edhall@randvax.UUCP (Ed Hall) (09/18/86)
Keywords: A very dear friend of mine once pointed out that obvious sexual ``hunger'' was a real turn-off for most women, and that as long as I gave the impression of being in sexual need I'd generally ``strike out''. It's been years, and my attitudes have changed a lot since then--at least partly from the realization that she was right, a realization reinforced by my experiences. I'm not just talking about lust here; mutual lust is a mutual turn-on. But when the sexual desire is unfocused, and when just about anyone fitting certain basic criteria becomes an object of that desire, it becomes a very unattractive thing. It's not hard to see why this is so. Just about everybody wants to feel that they're special, at some level; this is plain human nature, and just as important in the first five minutes of a relationship as in the first 50 years. It doesn't matter how ``sensitive'' and ``understanding'' you are; if the person you are with feels like they could just as well be someone else, they aren't going to want to get involved. Hell, you might be sensitive and understanding with everyone. People, of either sex, generally don't like being just sex objects. They might love being lusted after by an approriate someone who focuses that feeling *especially* on them, but if that glint in the other person's eye is based solely on raw biological need and has nothing to do with them as people, it is repulsive. This all leads back to feminism 101 (doesn't this group always seem to do this?): being a sex object is degrading. Some traditional women might accept men treating them as a sex object as ``the way men are'' [are you listening, Jeff W?], but it just ain't sexy to be thought of as a piece of meat--perhaps more or less tasty than some other piece of meat but meat nonetheless. -Ed Hall decvax!randvax!edhall
eric@batcomputer.TN.CORNELL.EDU (Eric Fielding) (09/18/86)
In article <1142@oliveb.UUCP> prs@oliven.UUCP (Philip Stephens) writes: >In article <911@gilbbs.UUCP> mc68020@gilbbs.UUCP (Thomas J Keller) writes: > >{about a painfully familiar situation} > >My situation isn't too different at the moment, so I look forward to some >wiser folk replying to you (gently, I hope). Meanwhile, a few interim >suggestions... > I have also spent extended time periods without a sexual partner, up to three years (and unfortunately find myself suddenly back in that situation). I tend to drink a lot more alcohol (and consume other things that I won't mention in public in case there are narcs reading :-) to make it easier to go home to sleep alone. I don't recommend this, but it works. >>This situation is complicated by several things, my being overweight, not >>being into dancing or partying, etc., and becoming extremely nervous when >>involved in social situations. > >Try to find a program in your area specificly designed to help deal with >shyness. Some community colleges etc have courses on this or related topics. >Even that may be hard for you to consider, but please do. > There have been several discussions lately on net.women about how it is much tougher for shy "passive" men than for "aggressive" women to meet MOTAS in our society. I can't boast too much success myself. Luckily, a few women have found me attractive enough to approach me. >> I find myself performing behaviours which I loath, and which distress me. >{details deleted} >Part of what you describe is quite normal, and nothing to be ashamed of, *if* >it is not so obvious as to offend. Er, at least I hope so, since I do it. >... >> It is not that I don't respect them as people. I am senstive to >>the fact that such staring degrades not only them, but me. I am deeply >>ashamed of my behaviours in this regard. > >Degrades? Not as serious as you believe. Not that I think it perfectly >healthy, especially if you are well out of your teens... to be compulsive >about it seems to me a normal phase to go thru, and getting stuck in it >calls for seeking help (as you are), not shame. > I don't worry about watching women (even when I do have a regular sexual partner, I look, though less), as long as I can keep from drooling on my shirt or falling off of my bicycle or reaching out to touch someone (may be (c) AT&T :-). Seriously, discretion is the key here. I see no point in feeling guilty for thinking thoughts that I can't help thinking. It does make it difficult to work with female colleagues, though. >> When I do meet women, I end up in >>"freidnship only" mode, which is fine, as far as it goes. I enjoy haveing >>female freidns (I enjoy havgin freinds). Not one of them owes me a damned >>thing, romantically. > >In my limited experience, friends are often better for