, aimai.  Unfortunately, in this toxic environment, that kind of obsession with control is often spun as romantic, something a woman should desire. Exhibit #1: Twilight.

Or who threaten to kill themselves, or you, if you leave them?

True dat. How does my cousin’s ex-bf who hung himself in the barn on Xmas eve as a final “fuck you” to her and her family for leaving him fit into Zimmerman’s worldview?

women are at a disadvantage in the modern dating scene, but they were at an even more severe disadvantage in the older dating scene. The real problem isn’t that girls have sex; it’s that men have more power and social esteem than women.

Naturally. My comment was written to be more of a response to Keshmeshi’s initial ruminating. Women get a lot out of hooking up—it’s just that a fair chunk of what they get out of it is Bad. It’s worth discussing whether or not the balance sheet comes up positive.

Under the old system, it ALWAYS comes up negative. If, under this system, it’s coming up negative more times than not (I don’t know that it is—but it may be) then we need to start exploring System #3.

(All of this being said with the knowledge that changing cultural mores and social power imbalances is great—but time-consuming. People need ways of moving through the imperfect world, the less damaging the better.)

that’s not how it works. women use hook-ups to get sex, and most of the time that’s it. sometimes the chemistry is right and things move beyond hook-ups into friends-with-benefits or even relationships, but that’s incidental, not the goal.

Sex does create an emotional bond.  Or, at least, that’s been my experience.  You can’t just dine and dash.  The hook-up to FWB to relationship to exclusivity is the natural progression in a pairing where the couple likes each other.  But then the couple usually likes each other when they hook up to begin with.

So while men and women both might use hook-ups to get sex initially, there is a good chance that - unless the sex was just awful or you wake up thinking your partner is gross - you’ll start walking down Relationship Road shortly after shacking up.

A combination of not wanting to lose a good thing (the first sex is always the hardest to get) and not wanting to share (I haven’t met a girl yet who enjoyed the idea of her current love interest sleeping with another girl), inevitably leads to exclusivity.

From my experience, it’s a natural course of events.

With the right horse, you could probably drive 30 minutes away from home, hop in the back, and arrive back home from “just a quick trip to town” without arousing suspicion.

Whoa, now.  Is this a guy and a girl and a horse, a guy and a girl on a horse, or just a guy and his horse?  I’m pretty sure “jumping in the back” of your non-Ford mustang is illegal in most states.

Zinfab, I think that horse was pulling a cart.  But I did have to read it twice, cause I got the same thing out of it you did the first time.

Just because that guy does not like women he believes no man does. When he discovers that people have different tastes in music or food he’ll probably have an identity crisis.

Magis #6: They will reap what they sow and will die lonely and bitter.

And convinced that this is proof of their superiority.

Well, what #28: In a vacuum, yes, it’s [=hooking up] a perfect win-win.

But current sexual politics will enter, no matter the ritual. So it’s better to go for the ritual one prefers, and wait for time and numbers to make “current” into “past”. People will always be insecure and compensate for it in different manners, be it by grandstanding or by trying to barter for approval. Muddling through with the feeling that everyone else has the manual is a basic of the human condition. If that was a reason not to do or change anything, nothing would ever get done or changed. Dating war probably quite scandalous and revolutionary if you go back a little further than two generations.

Sex does create an emotional bond.  Or, at least, that’s been my experience.  You can’t just dine and dash.

Maybe you can’t. Others can and do.

Also, the term “dine-and-dash” inadvertantly implies the sad Libertarian view of sex as just another economic transaction between two rational actors. And often the actors ain’t rational or looking for anything other than mutual pleasure.

The hook-up to FWB to relationship to exclusivity is the natural progression in a pairing where the couple likes each other.

“Natural progression”? I’ve had FWBs with whom I have no romantic relationship, let alone exclusivity, and none of the parties involved considered it “unnatural” to stop there. When I was younger I also had fun hook-ups that were one-night-stands—no real regrets there, either.

From my experience, it’s a natural course of events.

While it may work for you, your experience isn’t universal—don’t make Zimmerman’s mistake and assume it is.

Whoa, now.  Is this a guy and a girl and a horse, a guy and a girl on a horse, or just a guy and his horse?  I’m pretty sure “jumping in the back” of your non-Ford mustang is illegal in most states.

Heh. Should’ve been more clear—back of the wagon. The horses had enough problems in those days.

But current sexual politics will enter, no matter the ritual. So it’s better to go for the ritual one prefers, and wait for time and numbers to make “current” into “past”.

I get this. It’s perhaps just my personal difficulty balancing my own rah-rah feminism with the actual person in front of me, who knows she’s *supposed* to enjoy hooking up (after all, in the circles we run with, Good Feminists DO, as often as humanly possible…) but doesn’t, and now thinks she’s both

a) a bad woman, and
b) a terrible feminist.

I’m out of this discussion because I’m monogamously married, but aren’t we long past the age when “good feminists do…” have hook ups all the time because they think they are “supposed to?” I mean, jeezus christ haven’t we moved past “the place for a woman in the movement is on her back?”  I’m going to be sending my daughter off to highschool next year. I don’t think the feminism she has been exposed to presupposes that having sex is anything you *ever* do if you don’t want to do it. 

When I went to college, and in the years after, you were certainly judged as a woman (not as a feminist) by how sexually attractive you were. But you were not judged more sucessful by the number of partners you had had, but by how intensely desired you were. As for being judged as a feminist? you were judged by how sucessful you were in the work world, not by the number or quality of your sexual partners. When did feminism get reduced to a ranking of your sexual availability to others?

aimai

Dating wa[s] probably quite scandalous and revolutionary if you go back a little further than two generations.

Back in the day, weren’t parents just supposed to line up their kids and marry them off for convenience’s sake?  And before that, there are lots of ancient rituals that involve men on horseback riding into town seizing whatever women they can find, and dragging them back home to be raped and worked as slave labor (true conservative paradise, that).

I’m sure the idea that two people would actually select each other to date, rather than having their elders do it for them, was a shocking and unheard of innovation a few hundred years back.  I can almost hear the great-grandparents of my great-grandparents:  “You want to marry WHICH cousin?!”  (because, you know, 200 years ago everyone just married their cousins).

Well, what? I’m not sure what your point is. I mean, I’m a little older than some of the posters here, and my parents fretted about things like my “reputation” when I was in college, which mystified me since we didn’t know our neighbors, but yes, there was more stigma then than now. But even then, in conservative TX in the late 80s…it really wasn’t that big a deal. Once you got out of HS and weren’t living at home, nobody really cared what you did. Or if a given guy made a deal out of your “number” or whatever, then you dated a different guy.  All of the girls I knew who hooked up ended up exactly the same as those who didn’t; married and/or divorced, maybe single, discovering they were actually gay, whatever.

If you’re talking about violence as in rape/stalking, then that’s a separate issue from hooking up, and I can tell you w/out exception that being a “good” virginal girl is no protection whatsoever from dudes like that, because it’s about power, not sex.

Zimmerman:  “On this not-so-delicate subject, I’ve heard plenty of my 40- and 50-something male peers complain that they were born several decades too early. But I have never, ever heard a woman say she’d prefer today’s hooking-up system to the dating rituals we grew up with.”

