Posting of substance? Be aware.
Sep. 13th, 2004 12:23 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
silveradept"I am one, sir, that comes to tell you your daughter
and the Moor are now making the beast with two backs." - Iago, Othello, Act I, Scene I, 116-117.
And thus, having adequately warned you about the content of the post, those who are unconcerned about or unwilling to look at such matters should probably skip downwards (or upwards) to the next entry on their friendslist. I'll even give you a break or two so that you notice this segment.
There. Can't say I didn't warn you. I try not to be angsty or mono-topical (excepting when I'm being boring, and that happens regularly) in my journal, so bear with me.
You see, not that I'm anywhere even remotely close to situations that might involve Iago's jibe, but occasionally, the mind thinks about those sorts of things. And it presented a most interesting thought to me. One side posited the desire to know what the whole matter was about, providing anecdotal evidence somewhere that I had read that the first time is not always the best time. The other side provided different anecdotal evidence about how it was so much more meaningful and special to preserve the state of not knowing until one had found someone worth staying with for extended periods of time, and possibly children.
I suppose desperation is a close analogue to what some part of me is feeling. Something about the prime part of my life passing without a mate. Mor'an likely it's biology telling me that if I want to pass on my genes, I should go out and get cracking. Having roommates last year that were intimate probably helped this side's argument along pretty well. I admit that's he's fairly convincing and that I'm probably partial to him in some way. I suppose I have some idealized version of it, but I've heard (probable double-entendre there) that it's, well, good, both from men and women.
On the other side of the argument, there's my Catholic upbringing still saying that it's really just for procreation, and should be saved until marriage, and stories from both men and women that waiting made it more worthwhile when it finally happened. More prominent than that is a notion of somewhat low self-esteem and a general lack of belief in my own attractiveness, more due to lack of evidence to the contrary and probably slightly incorrect assumptions I have about what the populace that is looking for intercourse seeks in their partners. Generally, the image there is either someone of more obvious physical strength than I, or a personality type that is mostly antithetical to my own self. Thus, it's likely not right, but it's there.
The two forces strive with each other, providing excellent point and counterpoint to the whole idea. Perhaps the reason it doesn't surface much is, as I've noted, I'm unaware of any potential situations in my own life that could lead to this sort of thing. But I suppose I'm already playing out the hypotheticals, wishing at the same time for a relationship where it was only physical, with no need for deeper contacts, to get "experience", and at the same time thinking that such a relationship would be disastrous to my mental health, and that I really should be going after one of the supportive, nurturing type even if there's no possibility of the sexual act involved. Naturally, having both appears to be an ideal solution and a recipe for destruction all at once.
Am I over-thinking it? Probably. It's part frustration, part desperation, and part knowledge all working against me. So, I'm soliciting opinion again. Post with your name or without it, I care not. Anecdotes, stories, facts, arguments for, against, whatever. Even though we all know that I'll have to make that decision when it presents itself, could those of you who have more wisdom than I, on all sides of the argument, share it?
and the Moor are now making the beast with two backs." - Iago, Othello, Act I, Scene I, 116-117.
And thus, having adequately warned you about the content of the post, those who are unconcerned about or unwilling to look at such matters should probably skip downwards (or upwards) to the next entry on their friendslist. I'll even give you a break or two so that you notice this segment.
There. Can't say I didn't warn you. I try not to be angsty or mono-topical (excepting when I'm being boring, and that happens regularly) in my journal, so bear with me.
You see, not that I'm anywhere even remotely close to situations that might involve Iago's jibe, but occasionally, the mind thinks about those sorts of things. And it presented a most interesting thought to me. One side posited the desire to know what the whole matter was about, providing anecdotal evidence somewhere that I had read that the first time is not always the best time. The other side provided different anecdotal evidence about how it was so much more meaningful and special to preserve the state of not knowing until one had found someone worth staying with for extended periods of time, and possibly children.
I suppose desperation is a close analogue to what some part of me is feeling. Something about the prime part of my life passing without a mate. Mor'an likely it's biology telling me that if I want to pass on my genes, I should go out and get cracking. Having roommates last year that were intimate probably helped this side's argument along pretty well. I admit that's he's fairly convincing and that I'm probably partial to him in some way. I suppose I have some idealized version of it, but I've heard (probable double-entendre there) that it's, well, good, both from men and women.
On the other side of the argument, there's my Catholic upbringing still saying that it's really just for procreation, and should be saved until marriage, and stories from both men and women that waiting made it more worthwhile when it finally happened. More prominent than that is a notion of somewhat low self-esteem and a general lack of belief in my own attractiveness, more due to lack of evidence to the contrary and probably slightly incorrect assumptions I have about what the populace that is looking for intercourse seeks in their partners. Generally, the image there is either someone of more obvious physical strength than I, or a personality type that is mostly antithetical to my own self. Thus, it's likely not right, but it's there.
The two forces strive with each other, providing excellent point and counterpoint to the whole idea. Perhaps the reason it doesn't surface much is, as I've noted, I'm unaware of any potential situations in my own life that could lead to this sort of thing. But I suppose I'm already playing out the hypotheticals, wishing at the same time for a relationship where it was only physical, with no need for deeper contacts, to get "experience", and at the same time thinking that such a relationship would be disastrous to my mental health, and that I really should be going after one of the supportive, nurturing type even if there's no possibility of the sexual act involved. Naturally, having both appears to be an ideal solution and a recipe for destruction all at once.
Am I over-thinking it? Probably. It's part frustration, part desperation, and part knowledge all working against me. So, I'm soliciting opinion again. Post with your name or without it, I care not. Anecdotes, stories, facts, arguments for, against, whatever. Even though we all know that I'll have to make that decision when it presents itself, could those of you who have more wisdom than I, on all sides of the argument, share it?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-09-13 04:50 am (UTC)It can be for procreation, or for love, or for enjoyment, just as long as it's for people, and not for the sake of some obsession.
2c.
no subject
Date: 2004-09-13 08:07 am (UTC)Several people metioned that they want to have more than one partner because they want to be experienced or that want to satisfy their curiosity.
I think it's not that important, but people who have that wish should maybe better satisfy it before they one day have to try something out while being in a relationship: that always hurts.
For the waiting part: I believe in waiting till you are ready. Till you feel good with it and don't think you have to do it because of something. Waiting till marriage however... it's maybe not the most important part of being married, but it's clearly a huge part of it. If you have sex before you marry you know you're compatible. It's not nice to have you're first night together on your honeymoon and you find out she only has sex when you bellow like a poodle if you're not into that. I don't mean that without the right sex every marriage breaks up, but not few are know to.
(I believe that the wait-till-you-are-married is mainly to prevent fatherless children because women weren'T really able to protect theirselves against getting pregnant).
Sex is overrated, at least I feel so if I see the Media. There is so much more that's nice in a relationship that just being in bed.
Maybe that was a bit confusing and I guess it's diffrent from the male point of view. I was told there's always a chance to get sex if you want to for free, but from my experience it's far better if you don't look for it and you just stumble over someone and it's it.
no subject
Date: 2004-09-13 01:06 pm (UTC)When you do feel like it, go out and get some. Seriously. Go and get yourself laid, however long it takes, and don't marry the first person you sleep with. Get some experience. Find out what you like, and what you don't like. Above all, don't make it a big deal. "Sex is natural, [and] sex is fun," to quote George Michael, but it's just sex. It doesn't have to be a life-altering experience.
Finally, feel free to ignore any or all of the advice I've just given. It's your dick, man - you decide. :)