me than most of my >sexual partners have been. Learn how to be a good friend, and you will >learn the more important points of how to be a good lover (if I'm on the >right track here, I could use some further pointers myself.) > Several friends of mine have turned into lovers of mine. It is easier to get to know someone on a social level before getting involved on a intimate level. It's also much more fun to have sex with someone that you already know you like. >> Yet, I have this terrible need (yes, I need romance >>every bit as much, perhaps even more than I need sex). I am lost, frustrated >>and disgusted (with myself). > >The need for romance, as confused with and only partially distinguished from >the need for sex, is probably the key point here. I feel it too. It is the >feeling that "I'm not OK if I don't have a lover", the feeling that one must >prove acceptability by being accepted. People do *LOTS* worse things than >stare when driven by that desperate need to prove that they are an OK man or >woman. Including date-rape and worse. And milder things, like bedding and >even marrying someone they don't even like. From what you've said, you can be >proud of what you haven't done to physically degrade yourself and others. >Not to belittle your anguish, only defuse it a little. > Everyone needs affection, which may or may not include sex. Tom (>>) mentioned that he had a "SO" with whom he had a non-sexual relationship. I have had a little experience with this also, and I found that one woman was perfectly happy to have me hug her and even kiss her even though she definitely ruled out any sexual activity. This can be quite satisfying when one needs affection more than sex. In most countries it is expected for men to hug and kiss women (and vice-versa) as part of every-day greetings. We Americans are missing out on this--I guess this may be due to the Puritan traditions. >> I am opening myself up for a lot of shit around here by posting this >>article, and I am willing to take the shit. I am hoping that someone out >>there can offer me some ideas on how to rectify my situation. > >Well, there have been some humane and helpful responses to others with >serious questions, so I look forward to this discussion also. Thanks >for starting it. > I hope that my ex-lover does not get insulted by this. It's too bad that there is not a "net.men" for us to discuss things like this which are not necessarily of interest to women. >>tom keller "She's alive, ALIVE!" > >..The last two relationships, well, >have you heard of aversion training? (Both women were and are nice >people; I don't blame it *all* on them, but I now associate each of >them with pain). > >But I've been "resting up and healing" from the most recent one for >nearly a year; I don't know if I need more patience or less! I don't >seem all that shy, but where it really counts, I need help too. Some >answers will probably apply to Tom, some to me, some to both. And >I'll try not to take offense at well intentioned criticism. > > - Phil I am sorry to hear that you are still unhappy about your previous relationships, I am learning to recover faster each time. I have certainly found that it helps to be comfortable with oneself (have one's head together, in hippy jargon) before embarking on new relationships. I don't think that this involves any particular "healing" time. I am not sure that I have made any useful suggestions, but it is always good to know that one is not alone in feeling alone. ++Eric Fielding DARPA Internet: eric@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu (or) fielding@geology.tn.cornell.edu
eric@batcomputer.TN.CORNELL.EDU (Eric Fielding) (09/18/86)
In article <6015@lll-crg.ARpA> nolan@lll-crg.UUCP (Matt Nolan) writes: >In article <1143@oliveb.UUCP> ramesh@olivej.UUCP (Ramesh Dimbum) writes: >>In article <911@gilbbs.UUCP> mc68020@gilbbs.UUCP (Thomas J Keller) writes: >>> >>> I find myself in a painful and distressing situation. >> ( nice short reference eh? ) > Keeping extremely busy helps, keeping your body tired helps to, >1-2 hours of exercise per day will keep you busy and tired. (How about >that martial arts scene I've been reading about on the net.) Don't plan >on going to bed until your so tired you fall asleep immediately. Also, >think about sex while you do the 1-2hours of exercise. That way the rest >of the day you will have had that need fulfilled and can concetrate on >something more important. Also exercise has the addition benefit of using >up your supply of endocrins and adrenlin, by using them up you be less >likely to want sex. You've really got to tire yourself out though, just >a little invigorating exercise may increase desire. I forgot to mention exercise. I have found that bicycle riding and splitting firewood are both good ways to work off some of those physical frustrations. (No pseudo-Freudian comments please.) >This means you have to do stuff that makes you >available. Fun people attract S0's. How true! Besides, one might as well have fun while one is waiting to find the right person ;-). > Nolan, Matt ++Eric Fielding