This 50-year-old female grew up in a hookup culture and went on almost no “dates.”  Does no one remember the seventies?

I like dating but I like hook-ups too. It’s just a different kind of relationship. Some people I just want to have sex with. Hook-up or FWB. Some people I enjoy spending time with and talking to and may have romantic feelings for, and those people I date. I’ve noticed some people find this hard to grasp because they think in terms of the kind of person - stud or nice guy, slut or good girl - instead of the kind of relationship. The same person can want both.

I do think dating is a lost art, though. In my impetuous youth, it was all about the intense 24/7 instant relationship - living together right away, sex around the clock, sharing every last secret. Drama and suffocation soon to follow. Now if I like someone, I prefer to draw it out, savor it, get to know them, enjoy the anticipation and romance of dating someone new. And also I’m an adult now and have a full life, blending time and friends and habits with a new lover is an adjustment. But it’s amazing how many people feel rejected if you don’t want to drop everything and see them every single night.

The misogynistic anti-hookup culture really plays a standard game of conservative and reactionary movements:  react to social change by pointing out that a.) it’s still a flawed system and b.) there may be new risks for some people and ignore the whole concept it might still be an improvement. 

There is this set of people who respond to improvement by calling for its destruction, on the grounds that it’s not ‘perfect.’

“Does no one remember the seventies?”

...is that a trick question?

This 50-year-old female grew up in a hookup culture and went on almost no “dates.” Does no one remember the seventies?

Conservative nostalgia isn’t based on memory, it’s based on fantasy.  It’s like thinking of the 8th century as a great time to have a sword and fight dragons instead of a time when you’d be lucky to keep your teeth past 25 and nobody took baths.  The problem is that they try to make their fantasy real life.

This 50-year-old female grew up in a hookup culture and went on almost no “dates.” Does no one remember the seventies?

That was my first thought too.  I’m in my thirties, and “hookup culture” seems about the same now as it was when I was in college.  In the decades before that, college kids were even more promiscuous—after all, my generation had to worry about AIDS.

When I was in college, my mother told me, with this wry, knowing smile, that it was “pretty great” to be a college student in the 70s.  I didn’t want to know the details, but I got the impression they didn’t involve the chaste, formal “dating rituals” Zimmerman seems to think were the norm.

Casual sex has been part of the college experience since colleges went coed.  When the hell were the authors of columns like this born, the Restoration Period?

IMO, “Twilight” is chiefly popular because Stephanie Meyer has caught pubescent lightning in a bottle by presenting young girls (and some adult women) with an idealized combination of a bad boy who is ultimately sensitive and non-threatening at the same time.

As such, the result in Edward Cullen is a boyfriend who could only exist in fiction because Christ knows that no girl reading “Twilight” is ever going to find his human counterpart on their side of the page.

What do people even mean by “hookup culture”? To hear some people talk, you’d think that the social scene for the under thirty-five set is modeled exclusively on gay bathhouses of the 1970s. A lot of what gets called “hookup culture” consists of people hanging out with large groups of friends and periodically pairing off with others in their general social circle. It’s not like everyone who hooks up goes home with a complete stranger they never expect to see again. (Not that there’s anything wrong with that.)

Hooking up is an alternative to the traditional dating model where you have to split off from your friends and go on a certain number of outings as a couple before you decide to have sex, after which you can reintegrate into the social scene as a pair. (Not that there’s anything wrong with that, either.)

It seems like what really distinguishes “hookup culture” from the old paradigm is that the meaning of sex is negotiated on a case-by-case basis and it can be renegotiated over the course of a relationship. What began as a casual encounter might turn out to have been the start of a friendship or a romance, or not.

I really hate it when people act like men don’t want more than quick sex. Sure, a hookup can provide this, but it can also provide a segue into a relationship, which many men may desire[otherwise why would they participate in relationships if they don’t want them?]

and aimai, sure, some feminists do enjoy multiple partners, but others of us are committed monogamists or asexuals, etc.

Well, what?—The problem is any kind of mandatory sexuality.  That’s the no-no.  Feminism means having sex on our terms, not turning down hookups if you really want ‘em, but not having ‘em if you really don’t.

Sex does create an emotional bond.  Or, at least, that’s been my experience.  You can’t just dine and dash.

yeah you can. or at least, I can. But calling it dine-and-dash isn’t always right either, since the hookup is often with someone out of your extended friend-circle. you stay friends afterwards, not be an ass and pretend the person doesn’t exist!
It’s very possible we see this from different perspectives, since I’m talking about high-school in Germany and you’re probably talking about college in the States. Long-term relationships make more sense in college than in high-school, where the average length of a relationship was maybe 2 weeks anyway :-p

The hook-up to FWB to relationship to exclusivity is the natural progression in a pairing where the couple likes each other.  But then the couple usually likes each other when they hook up to begin with.So while men and women both might use hook-ups to get sex initially, there is a good chance that - unless the sex was just awful or you wake up thinking your partner is gross - you’ll start walking down Relationship Road shortly after shacking up.

it’s not “natural” in the sense of “inevitable”. I’ve had two fuck-buddies (one in high-school, and another later after dropping out of college) with whom there was never anything romantic; trying to force a relationship out of that would have been wrong. And the sex was good with FB #1, and abso-fucking-lutely awesome with FB#2, both of which were also my friends.

This 50-year-old female grew up in a hookup culture and went on almost no “dates.” Does no one remember the seventies?

*snicker*

yeah, I’ve been on a single date ever, and I’m not ever planning on repeating that experience. I seem to have acquired sufficient sex and even boyfriends without ever needing to date.

I always feel left out of these conversations. I’ve never had sex even though I’ve been in college for years now. I like the thought of dating and getting to know someone before having sex although I haven’t dated much. (Busy College Student) I find hooking up completely unappealing but I would never ever say anyone shouldn’t if they wanted to. My actions fit that steotypical “good girl” character the conservatives love to talk about. And it seems that is how people see me. Recently a friends very religious father commented on how he was glad I was such a “good girl”. If the situation had been appropriate, his daughters engagement party is neither the time nor the place, I would have gone on a feminist rant about how my morality is not tied to my sexuality. Plus I was seriously insulted that he thinks I am the way I am because of his patriarchal religion. (I’m an Atheist) Is anyone else stuck in this awkward place? Liberal in belief but conservative in personal practice?

When I was in college, my mother told me, with this wry, knowing smile, that it was “pretty great” to be a college student in the 70s.

that just reminded me of the one major conversation I had with my mom about STD’s. the most memorable line from that was “in my days, we’d just get a needle in our butt-cheek, and we’d be fine again. today, you need to be sooo much more careful!”

thanks, mom :-p

———

also, I agree with what Lindsay says at #59, though I’d amend it to say that it’s a mix of a wee bit of that “bath-house culture” and having an alternative to dating.

yeah you can. or at least, I can. But calling it dine-and-dash isn’t always right either, since the hookup is often with someone out of your extended friend-circle. you stay friends afterwards, not be an ass and pretend the person doesn’t exist!

Firstly, that’s a false dichotomy.  Sex changes the relationship, and that can make things awkward.  Particularly when the circle of friends includes ex’s on one or both sides of the equation.  So there’s a lot of distance between bff’s forever and ignoring each other.  And that space can get very uncomfortable.

