Sex and Love. Sex vs. Love. The Great Divide?

(November South Bay Poly Commentary)

That whole idea of sex and love as totally different came up again the other day when a friend of mine said, after hearing an interview about "Sex at Dawn," “So if it’s only *sex* you have with another person, I can live with it.  As long as you don’t have any emotional involvement.”

“But the emotional involvement,” I told her, “is what’s important to me.”

And there it is!  The Great Divide in orientation (Sexual?  Relational?  What do we call this “orientation?”)  It comes down, perhaps, to what we’re afraid of, or afraid of losing; perhaps to what scares us?

Some people are nervous about sexual relationships and have to treat them with caution.  Some people are uncomfortable with emotional involvement and have to tread carefully with it.  Some people are comfortable with both, or with neither.

So—I understand a lover becoming emotionally involved with another person; but their having sex with them triggers something uncomfortable for me.

Whereas, for some of my friends, sex is “just sex.”   “All you two did was have sex.  You were just having your fun.”  But emotional involvement can feel very threatening.

They’re *both* important for me.  And of course they *are* different.   But connected.  For me, sex with no emotional connection is pretty pointless.  But emotional involvement with no physical relationship (whether actually sexual or not) feels thwarted, stunted.

For me, it’s all connected.

Nature and/or Nurture?

(The October South Bay Poly Commentary)

Last month at our discussion I suggested reservations about the debate over whether orientation (whether sexual or relational) comes from “nature” or “nurture.”  Are we perhaps being too restrictive in our thinking?  Could we be a combination of both?

I do think some people are naturally poly or naturally monogamous.  But some people aren’t, and feel comfortable choosing, at times, to behave in a monogamous or a polyamorous way.  Even people who are naturally one or the other may still choose to behave differently from time to time.

And is that really so surprising?  I can be generally gay (or generally straight) and in a certain situation choose to behave differently.  And if I’m bisexual or pansexual or omnisexual….I can choose with every love-interest what I will do.

And perhaps people evolve—not be forcibly changed, as the “gay therapy” people claim; but may we not prefer men at one point, and women at another; or both equally sometimes?  Then why shouldn’t we incline sometimes towards monogamy but other times to polyamory?  We may indeed possess an orientation; but we may feel perfectly fine discovering that it’s broader than we’ve believed.  At least, some of us may.

So why should society be restrictive?

Caring and Love

For many people, polyamory is strongly connected to opening up their sexuality.  Somehow monogamy, for them, is about inhibiting, limiting their sexuality.  For me, there is an element of this.  I spent many years being uneasy with sexuality, feeling threatened by it.  I wasn’t comfortable with it.  I was afraid.
But sexuality isn’t the point, for me.  Even if I were totally comfortable with sexuality, I would still be left with the questions “why?” and “what for?”  Some people supposedly get past that; they simply say “why not?” and “just for the joy and pleasure and sharing.”

For me, to do something “just for the joy and pleasure and sharing”…well, I could do that.  And say “why not?”  But, to truly enjoy sex, I need certain things.

With myself, I need comfort and safety.  I need to feel relaxed.  With someone else, I need that too.  And I’m only comfortable and relaxed, and feeling safe, with particular people—not just “anyone.”  So—not strangers.  Probably not large groups of people at one time.  And not flippant folks.  Not that I’m a terribly serious person.  But sex is something special for me.  I can only take it so lightly……

Caring and love definitely help.

Many ("Poly!") Ways To Be Poly

(From the South Bay Poly August newsletter).
 
Some polys approach their polyness as a choice, others as an orientation.

Those who approach it as a choice may emphasize a larger interest in intentional communities, tantra, sacred sexuality, non-violent communication, sex-positivity, etc.

I feel my polyamory more as an orientation—it’s the “way I am,” and I’m more interested in understanding myself than trying to change society—although I think that people coming to terms with their polyness would change society!

So I examine myself, how I feel, how I react to others.  I ask myself questions:  What attracts me to other people?  What makes me feel comfortable or uncomfortable around others?  What limits my involvement with others?

I’ve suggested to friends that polys can be grouped by several tendencies:  “Active” polys have multiple love-interests; “Passive” polys don’t, but can accept their partner having them.  “Expansive” polys reach outwards to many people.  They can form many attachments, often of a light sort; while “consolidating” polys pull inwards with a small group of people.  Maybe it’s a matter of extroversion and introversion.

Many (“poly!”) ways to be poly!

This Thing Called Love

Once upon a time, I told someone I loved them.

"What do you mean by that?" they asked.

I thought a minute.  "I mean I like you very very much."

I don't think that satisfied them.  Later I came to realize that some people think "love" is an entirely different creature that "like."  Which reminds me of an old friend who once said:  "I don't like my wife; I love my wife."  Which puzzled me because I thought of "loving" as a more intense form of "liking."