rlk@mit-trillian.MIT.EDU (Robert L Krawitz) (09/20/86)
In article <1046@batcomputer.TN.CORNELL.EDU> eric@batcomputer.UUCP (Eric Fielding) writes: > >I forgot to mention exercise. I have found that bicycle riding and splitting >firewood are both good ways to work off some of those physical frustrations. >(No pseudo-Freudian comments please.) > Well, if your saddle doesn't fit right, or your riding posture is bad, it can relieve your physical frustrations in quite another way. Numbness of or pain in the genitals aren't all that conducive to sexual activity. > > ++Eric Fielding -- Robert^Z
jeffw@midas.UUCP (Jeff Winslow) (09/22/86)
At the end of an otherwise excellent article (I agreed with it :-)) Ed Hall gets in this dig: > Some traditional women >might accept men treating them as a sex object as ``the way men are'' >[are you listening, Jeff W?], I'm listening, and I can't figure out what it has to do with me. My defense was of men fantasizing, not treating women as sex objects. Something that I doubt even "traditional" women would enjoy, though I suppose they might accept it. Wrt to Tom K.'s questions, I'd suggest that Ed's article be required reading, even if it's no immediate help. For what it's worth, I met the woman who is now my wife several months after I had decided I could live alone for the rest of my life and enjoy it. Unfortunately that's probably not much help either. Except that you need things you enjoy doing that take a lot of effort and time to make that kind of decision, and I don't imagine women get very excited by men who are only interested in women. Jeff Winslow
edhall@randvax.UUCP (Ed Hall) (09/24/86)
In article <1665@ames.UUCP> barry@ames.UUCP (Kenn Barry) writes: > My main problem is that you went from "just sex objects" in the >former paragraph, to "sex objects" in the latter. Obviously, no one wants >to be just a sex object; no one wants to play that role at all times, >with all people. But much confusion can arise from a phrase like "being >a sex object is degrading", because it's ambiguous. Does it mean that >being nothing but a sex object is degrading, or does it mean that playing >that role part-time and voluntarily is also degrading? Sorry to be confusing at this particular point, but I thought I made it clear in the rest of my posting (e.g. the comments on mutual lust) that being *only* a sex object is what's objectionable--it can be quite fun to play that role in appropriate circumstances. > I have one other problem with what you said. You speak of impersonal >sexual interest being repulsive to the object of interest. I disagree. Perhaps we should consider the context. Many people like to be admired for their attractiveness or ``sexiness''. But a lot fewer people want their SO to consider them in that way and no way else. I usually assume that my reader has been following the particular discussion I'm commenting on. Otherwise, length of postings tend to grow exponentially. In this case we were discussing problems with finding an SO, and not general comments on people-watching. I agree completely with what you said in the context you put it in, Kenn. But I wasn't discussing superficial attraction, here. >- From the Crow's Nest - Kenn Barry -Ed Hall decvax!randvax!edhall
nap@druxo.UUCP (ParsonsNA) (09/26/86)
> Kenn Barry writes: > Obviously, no one wants > to be just a sex object; no one wants to play that role at all times, > with all people. But much confusion can arise from a phrase like "being > a sex object is degrading", because it's ambiguous. Does it mean that > being nothing but a sex object is degrading, or does it mean that playing > that role part-time and voluntarily is also degrading? It seems to me that there is a world of difference between being a sex PARTNER and being a sex OBJECT. In none of my roles in life do I wish to be considered an "object" nor do I ever want to treat others as "objects." Being an object suggests to me being passive and used. Ever wondered why "sex object" is traditionally associated with women? Nancy Parsons
wfi@rti-sel.UUCP (William Ingogly) (09/26/86)