I mean, I’ll admit, maybe I have absolutely no clue how to find and maintain a FB, because it always seemed to cascade into a relationship when I tried it.  Either way, I’ve never slept with a girl and not felt closer to her when I was done.  And I’ve never witnessed “no strings attached” affairs.  :-p So I don’t know.  If it’s possible, it’s not easy enough.

I hear you, kiki.  I arrived at the same place a bit differently (massive introvert + theater geek + not typically attractive = no sex, even though I wanted it), but I totally get being annoyed at the assumptions about “personal virtue” or whatever.  And feeling left out of what it seems like everyone else is doing.

I didn’t have my first relationship until I left college - I hit it off with a guy I worked with, we hung out a lot (not much that looked like the 50’s-fantasy “dating” though), and finally realized/decided we both wanted to be more than friends.  Fast-forward ten years and we’re married with three kids.

(You want to talk about bizarrely conservative in personal practice?  Not only is my husband the only person I’ve ever slept with, he’s the only person I’ve ever kissed.  The handful of times this has come up in conversation, I’ve had to point out that we were having lots of sex *long* before considering marriage and I never planned for it to happen this way!)

Yeah, I’ve never been kissed. I’ve been hugged at the ends of awkward dates but that is really it. As far as dating vs hanging out, I supposed what I mean is closer to hanging out. The kinds of fun casual things you do with your friends. Watching movies, going hiking, modifying fireworks to fly or blow up bigger… **Mwah Ha Ha!!** You know, the usual.

Is anyone else stuck in this awkward place? Liberal in belief but conservative in personal practice?

I am.  It can be very frustrating, especially when other people are casting off the shackles of their sexually repressive training, trying to sell one on “liberated” or “rational” sexuality, and hinting that people whose sex lives are more conservative than theirs are boring/stupid/miserable/Republican/whatever.

The good news is that by the time you hit your late twenties, most people who favour hookups, polyamory, etc., will have calmed down about it and stopped looking for validation from you.  (Assuming you don’t change your mind about those things, of course.  I didn’t, but you might.)

kiki @ #63: Me. I’m asexual, and people tend to think I’m a prude. Some people think this is good, which pisses me off as I do not want to be the poster child for weirdo abstinence woman-hatey stuff, and some people think this is bad, since I have no desire to be “fixed” by fake-caring fauxgressive d00dz who are only anti-weirdo abstinence woman-hatey stuff because it limits their access to sex, and will be equally anti-women’s actual choices if those actual choices limit their access to sex, and put me in the socially awkward position of not just having to turn them down politely, but to explicitly tell them to their faces that I think they’re fugly and really really really really really don’t want to see any more of them, for the love of God nothing you can say is going to make that sound anything less than traumatizing so stop putting these nauseating mental images in my head LIKE NOW PLEASE.

Then they get all insulted and offended and act like I’M a bitch. Doesn’t occur to them that THEY could have just left me alone at “not interested.”

In response to the original post: Yeah, women are shelling out ridiculous amounts of money to go stare at Taylor Launter’s abs over and over and over again cos they totally hate sex. This makes SO MUCH SENSE. >.< Even without the were-abs of doom, this dude clearly either didn’t read the book, or just can’t fucking read.

“I’ve heard plenty of my 40- and 50-something male peers complain that they were born several decades too early”

Right, guys my age wishing that they were young again.
Big Shock
This is unique to the current time?

Sex changes the relationship, and that can make things awkward.  Particularly when the circle of friends includes ex’s on one or both sides of the equation.  So there’s a lot of distance between bff’s forever and ignoring each other.  And that space can get very uncomfortable.

I haven’t had any problems. I’m friends with an ex and some fuck buddies and my bf of 4 years is also friends with them. (same friend circle… i was friends with my bf before we became a couple). Actually all of my girl friends have had sex with some of their guy friends…. Doesn’t seem to be a problem among us. My ex and my best friend even tried dating, although it didn’t turn out. We’re all still good friends. (most of us partnered or married now)

Is anyone else stuck in this awkward place? Liberal in belief but conservative in personal practice?

Kindof. No patience for relationships, too introverted for one-night-stands, all the FWB moved away or got married. However, my age redeems me. In conservative practise, the life I live would be virtuous if I were 20,  not when I should be looking forward to beomce a grandmother soon. *g*

I’m always happy to spend time with women, it tends to be as an observer rather than too much of an active participant, my wife has pointed out that I am a good observer of the social dynamics among men- including me- or men and women excluding me but lousy at those between men and women where I am included.

” Is anyone else stuck in this awkward place? Liberal in belief but conservative in personal practice?”

Yes and no, that is yes, my personal life is pretty conservative but I dont find it awkward

Could be that its different because I’m male, but I think the fact that im in my mid-fifties has more to do with it.

But the main reason I call myself a liberal on social issues is because I think that if somebody wants to do “x”, and “x” doesn’t hurt anybody else, then they should be allowed to do “x”, not necessarily because I want to do “x” myself

Is anyone else stuck in this awkward place? Liberal in belief but conservative in personal practice?

I can relate to this.  I was the last of my friends to have sex and was well into college before I had even kissed anyone.  I am (and was then) extremely liberal in my attitudes about sex, but had a personal preference for a more staid sex life. I always dressed fairly conservatively as well—again, just a matter of preference, not moral conviction. 

It could be very frustrating, and sometimes entertaining, when others assumed me to be super-conservative.  I attracted a lot of Nice Guys who put me on a pedestal and believed I was both naive and submissive.  One even assumed that I couldn’t possibly understand the meaning of my roommate’s poster (the classic “A Hard Man is Good to Find.”)  It was fun to shock them by showing some irreverence or whipping out the “f”-word (“feminist”) because it never occurred to them that such “a nice girl” could harbor those kinds of attitudes. 

I was also mis-read by liberals, including some of the lesbian students in my dorm who tried to shock me because they were under the misapprehension that I was some sort of super-sheltered religious freak.  It could be a little frustrating.  Geez, I just happen to like long skirts fer cryin’ out loud.  But the problem was easily solved when I made my real beliefs known.

My advice:  Be yourself.  Don’t change your conservative personal practices unless and until you want to.  You are not obligated to do anything sexually unless it is something you want to do.  And if someone mis-reads you, don’t hesitate to correct them.  If it is an occasion inappropriate for a personal rant (like your friend’s engagement), you can still say with a smile, “Hey, you make it sound like I am five years old, Mr. B” to at least signal that you don’t aquiesce to his condescending and infantilizing comment.

Then they get all insulted and offended and act like I’M a bitch. Doesn’t occur to them that THEY could have just left me alone at “not interested.”

This seems to be a problem among many straight guys—a lot of us can’t fucking take a hint already.

I think the premise of the article is crap.  I find it nearly impossible to believe that sexuality has changed substantially in the last 20 years.  I don’t believe teenagers and young adults are hooking up any more or less frequently, or that dating is any more or less quaint, or that if I suddenly found myself 16 again that I’d have a substantially different experience of sex than what I’ve had.  And I don’t think that if I found myself suddenly 26 and single again, that my experience of dating would be any different.

I also think Twilight is popular for the same reason The Hills is popular.  I’m not sure why it is, but adult women seem to like to watch good looking, rich, young people.  I don’t think it has much to do with the actual decisions they make, in terms of endorsing the values of the characters one way or another.