Now I've thought more about it.  It seems that, at some point after I've realized I like someone a lot, the question occurs to me, do I love them?

First, I have to like them—a lot.  Second, I have to care about them.  Third, maybe I have to care for them so much, that I'm willing to give up some of what I want for the sake of what they want.  So that loving someone includes an element of putting them first.

Not in a co-dependent way.  I don't mean that you should cause yourself hurt, over and over, to give someone else what they want.  Although, now and then, you may have to give up something you want, in order to give your love-object something they want.

(My first fiancée once said "Love is Sacrifice."  That somehow rubs me the wrong way.  If you do nothing but sacrifice, if you're never getting what you want, I'm not sure that is "love" either...).

Some of us can love deeply, romantically, several or even many people at once; and people of several genders.  This often leads to difficulty and misunderstandings; for of course this is not the social standard of "love" which society usually teaches us.

Of course there are many kinds of love apart from romantic love.  We may love our relatives—parents, siblings, children—our friends, our fellow human beings.  Yet society seems particularly nervous about romantic or sexual love; because society is particularly unsettled, it seems, by sexuality and sexual feelings.  So to feel romantic or sexual love for several people, of several genders, is a recipe for misunderstanding and rejection.

Yet some of us by our natures seem to do it.  People are gay or straight or something other.  People are also romantically drawn to one person, or to several people, or none.  I don't know why, but it happens.

Love can sometimes mean, I care about you even if I'm attracted to you and you can't reciprocate.  Or if you're attracted to me and I can't reciprocate.  Romantic or sexual feelings may or may not be mutual.  In fact, "love" may mean committing to finding the way to provide something good for someone you care about, even if you know you will never receive back what you yourself would like to receive.

So a gay man may love a straight man; or a polyamorous person may love a monogamous person.  "With love, all things are possible," it is said.  The wisdom is to see how to love, truly love—to care for someone and act towards what they need, even though you may get nothing in return.

Making Friends Online -- My Own Rationale.

(This is the story of how I ended up with over 1,000 "friends" on Facebook.  I realize this approach is "not for everyone"--it's just a description of my own rationale).

fyi...

I've friended people on Facebook for a variety of reasons --

Various common interests (languages, history, religion, literature, human rights)

or because we're both writers, or pagans, or witches, or Unitarians (or poly or bi or "open")

Or because we've both lived in Virginia, or Germany, or Japan.

or because we both speak any number of the same languages.

Or because we like the same writers, or composers, or films.

Or because they live somewhere I'm interested in.

Yes -- I admit -- There were times when I noticed someone was irresistibly gorgeous....

...but I don't know that I ever friended someone just for that.

Sometimes they posted an interesting remark or something funny or poetic.

At this point...well...after I arrived at 1,000 friends, I put a moratorium on myself.  I thought, "Who are all these people?????"  And I decided to try to get to know them better, rather than just accumulating even more "friends."

At  this point....I can't remember how often I included a note to say why I was interested in being their friend.  I'm sure I didn't do it for all 1,000+ people I've friended.

Then again, some of those 1,000 have friended me for any number of reasons.  I generally accept.  I only hesitate if.....I have idea who these people are.  By which I mean....nothing much on their profile, no photo -- and if I send them a message to say "hi, how did you find out about me?" they ignore it.

Conflicted?

(From this month's South Bay Poly newsletter).

I recently spent a week or two distraught, feeling like a child.  I suppose some guy had to grow up conflicted about sex; it might as well have been me.

   

Sex is complicated.  A lot of us have conflicts about it on some level or another.  Who should we have sex with?  Should we have sex at all?  We bluff our way through life.

But heck, I’m a grownup; I feel like I’m supposed to know what I’m doing...

It isn’t so much the sex; it's the people that cause pain.  Sex with yourself is relatively simple.

Call it “conflict,” call it “hang-ups.”  One way or another, a lot of us have problems with those three little letters s-e-x.

Some people will tell you that if you’re ever uncomfortable about something sexual, you're "hung up," you’re not “sex-positive.”  I disagree.

Sometimes I feel so isolated!  Everyone else seems so comfortable with sex, so relaxed.  They just enjoy it!  They even seem glib or flippant!  But some of us think and fret; we can’t be glib and flippant.  Maybe we should be.

 In my case, sexuality is tied to the person—I want to know them better as people.  That's what attracts me....

Sex for me isn't just fun; it’s a deep pleasure I share with another person.  At its best it’s transcendent (some would say “holy.”)  If it's simply mundane...it's lost something.  If it's only mundane…I miss the transcendence.

