That implies a need for faith and trust in a person. Where does is that need come from? Committed romance.
If that isn't my goal, what do I have to fear?
I'm not here to belittle you personally. I'm here to confront your ideas.
What are you here for?
It's clear there is no separation between church and state. People just debate the religion of the "church".
Yes, we can change social expectations and boundaries. We did change social expectations and boundaries. It was called the "Sexual Revolution" and it happened over half a century ago. It's old news. This is where we've ended up since then.
I could really use an aftershock.
This is precisely the issue at hand.
I'm not pestering you for sex; in fact I am not pestering anyone at all! Yet here you are pestering me for expressing an interest in it.
--
Am I a pest for leaving the Mormon Church? Am I a pest for drinking alcohol at home?
Whatever happened to the religious freedom y'all keep telling me about? Can I have some?
No but there does seem to be a strong correlation between people who were raised in strict religious households and a strong predilection towards sex. I kind of already assumed that you were ex-religious before you said so.
You are free to believe and do whatever you like, but don't presume that everyone else is a prude because they don't look at sex the way you do. Or that your perspective should be the norm. People overwhelmingly choose and hope for monogomy despite society largely accepting casual sexual encounters as "normal". There's no telling the extent of the damage that has done to people's ability to pair bond successfully and develop interpersonal relationships.
I won't. I'll assume they are a prude when they call me a "sex pest".
> Or that your perspective should be the norm.
I just have to accept the inverse. Got it.
--
> People overwhelmingly choose and hope for monogomy despite society largely accepting casual sexual encounters as "normal".
I would like to live in that society please. Oh right, you want to vilify it because casual sex offends you; and you are not alone, which is precisely the source of my troubles.
I have plenty of deep and fulfilling interpersonal relationships. I'm quite good at that, as it happens.
--
What the fuck do you want from me? Do you want me to pretend I actually crave committed monogamy? Wouldn't that make me the actual pest?
That doesn't sound any different from asking my trans friends to pretend they are cis or my gay friends pretend they are hetero.
I would much rather be honest. Unfortunately, this social situation you are holding over my head is making it a lot easier to just stay silent. Thanks for that.
Straight women’s sexuality is drastically different from gay men, lesbian women, and straight men. It’s not much of anything like the rest. There’s a desire for the attention and approval of straight men (probably due to patriarchal reasons) but there’s often a missing desire for the straight men as they are. (I assume this is more biological) It’s why we see so many straight women being completely content with living an asexual lifestyle whereas straight men are completely miserable.
My theory is that this dynamic is mostly narrative-based, but partly physical:
Our social narrative says that a man's sexuality is dangerous, and that a woman's sexuality is fragile. It also says that safety comes from commitment.
The physical difference (that applies to sexual intercourse) between cis men and cis women is genitalia. The penis is homologous to the clitoris, and the vagina is homologous to the prostate. When a cis man has sex, he probably uses his penis, but when a cis woman has sex, she probably uses her vagina.
Most people who have mastered prostate stimulation can tell you it requires a completely different mental approach (headspace) than penis stimulation. This rules out most cis men, to whom the prostate is usually on a spectrum from unfamiliar to taboo: that gives queer/gay/trans people kind of opportunity advantage.
The headspace I'm talking about here is more of a yearning for connection (to connect with the prostate/vagina), as opposed to feeling impressed with and excited by someone's figure (to connect with the penis/clitoris).
The feeling of safety and commitment that can be found in a monogamous relationship is a really effective way to get into that headspace. This means that the utility of a committed romance can be directly applied to a cis woman's sexual experience, in the same way porn can be applied to a cis man's experience. This is where goals can be misaligned categorically along the boundary of sex.
How much of that is social expectation? I can see the circular reasoning here: can I get out?
That is a challenge. Social expectations set boundaries: changing those boundaries takes a lot of work. It's still possible, though. To me, it's worth the effort.