Back in the day, weren’t parents just supposed to line up their kids and marry them off for convenience’s sake?

Honestly, I don’t think it’s changed that much.  The thing that has probably changed the most is the idea that young people are now free to be somewhat open about sexuality.  It is assumed that you will become involved with several people before you ultimately “settle down” in marriage or something like it. 

But I’m pretty sure young people had sex outside of marriage long before the 60’s (or the 20’s, or whichever “sexual revolution” you prefer).  They just didn’t talk about it and no authority figures were supposed to know. 

And I’m also pretty sure that, while we affluent westerners think we’re making completely independent decisions about who to settle down with, the result is probably not substantially different than life under an arranged marriage system*.  People mostly end up with folks that are like them, and that their families approve of**.  The initial sexual chemistry is probably better, but then I’d guess that, way back when, you probably had plenty of couples who paired off, and then their families were just like, “eh, why not?”

*The major difference I can think of is open homosexuality, especially open homosexuality regardless of how accepting one’s parents are.

**And in re the rebels and odd ducks, that happens in societies with arranged marriage, too.

I liked dating, enough.  I always preferred finding someone to ‘settle down’ with and ‘go steady’, since I’m more of a serial monogamist than a play the field type.  Never understood why people claimed no one dated at Stanford, since I had no problem doing it.  It just depends on how you want to define the terms.

But then again whole “dating” thing is revolutionary.  Free Love and all that.  The idea that you should date/marry someone you love?  Scandalous! 

It’s part of why Pride and Prejudice is so much fun…Lizzy ends up marrying just the right man, he’s rich enough to take care of her and her sisters in perpetuity, better than could have been hoped for.  But she marries him, and he marries her b/c they fall in love.  They marry because they want to, over parental objections (Lizzy’s father thinks she hates him; Lady Catherine does hate Lizzy)  Tradition and rebellion all tied up in a witty ribbon.

In the middle ages, you weren’t expected to love your spouse.  In fact, it was considered impossible, since marriages were political arrangements that had nothing to do with feelings.  An entire genre of “courtly love” romances was created—Lancelot and Guinevere being an example—where your true love is most definitely not your spouse.  It’s someone you CAN’T marry.  You can only truly love, unreservedly, someone you are NOT married to, that you have no obligation or responsibility to.  In the older texts, Arthur really doesn’t give a shit that Lancelot and Guinevere are having an affair.  He’s having a great old time fighting wars with the knights and doesn’t have much care for the young thing he had to marry to cement his kingdom.  He’s happy Lance and Guinevere are happy.

The clerics who had to write the stories down hated this shit.  They thought it was sinful, of course, and pushed to kill the whole courtly love ideal.  Here’s where the Grail Quest comes into King Arthur’s legend and where Arthur has to banish Lancelot and send Guinevere to a nunnery.  Heaven forbid anyone enjoy sex or hooking up or love.

People like to pretend that history is the way they imagine their grandparents did things, and that this imaginary history is the way things were ALWAYS done.  Just ain’t so.

Not even just for convenience sake, but for financial reasons. Ex., FDR and Elanor Roosvelt—that was a purely financial transaction. To use another first couple—George and Martha Washington. Looks and sexual attraction were irrelevant, that’s what having a mistress was for.

And back then there wasn’t a stigma to this “gold digging” for either side, it was just what was done.

oldfeminist,

Thanks for the laugh.

I had to look up this guy’s bio, because from the sounds of it he was at least eighty years old—I was picturing Wilford Brimley with a PhD.  But no, the fucker graduated from college (the notably monastic Columbia University located, as I understand it, in staid NYC) a year after I did.  (Also the same year David Brooks graduated from college—coincidence?  I think not.)

My recollection is that there was much hooking up in the late 1970s/early 1980s college milieu and precious little “dating.”  People hooked up or they had relationships—but dating rituals?  Like taking Peggy Sue to the sock hop?  I just don’t remember that.  Of course, it was the 70s.

yeah, I’ve been on a single date ever, and I’m not ever planning on repeating that experience. I seem to have acquired sufficient sex and even boyfriends without ever needing to date.

This was the story of my life until I was about 25-26 and found myself with a 60 hour a week job and a somewhat solid group of friends that didn’t really change very often.  Suddenly I wasn’t surrounded 24/7 by sexually available people of my age group and sexual orientation.  I didn’t have a lot of time to pursue interests that were likely to put me in contact with a large number of prospective hookup/fwb/insta-relationship partners.  I woke up one day to find myself going to work, coming home, eating dinner, and watching netflix with my roommate, with an occasional break to go to yoga or hang out with the same set of people I’d known since college.  Most of whom I’d already slept with or knew too much about to make a random hookup desirable.

So never fear, you might someday see the useful side of “dating”.  Not that it’s honestly that different - you just have to actually try to meet people.

In fact, it was considered impossible, since marriages were political arrangements that had nothing to do with feelings.

Well, for the landed/moneyed/titled classes, anyway.  I imagine that Jack Peasant and Jill Serf probably just hooked up and settled in together, with the eventual blessing of the local priest.  And you didn’t need the priest part before the modern notion of religious institutions sprung up 1500-odd years ago.

Mighty Ponygirl, you don’t happen to have a good list of games that are good to play with your spouse?

It’s been a right pain to find them recently.

Is anyone else stuck in this awkward place? Liberal in belief but conservative in personal practice?

Somewhat. When given the opportunity, I will and have engaged in some fairly outré sexual practices. On the flip side, I’m something of an introvert, not much for the bar scene and uglier than a bowling shoe, and since I hit my thirties, opportunities have been few and far between. I absolutely loathe dating and I’m uncomfortable with standard romantic relationships, which doesn’t really help matters. The vast bulk of my close friends are female, but I can count on one hand the number who’d be willing to take a ride with me and even they all have good reasons not to.

That all being said, while my beliefs and personal practices are/would be liberal, a lot of folks assume I’m conservative in both in great part because I prefer old music, movies, books and television shows. “Matt would rather listen to Big Joe Turner and watch A Night At The Opera than any new stuff, therefore he’d be shocked at the thought of a threesome or pegging”, when in reality I think all of ‘em are pretty neat.

And what Laurie said. Do what feels right in all cases and damn the torpedoes.

So never fear, you might someday see the useful side of “dating”.  Not that it’s honestly that different - you just have to actually try to meet people.

well, have always had a very small social cycle, none of my boyfriends ever even came from the same country as me, and I found my last boyfriend after the magical cutoff-age of 25, so I think I’ll do just fine. The internet is a wonderful place, you know? :-p (and no, I don’t mean internet dating sites)

seriously, I’m not interested in “trying to meet people”. never was, never will. if that means I’ll turn into a old cat-lady(assuming this relationship doesn’t work out), that’s fine. but dating is just stifling, and being asked for my phone number by someone I don’t know is just creepy.

On this not-so-delicate subject, I’ve heard plenty of my 40- and 50-something male peers complain that they were born several decades too early. But I have never, ever heard a woman say she’d prefer today’s hooking-up system to the dating rituals we grew up with.

My recollection is that there was much hooking up in the late 1970s/early 1980s college milieu and precious little “dating.” People hooked up or they had relationships—but dating rituals?  Like taking Peggy Sue to the sock hop?  I just don’t remember that.  Of course, it was the 70s.