For me, becoming someone's lover isn't just a matter of titillating each other's bodies—though I'm coming to appreciate my need for touch more and more!   For me, becoming someone’s lover means opening my whole self to them (as much as I can open!) and inviting them to open themselves to me.  It's not just physical; it’s mental, emotional, psychic…spiritual…divine.

But why not have sex on a whim, for kicks, with a stranger?  A hot dog on the Boardwalk—with onions…and relish—can be fun, now and then.  But I'm used to Chinese banquets.

Self-reflection can lead to insight.  I realize that I’m open to people but also afraid of them. I don’t feel comfortable making love with a stranger.  I’m not at ease with people I've just met.  It’s true I can start to feel close to someone quickly; but the whole process takes time.  It takes time for me to become comfortable with a new acquaintance.  It takes time for me to trust them to the point that I can open up to them emotionally or physically.

For me, sex takes time.

"Dr. William's Guide to Using Viagra"

People laughed and gave me weird looks when I told them I was writing this, but…

Some of us guys need a little “assistance” with our sex lives.  But who wants to dwell on that?  Sounds too much like “work!”  It’s embarrassing!  Viagra is the butt(?!) of so many jokes…..

Still, there are some things that older men (and their lovers) ought to know.  Dr. William (not a real doctor!) can help!  Here’s Doctor William’s Guide to Using Viagra.

In Brief:

Without Viagra, “nothing may happen.”

Well, maybe not nothing.  But maybe not much of an erection—but still possibly an orgasm anyway (men can have orgasms without erections).

With Viagra—an erection, possibly quite * * * HARD* * * (lol)

And a much more enjoyable orgasm.

--> Therefore—“Viagra Good!” (grin!)

  

But…

1.   After you take it, nothing much will happen for 15-20 minutes…at least…

2.    Then, when something does happen, if you don’t do anything about it, it can get quite frustrating.

3.    The effects can last several hours.

4.    These critters cost over $10 per ____ (you know “per what!”…)

Therefore…

“If you’re gonna take it, you wanna use it.”

“If you ain’t gonna use it, you don’t wanna take it.”

It’s great to take—!

—but you have to give it some time.  Be patient…

—and if there’s a change of plans and you ain’t gonna use what Viagra has given you…

    …it’s nice to have a cozy place handy for a date “with yourself”…<grinning>

The Opening

I realize suddenly, eerily, that I’m at peace—tranquil.

It surprises me because I’ve spent weeks or months uneasy.  But now, unexpected tranquility.

It has something to do with the time I spent with my girlfriend last night.  Peaceful.  We lay together, sleepy, watching TV.

And it has to do with the conversations I’ve been having with dear friends online.  We talk about relationships, and literature, and love.

And the conversation I had with my other girlfriend over the weekend—a long deep discussion about sexuality and relationships.  How do people open up to their own inner depths?  How do they open up to each other?  What makes this fulfilling, or not?

Or another quiet meeting I had with a newer friend?

Lately, I’ve been exploring my own feelings about sexuality, deepening my understanding of myself.  I have friends who are very comfortable with bodies and sex; and very sociable and talkative; sometimes loud, sometimes blunt.

Me, I’m an introvert and Former Shy Person—maybe still a bit shy; and maybe not so comfortable with my body and sexuality.

So—to let my loud friends have their fun and not feel intimidated or left out myself—and not to sneer just slightly…is a challenge.

But apparently possible—trusting my own feelings and allowing myself to relax.

And…realizing also that I know other people, who are shy and have never become as sociable as I have.  How do I assure them about their own self-image and feelings?

I walk between.  Perhaps it is possible to remain true to your own feelings while opening yourself up to everybody else’s!

Poly vs. Promiscuity?

In some recent fiction I posed the question, “Did [so-and-so] really have only two choices:  Traditional marriage or shallow promiscuity?”  Part of the idea of the story is that there are multiple choices; just because someone doesn’t live in a traditional marriage or relationship doesn’t mean that they are living a “shallow promiscuous” lifestyle.

At the same time, I’ve been exchanging opinions about the Congressman Weiner “affair” (<heh?>) and realizing what a knack Americans have of considering anything other than monogamy “shallow” and “sleazy.”  And how so much of our phraseology reduces everything other than monogamy to cheapness.

Then again—I’m also reading Sex At Dawn:  The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality by Christopher Ryan and Cacilda Jethrá.  This book from 2010 suggests that humans are naturally, happily “promiscuous”—by which the authors mean “having a number of ongoing sexual relationships at the same time.”  (I immediately disagreed with this definition).  They also discuss cultures in which people simply have sex with a lot of people (whether in any kind of relationship or not).

Myself, at age 60, almost feel comfortable with sexual encounters outside of an ongoing relationship.  Almost.  Because I prefer sex within a relationship.  “Promiscuous?”