In article <911@gilbbs.UUCP> mc68020@gilbbs.UUCP (Thomas J Keller) writes: [I was going to delete net.women from the Newsgroups, but after writing my response decided what I have to say might be helpful to someone who reads net.women but not net.singles] >This situation is complicated by several things, my being overweight, not >being into dancing or partying, etc., and becoming extremely nervous when >involved in social situations. None of these problems are unsolvable. Join a health club or the Y and get into shape. GET INTO dancing or partying, or at least into putting yourself in situations where you'll meet some nice people. If you're nervous about social situations, figure out why; get some professional help if you need it (there's nothing wrong with that -- going for help is a sign of mental HEALTH, not illness: the stigma attached to these things belongs in the 19th century). By the way, I don't understand why masturbation should be a poor substitute for intercourse. Who knows your own responses and needs better than you? > I find myself performing behaviours which I loath, and which distress me. >When I am in public, I find myself staring at women, wondering about how a >sexual interlude with them would turn out. I stare at their crotches and >chests. I mentally undress them. I *DO* try very hard to maintain a low >profile. It is not that I don't respect them as people. I am senstive to >the fact that such staring degrades not only them, but me. I am deeply >ashamed of my behaviours in this regard. Why? Why be ashamed of being human and having a normal sexual drive? We all sometimes go through periods when we feel our sexuality strongly. We all lust in our hearts, even Presidents. :-) There's nothing wrong with feelings and desires; they're perfectly normal. It's EXPLOITATIVE AND HURTFUL ACTIONS that are immoral, not normal sexual feelings. > I am just unsure of what to do. I don't know how to meet people, or at >least I am particularly unskilled at it. When I do meet women, I end up in >"freidnship only" mode, which is fine, as far as it goes. I enjoy haveing >female freidns (I enjoy havgin freinds). Not one of them owes me a damned >thing, romantically. Yet, I have this terrible need (yes, I need romance >every bit as much, perhaps even more than I need sex). I am lost, frustrated >and disgusted (with myself). I think you have some problems with your perceptions of yourself, and with your perceptions of how you think other people view you. Don't worry; you're certainly not alone. Many people have suffered from perceptual disorders, and these things can be effectively dealt with. I know: I'm a person who's been battling panic disorder and depression for some years, and have fairly recently begun to control these problems through interaction with a cognitive behaviorist. He's shown me techniques for dealing with the stream of negative thoughts I'm usually only half aware of about my self-worth and about the way I appear to other people. They work, and they're simple to follow. I have no idea what your root problems really are, or how similar they are to problems I've had, but I'll tell you there's nothing to be ashamed or disgusted about. More people than you'd suspect suffer from the kind of depression you seem to be having at one time or another in their lives. You see, it's easy to build up an incorrect set of beliefs about how the world works, about yourself, and about other people's perceptions of you and reify that set of beliefs with a constant internal dialogue that filters your experiences and interprets them in a negative way to reinforce your world view. Back when you were a child, you probably believed in Santa Claus or at least in some other fantasy beings that you no longer believe in. At some time, that belief system was shattered by a rational examination of the basis for the beliefs. Believe it or not, you can do the same thing with your warped perceptions about yourself and the world and get beyond this. I hope this does someone on the net some good; I'm happy with the way my life is going now, and when I see other people hurting I like to tell them there's no reason to: there's a way out, and it's as close as the nearest telephone. For those of you on the net who suffer from panic disorder, anxiety, or agorophobia, I highly recommend a book called "Don't Panic," by R. Reid Wilson. And for those of you who suffer from depression, I highly recommend another book called "Feeling Good," by (I think) David Burns. They were recommended by my therapist, and they've helped me a lot. -- Cheers, Bill Ingogly
barry@ames.UUCP (Kenn Barry) (09/28/86)