I was born in 1962, and I second Sir Charles.  The reason Jonathan Zimmerman never heard a forty-to-fiftysomething woman say that she’d prefer today’s hooking-up system to the dating rituals she grew up with is most likely that she herself grew up under the hooking-up system Zimmerman deplores.  When I was in high school, practically nobody dated at all, except the kids who were somehow exceptional in a positive way (such as being popular or athletic); later, in college, people would congregate in groups and hang around together, with couples occaisionally pairing off and moseying away into the shadows.  For the most part, people acted the way they do now.  Little has changed.  If the hooking-up culture is bad for women now it must have been bad for women then, but, since the socio-bio and evo-psych types had not yet discovered antihookuppery as a cause, a whole generation (at least) of young women was left in ignorance about how badly they were being treated and about how their most deeply-seated primal needs were just never going to get met.  Tragic, that.

I will go farther: my mother, who was born in 1932, has told me that when she was in college the usual practice was that people who knew each other and who were interested in the same things would forgather and visit the bars in groups.  (In other words, her experiences were very similar to mine.)  Pre-bridal couples, people who, though as yet unwed, were so committed to the prospect of getting married to each other that they had everything worked out except what kind of fingerfood they were going to serve at the reception after the wedding, were around, but they were pretty rare, and they weren’t considered to be any kind of industry standard.  Nor were they considered an ideal toward which everybody else ought to aspire.

I myself think that the duck-like pairing-up which social conservatives are into for moral reasons and which the evo-psych types tout as the only option which is true to the deepest, dimmest, most mysterious recesses of the female nature (recesses which are so deep and dim and mysterious that many a woman has gone through her life with never a hint that they’re there), just plain is not a human specialty, and never has been.  Lots of species of animals don’t travel around two-by-two.  I think the human species is one of those.  Humans tend to congregate in clumps.  We do a lot of the things which are important to us, like working and playing and learning, in groups.  Why then should we not also seek for mates in groups?  Personally, I think that is what we do, when left to ourselves, all other things being more or less equal (though they never are).  You can gauge the intensity of the human predisposition toward hooking up by the mammoth scale of the propaganda efforts which are launched to counteract it.  Though you have to admit that people have to have gotten pretty desperate before they start citing Twilight characters as authorities.  If Twilight were intended as a broadside in favor of one-to-one coupledom or even of the notion that males are naturally sexually prolific whereas females are naturally sexually exclusive, Bella Swan would not have two boyfriends.  So there…

Orgasm is not the ultimate goal of sex.  For women, sex can feel amazingly, awesomely awesome the entire time.  It’s really indescribably ecstatic regardless of an orgasm at the end.  If you don’t know this, then I feel very sorry for any woman unlucky enough to sleep with you.

I think you need to replace “women” with “some women”, because mileage certainly varies here. *I* consider sex pointless and in fact actively a bad idea if I don’t get off, because physical frustration makes it impossible for me to sleep. And the last I checked, I had a vagina.

On the other hand, I’ve only slept with three people in my life, and all of them were very much interested in making sure I got off, and if I had ever slept with anyone who wasn’t interested in making sure I got off, it would never have happened a second time, so I can’t make an argument either way for women getting benefit out of casual hookups, either.

I wouldn’t go so far as to say that sex without orgasm is pointless...but I basically agree with Alara. YMMV.

Mighty Ponygirl, you don’t happen to have a good list of games that are good to play with your spouse?

I hear the ‘co-op’ mode in New Super Mario Bros. Wii will test the bonds of your marriage. At least you’ll know if it’s built to last LOL.

Is anyone else stuck in this awkward place? Liberal in belief but conservative in personal practice?

Yeah, and I rant about it frequently.  I have a lot of the ‘markers’ of being conservative—I dress in skirts and not-low-cut tops a lot, I like to cook, I like to crochet/sew, and people of my parents’ and grandparents’ generations read me as a good girl because I’m reasonably good about helping out and curbing my language around them.  I also write smut (mostly slash), own more than one sex toy, and get incredibly frustrated by the way guys presume I will someday settle down to marriage and kids (to the surprise of absolutely nobody who knows me well, I flee as rapidly as I can whenever I say “I don’t know, maybe if it feels right, but I’m not planning my future around being married to anyone” and a guy hears “hang around a lot longer before bringing up the marriage thing”).  I don’t date much because I’ve got a lot of other stuff going on, not because I’m saving myself, but I still end up having awkward conversations trying to convince people of this.  I’m happy dating, I’m happy not dating.  I’m polyamory-friendly, kinky, and inexperienced: people see these as wildly contradictory, when in reality, they all work together just fine.  And the skirts?  Are because I can get three awesome-looking skirts for the price (and shopping time) it would take to get one pair of decent-fitting pants.  It’s a slightly different version of practicality over fashion, suited to my body type, that’s all.

I am among the numbers of people who don’t do hookups, because so far? Sex causes me to have feelings about my partner. I’m celibate outside of relationships, because otherwise, I’m unhappy. Conforming to someone else’s sexual standard at the cost of my own happiness is, I reason, the least feminist thing I could possibly do. So I don’t do it. Maybe this will change with age, maybe it won’t, but right now it makes me happy, so I’m sticking to it.

Ditto to this entire paragraph, purpleshoes.

kiki, yeah, I’ve been married for 20 years to the first guy I ever dated. I wouldn’t date in high school unless I thought there was a chance of love, and we waited for marriage to have PIV sex. None of which was because of religion (I wasn’t religious), but for personal reasons. The no dates unless love was possible was because I didn’t like the games most kids my age were playing, where dating seemed to involve status issues and such. The no sex rule was because I really, really, really didn’t want to get pregnant while I was in college!
So, I know this one idiot who assumes I will disapprove of friends who are bi-, polyamorous, or just plain kinky; my lifestyle looks kind of conservative. But I’m in favor of people doing what works for them and hurts no one else… but I disapprove of HIS sexual behavior, because even though he’s married, he’s always drooling over other women in front of his wife and creeping out his female friends.
It’s pretty frustrating sometimes, being the kind of person I am. I’m CAUTIOUS, not judgmental! I’m private, not prudish.
My real friends get this, but people who jump to conclusions don’t understand me at all.

Oy. Basically I was defending the sentiment expressed so well by purpleshoes, killjoy, etc. and somehow came across as a moral scold? Clearly my cold medication is warping my reading, my writing, or both at once.

Not intended. I maintain that more mainstream, faux- or just nominally-feminist outlets are trumpeting hookups as the new expected sexuality, which is damaging not because OMG reputations! Or even OMG rape! but because it’s just a new box, same as the old box, into which many individual women will never fit comfortably. It’s that whole empowered vs “empowerful!” thing. It isn’t a call for a return to 1950, it’s a call to keep thinking and talking about the message, and catching it when options start to look like pressure instead.

It’s the one thing shitpiles like the original article are good for—bringing out nuanced discussions among the not-shitty folk.

wow! i mean just…...........wow! does the author of this article live in some kind of bizarro alternate reality? why on earth would i even consider having sex with someone (commitment or not),  that i didn’t even like as a person first?

he and his friends, who supposedly think in tandem, would do the rest of the human race a favor, by confining themselves to all-male activities, and only with other males of similar persuasion.

