News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Science of Passionate Sex by overcast on Thursday August 03, 2017 @10:11AM (#14919713)
Here's the science for you all. The key to passionate sex is actually caring about the person you're having sex with. Hooking up on Tinder isn't going to give you that.
Re:The Science of Passionate Sex by root_axis on Thursday August 03, 2017 @10:35AM (#14919925)
Maybe you're not capable of a passionate hookup, but you're fooling yourself if you don't realize that people have very passionate sex from hookups all the time. In fact, the excitement of a strong mutual sexual attraction to a new person can heighten the sexual passion.
Re:The Science of Passionate Sex by FLUX-YOU on Thursday August 03, 2017 @11:39AM (#14920500)
Some people might not understand this because it's better explained by simply experiencing it. It's an equally valid mindset just as the article's mindset, and just as equally valid as not having sex until marriage if that's what you choose. It's also very similar to fetishes -- experiencing it is just too different from watching videos or demos.
Re:The Science of Passionate Sex by hsitz on Thursday August 03, 2017 @10:47AM (#14920029)
"The key to passionate sex is actually caring about the person you're having sex with."

That sounds nice, but it's a load of baloney. I would wager that most people over the age of 20 (25?, 30?) have experienced a significant relationship(s) where the sex tends to be passionate (and frequent) at the very beginning, and tapers off and becomes less frequent, less passionate, more boring as time goes on (and years drag by). In fact, that is the typical progression of sex in a committed, caring relationship. So, no, I would not say that the key is "actually caring about the person".

I haven't read the linked article yet, but the subject reminds me of some work done by a psychologist named David Schnarch, who has built a career and written several books on the subject. These include a book called _Passionate Marriage_, intended as self-help for a lay audience, and _Constructing the Sexual Crucible_, which is more of a technical handbook for therapists and counselors.

See http://passionatemarriage.com/

http://passionatemarriage.com/catalog/15

Alain de Botton also examines the issue in a similar way on the impressive "Book of Life" website. E.g., he says:

"In a wiser world, we would collectively admit that the very rare cases where love and sex did run together were astonishing exceptions with no relevance whatsoever to most of our lives. We would instead learn to pay admiring attention to those who had accepted with a reasonable show of dignity and grace that the natural price of long-term togetherness is a decline in the quality and frequency of sexual contact – and that this is, in a great many cases, a price very much worth paying."

http://www.thebookoflife.org/love-and-sex/

http://www.thebookoflife.org/category/relationships/

Re:The Science of Passionate Sex by pmoriarty on Thursday August 03, 2017 @11:49AM (#14920587)
"We would instead learn to pay admiring attention to those who had accepted with a reasonable show of dignity and grace that the natural price of long-term togetherness is a decline in the quality and frequency of sexual contact – and that this is, in a great many cases, a price very much worth paying."

Is it possible to accept that and remain monogamous?

Because for many, when one is bored with their current partner, passionate sex is just an affair away.

Re:The Science of Passionate Sex by Mahn on Thursday August 03, 2017 @12:20PM (#14920927)
> Is it possible to accept that and remain monogamous?

I think this is something very personal and varies from person to person. To some sex in a long-term relationship is important, to some it isn't. Some hop from partner to partner, some stay committed for decades. There's probably not a one-size-fits-all and there doesn't have to be.

Re:The Science of Passionate Sex by root_axis on Thursday August 03, 2017 @12:03PM (#14920740)
Well sure, and many people have affairs for this reason. On the other hand, many don't out of respect for their partner or their own values.
Re:The Science of Passionate Sex by user5994461 on Thursday August 03, 2017 @10:12AM (#14919720)
Caring and hooking up on Tinder are not mutually exclusive.
Re:The Science of Passionate Sex by overcast on Thursday August 03, 2017 @10:23AM (#14919814)
There is no way I am at any level of caring for someone, after just meeting them. That's just impossible.
Re:The Science of Passionate Sex by waterhouse on Thursday August 03, 2017 @10:34AM (#14919918)
It is possible to, say, care about some archetype, and then perceive that archetype in a person you've recently met, and apply your feelings to them. There are people that find it easy to fall deeply in love quickly. I think this is what goes on in their heads.
Re:The Science of Passionate Sex by Max_Mustermann on Thursday August 03, 2017 @10:33AM (#14919898)
Not caring at even the basic level strikes me as a lack of empathy.
Re:The Science of Passionate Sex by wolfram74 on Thursday August 03, 2017 @10:54AM (#14920084)
Perhaps you are a very cautious person, that's your prerogative. What about that statement makes you think it applies equally to everyone else?
Re:The Science of Passionate Sex by Sleeep on Thursday August 03, 2017 @12:09PM (#14920801)
I totally believe that is the key to passionate sex for you, however it's certainly not universal.

I'm married now but the most passionate sex I ever had in my life was a one night stand with someone I only knew in passing and haven't seen since.

Re:The Science of Passionate Sex by Koshkin on Thursday August 03, 2017 @11:58AM (#14920687)
> The key... caring about the person you're having sex with

Biologically and historically this is far from being so. Among animals, sex is often aggressive rather than "caring"; the history of humans, too, shows that opportunities of this nature arise from a fierce competition and also from what effectively amounts to slavery.

Re:The Science of Passionate Sex by overcast on Thursday August 03, 2017 @12:05PM (#14920762)
Sure. But that's not something I would consider passion between two people.
Re:The Science of Passionate Sex by Koshkin on Thursday August 03, 2017 @05:16PM (#14923971)
passionate sex != passion
Re:The Science of Passionate Sex by Mahn on Thursday August 03, 2017 @10:20AM (#14919789)
The other person should care for you, too (for passionate sex to take place, that is).
Re:The Science of Passionate Sex by overcast on Thursday August 03, 2017 @10:22AM (#14919804)
Well yes, that bit was implied.
Re:The Science of Passionate Sex by ionised on Friday August 04, 2017 @11:34AM (#14929450)
You are not representative of people on the whole.