From: nap@druxo.UUCP (ParsonsNA): >> Kenn Barry writes: >> Obviously, no one wants >> to be just a sex object; no one wants to play that role at all times, >> with all people. But much confusion can arise from a phrase like "being >> a sex object is degrading", because it's ambiguous. Does it mean that >> being nothing but a sex object is degrading, or does it mean that playing >> that role part-time and voluntarily is also degrading? > >It seems to me that there is a world of difference between being a sex >PARTNER and being a sex OBJECT. We agree. Sorry if my phrasing added to the confusion. >In none of my roles in life do I wish >to be considered an "object" nor do I ever want to treat others as >"objects." Being an object suggests to me being passive and used. That's the basic idea ;-). While sex should always be, on the average, a give and take, I see no harm in one partner being the passive giver and the other the active taker from time to time, as a change of pace. To take this conversation back to the "cheap thrills" arena where it started, there is nothing wrong with a man or woman getting a kick out of admiring a good-looking stranger's body if it's not done offensively. Nor is there anything wrong with enjoying such impersonal admiration from others. The general idea I was trying to get across was that roles like sexual aggressor and sex object can be played for fun, and are. Being "used" can be quite nice in the right company. >Ever wondered why "sex object" is traditionally associated with women? I know the tradition of male/hunter female/prey. No reason we have to abide by it. Playing sexual roles for fun needn't be a sexist activity. - From the Crow's Nest - Kenn Barry NASA-Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ELECTRIC AVENUE: {ihnp4,vortex,dual,hao,hplabs}!ames!barry
drw@cullvax.UUCP (Dale Worley) (09/29/86)
> In article <911@gilbbs.UUCP> mc68020@gilbbs.UUCP (Thomas J Keller) writes: > >This situation is complicated by several things, my being overweight, not > >being into dancing or partying, etc., and becoming extremely nervous when > >involved in social situations. > > None of these problems are unsolvable. Join a health club or the Y and > get into shape. GET INTO dancing or partying, or at least into putting > yourself in situations where you'll meet some nice people. If you're > nervous about social situations, figure out why; get some professional > help if you need it (there's nothing wrong with that -- going for help > is a sign of mental HEALTH, not illness: the stigma attached to these > things belongs in the 19th century). And remember, it will take *time* to learn new social skills. It also takes time to develop a network of social contacts, but once you do, your social life improves in widening circles. You have to put effort into this if you aren't in college--don't fear that you are being pushy, they want friends too. If you can find some relatively small group where you can meet the same people time after time, it helps. See if you can find a copy of "Shyness" by Zimbardo. (It helped me. Hey, if I can escape from shyness, so can you!) > > I find myself performing behaviours which I loath, and which distress me. > >When I am in public, I find myself staring at women, wondering about how a > >sexual interlude with them would turn out. I stare at their crotches and > >chests. I mentally undress them. I *DO* try very hard to maintain a low > >profile. It is not that I don't respect them as people. I am senstive to > >the fact that such staring degrades not only them, but me. I am deeply > >ashamed of my behaviours in this regard. Sounds normal to me. Just be tactful about it -- but it seems that you are. Try to get off this self-loathing kick. You're not doing anything that's even uncommon. Don't judge yourself harshly, at least, no harsher than the people you're around. I am always surprised at the tolerance that other people show -- I'm always afraid that I'm being an obnoxious asshole, but as far as I can tell, I'm never perceived as such. > > I am just unsure of what to do. I don't know how to meet people, or at > >least I am particularly unskilled at it. When I do meet women, I end up in > >"freidnship only" mode, which is fine, as far as it goes. I enjoy haveing > >female friends (I enjoy having freinds). Not one of them owes me a damned > >thing, romantically. Yet, I have this terrible need (yes, I need romance > >every bit as much, perhaps even more than I need sex). I am lost, frustrated > >and disgusted (with myself). Re: female friends. It's a good start. If you're track record is like mine, only a relatively small fraction of the female species (?) is potentially romantically inclined toward you. This means you've got to do alot of searching. Along the way, you will probably make a lot of female friends, which is good also... Just make it clear to them that you are interested in them romantically as well, and when you come across a real possibility, things will work out. Dale