Is anyone else stuck in this awkward place? Liberal in belief but conservative in personal practice?

In college, a lot of people pegged me as a hermit/prude for not being involved in the prevalent hookup culture at my undergrad campus.  A large part of that was the busy student aspect…especially as unlike my upper/upper-middle class classmates I had to ensure I maintained a respectable academic record to keep the near-full scholarship which allowed me to attend….especially considering the fact I had no feasible second chance if it fell through. 

This was coupled with a desire to avoid repeating my older cousins’ mistakes when they prioritized partying/fun over their studies to the point of almost being suspended/expelled.  Very expensive, engendered more family tensions, and creates bad blots on records/habits which continue to hurt them even today.  :(

As for hooking up, it can be summed up by Samantha Vimes:

I’m CAUTIOUS, not judgmental! I’m private, not prudish.

It isn’t helped by overhearing college classmates and co-workers discussing their sex lives including the performance levels of their sexual partners that were not only TMI for the occasion, but also turned out to be releasing information the other partner wished had been kept private.  Don’t know why many people feel there is nothing wrong with discussing their partner’s sexual performance without ascertaining whether the partner wanted his/her sex life told in a tone akin to a racy tabloid.

kiki-

Asexual here, so you can extrapolate pretty nicely from there.

Overall, I think the trick is to remember and popularize the notion that the “right amount” of sex to have is the amount you want to have.

Feeling horny and want to jump the first guy at the bar? If it’s consensual, go for it. Feeling iffy and want to take a year or twelve or a lifetime off sex until you figure things out or get comfortable with your own sexuality or yourself? Super.

Overall, I’ve been a big fan of pro-sex feminism because getting people over all of their sexual hang-ups and cultural garbage means they stop following idiotic “rules” about sex and sexuality. When enthusiastic consent is the only game in town and when everyone can be fully honest to themselves and partners about their sexuality and turn-ons, it’ll be a wonderful day for everyone and asexuals and other people who don’t want sex will be left more alone instead of accosted by the rape culture.

Zimmerman of course is freaking out because that honesty and exploration threatens said rape culture. No one will put up with a hateful lover if they are not still trapped in baggage that “sex is supposed to feel bad” or feel they “have no other options”. The hook-up culture, polyamory, etc… all allow greater flexibility and remove shoulds. Naturally monogamous people will still be monogamous, but the poly-people will have the freedom to find something that fits their relationship style better and thus not grow to resent their partner for “trapping them” or decide to cheat later.

Greater options is always a good thing, because it allows people to be more natural to who they really are and thus have the greatest possible likelihood of being happy with their lives. They may not succeed, but they’ll have a better chance, whatever they choose. And all choices are valid (with enthusiastic informed consent, of course).

On Twilight, I still hate it and it’s messages, but I suspect that women aren’t really giving a shit about its messages and are simply glad for something they can use as an excuse to explore their sexualities and selves and geekiness in public without the usual conservative nonsense. Sucks that it’s in a repressed mormon package, but maybe that was needed in order for girls to feel safe lusting after Taylor’s abs in public without looking like “bad girls”.

Under the old system, it ALWAYS comes up negative. If, under this system, it’s coming up negative more times than not (I don’t know that it is—but it may be) then we need to start exploring System #3.

Trying to manipulate men with sex to achieve equality can’t work, however.  System #3 or System #10: all systems that operate under a patriarchy will screw women over.  All systems will be fucked by men who hate women, and women whose internalized misogyny causes them to have too-low standards that degrade the quality of the system.  Only by attacking root causes will we be able to fix this.

It’s perhaps just my personal difficulty balancing my own rah-rah feminism with the actual person in front of me, who knows she’s *supposed* to enjoy hooking up

If she doesn’t, she doesn’t.  But I wouldn’t mislead her into thinking that she can manipulate a man into thinking well of her using sex.  She cannot manipulate a commitment with sex.  She should have sex or not have sex depending on her preferences.  But men cannot be controlled with it.  And if she thinks that, then that’s probably what makes her feel bad.

However, is sex is not pleasurable to her outside the context of a relationship, then that’s her preference.  Noting unfeminist about it.  But I would carefully encourage her to make sure that it’s simply that she feels awkward naked in front of someone she doesn’t know well, and not that she’s still operating under the scary assumption that the longer you hold out, the more he’ll like you.  This isn’t true, and it can be very bad for women who get involved in relationships only to find out after you’re invested that he has contempt for you.  It’s much harder to extract yourself.

Every time I hear this argument, my brain just goes straight back to the hundreds and hundreds of primary sources from 1890-1920 that talk about how slavery was the ideal arrangement for those poor, poor childlike people of color.

If you ever want to remind yourself exactly how bad backlash can be, recall reconstruction, and then recall 1890-1920. If that doesn’t convince you to call your Senator about repro rights, I don’t know what will.

I consider myself a recovering anti-feminist, and I’ll tell you what’s wrong with the people (especially women) who write this type of stuff, because *I* wrote it back in the day. They’re going around with the wrong crowd. They think all men are cold and uncaring and want to use women for sex because that’s true of the men they hang out with. Didn’t a study just come out saying anti-feminist women have more negative attitudes about men?

Even worse, though, are the self-serving men who write garbage like this because it’s a veiled way of calling women whores and implying that we should save ourselves for them.

http://townhall.com/columnists/MikeAdams/2007/08/20/unprotected

Mighty Ponygirl, you don’t happen to have a good list of games that are good to play with your spouse?

It’s been a right pain to find them recently.

[momentarily dons FG mantle]

I *have* heard good things about SMB Wii, haven’t picked it up yet tho.  The Wii is primarily a party-game platform at this point, so actual 2-player co-op isn’t particularly strong on that platform. We had picked up Tales of Symphonia 2 (since 1 on the GameCube was a fun game with co-op mode) but it was honestly so horrible we barely got to the point where two people could actually play together before we packed it in. My tolerance for JRPGs is really sinking fast.

I don’t have a PS3, so there may be a few titles that I’m missing from there. I think LittleBigPlanet is more of a party game than a co-op game.

For the 360, I would recommend Marvel: Ultimate Alliance. 1 is Super cheap since it’s been out for years and 2 just came out. Borderlands has splitscreen co-op mode which is a lot of fun (but you might need a big TV for it). Halo and Gears of War, obviously. I’m having trouble finding any official information on Left 4 Dead (and its sequel) offering a local co-op mode, but I’m sure I’m wrong because I’m positive I’ve seen friends who live together playing it at the same time. Guitar Hero or Rock Band—I would lean Rock Band since it’s scalable and has better DLC.  Also check out some of the stuff in the Arcade. Castle Crashers is pretty fun and scalable.

A lot of the other titles out there are primarily single-player titles that have a duel-mode enabled. So if you’re not interested in co-op gaming and just want short skirmishes where you wail on each other, just about any FPS game is going to have that ability.

every attempt to determine fixed laws for human sexuality seems only to prove that it has no fixed laws

/waits for favorite furry art (=pr0n) site to recover from its recent crash

I wonder what percentage of happily married or monogamous couples had sex on their first or second date?  My guess is most of them.  I know in my case the times I have met someone who wanted to wait it became pretty obvious they didn’t like me that well, usually after about six-months.

However, is sex is not pleasurable to her outside the context of a relationship, then that’s her preference.  Noting unfeminist about it.  But I would carefully encourage her to make sure that it’s simply that she feels awkward naked in front of someone she doesn’t know well, and not that she’s still operating under the scary assumption that the longer you hold out, the more he’ll like you.  This isn’t true, and it can be very bad for women who get involved in relationships only to find out after you’re invested that he has contempt for you.  It’s much harder to extract yourself.

I never believed “the longer you hold out the more he’ll like you”, but I did make my first boyfriend wait 2 years as part of me lashing out against patriarchy—I believed the bullshit about men treat women as conquests, so I wanted him to prove to me that I wasn’t a conquest, that he genuinely liked being around me enough to put up with not getting sex (and later, with getting forms of sex that got me off but not him… he offered, I was too naive to have come up with that idea myself.) So it was more “the longer you hold out the more proof you have that he likes you,” not an attempt to change his opinion but an attempt to ascertain definitively what his opinion actually was.

My motivations were completely feminist, but I’m not sure that my strategy actually proved a damn thing in the end, because he still dumped me for a woman who was better in bed after nine years of a mostly long-distance open relationship (the open part was something that I agreed to but never took advantage of), and then acted like a jealous a-hole when I found a new boyfriend two years later.

Alara, yeah exactly.  I learned the hard way, too, that you really can’t control these things.  You can’t make someone “prove” something.  You really can’t manipulate their behavior.  Assholes will out.

@MPG: I can confirm that L4D and L4D2 have local co-op modes, considering how often I’ve seen my roommate and his friends play that.

No no no, the girl in question was ALREADY trying to manipulate men through sex. She was operating under the underpants-gnome theory of hookups, where sex with stranger + ???? = Engagement! But of course that isn’t any more foolproof than “hold out forever + jesus = Engagement!” What I suggested was that she stop trying to manipulate at all, and instead take her partners at their word about what they are looking for.

This apparently took the shine off hookups for her, because:

She does not feel comfortable with sex out of a relationship context, (mostly due to her own body image issues and some abandonment fears), but she felt obligated to partake since these are the new “rules”. Obviously that attitude doesn’t exist everywhere, but it does exist, and very much among young people (the girl in question is in her very early 20s). It’s still mandatory sexuality, but in a different package.

Again, it’s not like I’m advocating the article’s bullshit, or a Return To Courting, or anything like that. I’m just noting that, like you said, any sexual system we’re going to see in our lifetimes, most likely, will fuck women over. So even though hookup culture is 1000 times better for women than other arrangements, it bothers me to see it upheld enough to become a source of more pressure.

Clearly not a widely-shared viewpoint, though, so now I’ll let it be.

My tolerance for JRPGs is really sinking fast.

Yeah, me too. My attitude has become “Yeah, I liked that game. When it was called Final Fantasy VI.”

I did make my first boyfriend wait 2 years as part of me lashing out against patriarchy—I believed the bullshit about men treat women as conquests, so I wanted him to prove to me that I wasn’t a conquest

I’m not privy to all the details, but written like this it sounds to me like “I don’t want to be just another mountain you climbed… I want to be the Everest.” There’s people who look specifically for these sort of conquests. Doesn’t seem like it would prove much of anything.

I don’t know if someone has mentioned this already, but it is hardly surprising to me that there are men who find it inconceivable that there are women who enjoy having sex for it’s own sake.  After all, their direct experience implies that women do not want to have sex with men….

But seriously, enjoying sex is a lot different than enjoying ice cream.  Enjoying sex is not just about enjoying the physical experience, but also about enjoying the act of having sex with a particular person.  Something along the lines of becoming aroused and then enjoying the satisfaction of that arousal.  So the enjoyment of sex is dependent on what we find arousing and this may be determined by our feelings towards a person and also whether we find them attractive or not- and who can really say that who they find attractive isn’t influenced by all sorts of messed up social expectations?  It makes the whole thing confusing and it’s hardly surprising that both men and women are all screwed up about how and when they should have sex and what they should feel about it.  But all that just says that we need less of this sanctimonious bullsh*t about how women give it up too freely these days because it only makes the subject more confusing by introducing a healthy dose of guilt to the situation.

@kiki: I’m with you, girl. Politically, I’m very, VERY liberal, and I’m pretty sure I’m bi and poly-friendly at least. I’d love to fool around with someone, but a) schoolwork is crushing my soul, b) I’m majoring in theatre, which means shows, which means no sleep anyway, and c) I just haven’t come across the right person yet.

@Leely: Thank you for your story- sometimes I worry that this is it, it’s now or never, relationship-wise. It’s wonderful to hear from someone who’s been there and knows that’s not the case.

@kiki:

You’re not alone.  I married the first man I ever slept with—granted, we’d been having sex for years before we got hitched.  I dress pretty conservatively.  I don’t drink much, don’t smoke, haven’t ever done drugs.  The poster child for the good “church girl.”

Except for the fact that I’m a liberal feminist atheist.  It’s not really a contradiction, being politically liberal but personally conservative.  It just means that you believe that your choices are just that—yours, and that others are free to make their own.

But all that just says that we need less of this sanctimonious bullsh*t about how women give it up too freely these days

Yes, we need less (or none) of that sanctimonious bullshit, and of all other kinds.

@kiki:

I have discovered that I have the most satisfying sex with people who I trust, which rules out hook ups for me.  In other aspects of my dating life I am quite liberal, non-monogamous, bi-, etc., but the risk of having sex with someone who may not respect my boundaries, listen when I stay stop, whose gaze may make me self-conscious about how my ass looks or what kinds of faces I am making when I want to be completely embodying my body is more than I am willing to accept.

bellacoker:  That is a very good reason to avoid casual hook ups.  I’ve always been impressed by women who are able to do it and enjoy it.

Hooking up doesn’t exclusively mean PIV sex, by the way. I hooked up with my spouse in college, didn’t have PIV sex with him until 5 years of exclusivity, and got married a couple months after that. That’s what was right for the two of us. The problem is that lots of people think their own course through life is best. Thankfully I’m not saddled with that expectation.

mpowell:  Yeah, I agree, it’s kind of the same way I feel about people who cliffdive.  It’s way outside my comfort zone, but good for them.

It’s not really a contradiction, being politically liberal but personally conservative.  It just means that you believe that your choices are just that—yours, and that others are free to make their own.

QFT

Oh wow. I was not expecting such a positive response to my question. I’ve become accustomed to being met with defensiveness and arrogant superiority whenever I voice my conservative (personal) views on sex. Some people cannot comprehend the idea that I can support their right to do ‘X’ without wanting to do ‘X’ myself. (Logic Fail) Thanks to everyone for all the warm and fuzzies sent my way. I really do appreciate it.

I guess he never watched Something About Mary. A movie targeted towards men about a bunch of men who all want to be loved by Mary. And it has grossed a lot of money, ergo, men love to be loved.

Yeah, maybe one day relationships will indeed be simply personal, not distracted or dictated by traditions.

I believed the bullshit about men treat women as conquests, so I wanted him to prove to me that I wasn’t a conquest,

FOR TWO YEARS?!  Jesus Christ! 

I kid, but damn.  I usually vet the “just wants to do the bisexual girl” folks by making our first date a weeknight outing to a museum.  It takes an hour, tops.

“My guess is that this guy doesn’t actually know any guys.”

I flashed on Steve Carrell saying a breast feels like a bag of sand in “The 40-year-old Virgin” while he tries to bluff his way through the sex talk.

“It isn’t just misogyny, it’s misandry, too.  The author accomplishes the seemingly imppossible task of insulting both males and females at the same time.  What you say about the author’s worldview of women is correct, but what in the hell does that say about men?”

This happens roughly every time someone of conservative bent says anything about men, women, sex, abortion, marriage, dating, life or pie.

I’m another one of those “liberal beliefs, conservative practices” peeps, mostly just because I am a very busy and somewhat reserved person who doesn’t mix with many people day-to-day. (Sex would be fine if a hot guy fell into my lab*, and all, but it’s not worth it to me right now to go out looking for it. And my lap remains empty. Oh well.)

*this was originally a typo, but I left it in because it is a magically accurate typo. Working in a lab *is* a large part of the reason I don’t get a lot of other-people-face-time :p

As for other people hooking up (especially people in college), I would feel a *lot* more comfortable about it if kids got better sex ed. A biology-major acquaintance of mine in undergrad told my friend and I that she was going to NY to visit her friend-with-benefits one weekend and we were like “whooHOO have fun!” despite neither of us getting any that weekend, but then she followed up with “I’ve been off the pill for a while, if I take it tonight do you think it’ll work for tomorrow?” and we were like “GOD NO USE A CONDOM.”

So yeah, I have no problem with her having sex and whatnot (no slut-shaming here!) but I would *really* prefer that she know how the pill works (biology major-shaming? :p)

Well, what? wrote: “I’m just noting that, like you said, any sexual system we’re going to see in our lifetimes, most likely, will fuck women over. So even though hookup culture is 1000 times better for women than other arrangements, it bothers me to see it upheld enough to become a source of more pressure.” (Comment #115).

I actually agree with this comment.

Firstly, I would say that clearly Zimmerman is a repellent human being who I actually feel a bit sorry for, because he’ll clearly never experience a real love connection with a woman. The whole ‘witholding sex to make a man like you’ idea is bullshit and very harmful to women *and* men. Pressure to withhold sex and to conform to ‘The Rules’ is horrible and damaging, but then so is pressure to have ‘no strings attached’ sex.

I’ll explain; I’ve experienced the first kind of pressure, but also a counter-pressure from my university peer group to go out and have casual sex (flings, one night stands, f**k buddies) just for its own sake. The dominant idea in that circle was that anyone who wanted a relationship and wanted to fall in love was just soft, and ‘no strings attached’ sex was the only acceptable thing to want. This I found equally damaging because casual sex means nothing to me (I see it as just masturbating with another person’s body to be frank) and I always wanted a relationship, but that view made me seem weak and old-fashioned to my peers. I felt pressure to fit in and have flings, etc. It made me quite miserable. I have a great relationship now, and am very happy.

What I’m saying is that there should be no ‘rules’ for having sex and negotiating relationships other than the preferences each individual has. I worry about one set of ‘rules’ being replaced by another. If just one person had said to me that it was okay to want a relationship, that it isn’t necessarily ‘needy’ or unenlightened to want one, and that there are many men out there who want the same thing and who don’t just want sex, I would have felt a lot better about myself and my relationship prospects.

I also have to say, in response to a comment earlier in the thread from a woman who had casual sex and was surprised when partners fell in love with her, even though she’d “made her intentions clear”... I’m sorry but having sex and being intimate with a person sends a pretty big message saying ‘I’m attracted to you, I like you’. If you then say ‘but I don’t want a relationship with you’, that’s a huge mixed message. It’s not “clear” at all! In fact it’s pretty damn confusing.

I kid, but damn.  I usually vet the “just wants to do the bisexual girl” folks by making our first date a weeknight outing to a museum.  It takes an hour, tops.

Do you have any tricks to vet the “just want to screw the woman in the couple and willing to fake bisexuality and ‘sacrifice’ himself getting a male to blow him to get there” folks?

just want to screw the woman in the couple and willing to fake bisexuality and ‘sacrifice’ himself getting a male to blow him to get there?

Try suggesting that he do the blowing.

An actual bi man is a lot less likely to be bothered by the notion of giving another man a blow job than a straight man who’s pretending to be bi to get in the woman’s pants (for that matter, an actual bi man who has no interest whatsoever in this *particular* man and just wants to get in the woman’s pants probably wouldn’t be thrilled at giving the particular man he doesn’t find attractive a blow job, either.)

And a straight man who’s willing to give another man a blow job in order to have sex with a specific woman is, at least, open enough to “looking gay” to the outside world that he’s probably not hiding a great deal of homophobia, and might actually feel affection if not sexual attraction for the man in the couple.

FOR TWO YEARS?!  Jesus Christ! 

I kid, but damn.  I usually vet the “just wants to do the bisexual girl” folks by making our first date a weeknight outing to a museum.  It takes an hour, tops.

Yeah, I know. I was a virgin at the time and I’d read too much goddamn Andrea Dworkin. (Who I’ve come to have more respect for as I’ve gotten older, but I never will forgive her for convincing me for six years that male sexuality is by its nature evil and predatory. That really should not be the point of feminism.)

After the first guy broke up with me nine years later, I waited only three dates with the second guy, and that was mostly to confirm that the woman who was still legally his wife really did not want him any more (she had fled the state and taken up with someone else, but there were kids and I didn’t want to be a homewrecker, so I needed to talk to *her* rather than taking his word for it.)

earthling @132, i had the same but sort of opposite experience. i was a late bloomer who read way too much dan savage in high school, and all i wanted out of college was to be part of the hookup culture. but, somehow, both of my random hookups turned into long term relationships (ok, so one of them sort of lingered as FWB for a bit, then fizzled completely for a couple years, but fast forward to now and he and i are buying a house together). there’s still a teeny little part of me that’s kind of annoyed i never succeeded at casual sex, but all in all, i’m happy where i am now. this thread has actually made me feel a lot better about how my sex life has veered into more conservative territory than i actually would have said i wanted, had i been asked at 17 where i wanted to be and how i wanted to be living in 10 years.

rather, that first sentence should read “i was a late bloomer who read way too much dan savage in high school, and all i wanted out of my college social life was to be part of the hookup culture.” obviously, out of college itself, i pretty much wanted a career.

@kiki: Yeah, I’m 19 and have never been in a relationship because I’m rather shy. I also have trust issues with guys that I’m trying to get over. I suppose I might come across as conservative if people didn’t know me well. My friends were shocked to find out that I was an atheist, bisexual, and radically liberal. But I get involved in political discussions in my classes and talk about my opinions. Personally, I want to have a monogamous relationship before I have sex, but I really want to have sex, and I’m not looking to get married anytime soon. I believe in serial monogamy, not One Tru Luv 4Ever (thought that’s certainly nice if people can get it to work out). But I don’t judge people for what they prefer in their sex lives. It seems like there’s too much controversy over “hookup culture.” Sure, there are issues when women are pressured to have sex or are sexually objectified too much, but if people are really enjoying hooking up and are careful about STIs/etc, why not?