Polyamory.com Forum

Polyamory.com Forum (http://www.polyamory.com/forum/index.php)
-   General Poly Discussions (http://www.polyamory.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Sex positive/sex negative (http://www.polyamory.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1917)

constlady 01-07-2010 03:59 AM

Sex positive/sex negative
 
I've been contemplating a bit on this idea due to some of the recent discussions on this board.

Anyone who has ever been a part of my life has always considered me to be a very sex positive person.

That's how I see myself, to be honest.

I'm a big fan of sex in any form that makes me feel good (note that this is about me!) and adore experimentation, very frequent sex, open discussions about sexuality and pushing my boundaries.
I believe that the society I live in has an extremely dichotomous and warped view about sexuality.

One which never fit with who I am as a person.

I remember being quite young when a discussion about "saving one's self" for marriage was taking place and the concept made no sense to me at all.
How could anyone possibly know even the tip of the iceberg of sexuality if its sole expression had been with a single other person?
Sex is fun dammit and a life without frequent, varied and amazing sex is not one that I would be interested in living.

But somehow, because I choose to identify my relationship style as a thing that isn't necessarily the same as my sexuality, it is believed that I must be "sex negative."

Because I happen to believe that who I fuck isn't as important as who I love (though for me, as I suspect it is for many others, they often go hand in hand), because I don't want my lovestyle to be perceived as being solely based on the number of sexual partners I may have at any one time - since that is not how I define my relationship style - because I feel the need to differentiate the form of polyamory that I practice from the ones who prefer the combination of emotional monogamy and physical non-monogamy, I am oppressing an entire group of people who don't choose to live their lives in the same way as I choose to live mine.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

crisare 01-07-2010 04:20 AM

Quote:

But somehow, because I choose to identify my relationship style as a thing that isn't necessarily the same as my sexuality, it is believed that I must be "sex negative."

Because I happen to believe that who I fuck isn't as important as who I love (though for me, as I suspect it is for many others, they often go hand in hand), because I don't want my lovestyle to be perceived as being solely based on the number of sexual partners I may have at any one time - since that is not how I define my relationship style - because I feel the need to differentiate the form of polyamory that I practice from the ones who prefer the combination of emotional monogamy and physical non-monogamy, I am oppressing an entire group of people who don't choose to live their lives in the same way as I choose to live mine.

Nothing could be further from the truth.
Thank you. From the bottom of my heart, thank you.

It made me sick to be catogorized as "sex negative" just because I see a difference between casual sex and committed sex. Neither is wrong, neither is bad, neither is negative ... but they are different animals.

Yet because I differentiate them, I'm "sex negative".

That's why I will no longer participate here.

MonoVCPHG 01-07-2010 04:26 AM

I don't see judgment or oppression in simply not wanting to be associated with an activity or approach to any lifestyle. I don't judge or oppress people who don't like to ride motorbikes. If I chose to go for a ride with other friends of mine who ride I am not discriminating or excluding the friends who don't. I'm not oppressing their ability to ride with me. The fact they don't have a license or bike is excluding them.

If I am uncomfortable with a particularly sex positive social scene, I don't associate with it. I don't stamp my feet and demand inclusion, or that they change their behavior to suite my individual needs. I don't go.

Participating or defending sex positive things is not a requirement to being sex positive..simply accepting the healthy ideas of others is.

All inclusive anything is a bullshit idea because every person is unique. There is no one thing in the universe that everyone will see the same. Some one will disagree with everything. They just need to sit back, shut the fuck up and live their life without hindering the lives of others...unless their doing something that is unhealthy...then others have a responsibility to correct that behavior...than we have a responsibility to judge.

I kind of went off on that....not related to the topic? Sorry

ImaginaryIllusion 01-07-2010 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crisare (Post 18942)
Yet because I differentiate them, I'm "sex negative".

That's why I will no longer participate here.

Now that would be unfortunate, if you felt that you needed to limit or remove your participation due to the opinions of a couple of others. They may be opinions, but they don't need to be taken to heart. I don't see a reason to give up that power to another.

CielDuMatin 01-07-2010 01:26 PM

I, must say that I, too, am very interested as to the answer of this question, since it is a label that certain people have attached to me, and it surprised me. My conclusion was that their definition was quite possibly different to mine.

I would like to know what behaviors are considered "sex-negative" so that I can look in the mirror and see whether they fit me or not. On the flip-side, I would like to know what actions are considered to be "sex-positive".

I wouldn't like anybody (and I do mean anybody) to stop contributing to this forum just because opinions differ.

Ceoli 01-07-2010 02:06 PM

Constlady, I'm confused. Where have you been accused of being sex negative?

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonoVCPHG (Post 18943)
I don't see judgment or oppression in simply not wanting to be associated with an activity or approach to any lifestyle. I don't judge or oppress people who don't like to ride motorbikes. If I chose to go for a ride with other friends of mine who ride I am not discriminating or excluding the friends who don't. I'm not oppressing their ability to ride with me. The fact they don't have a license or bike is excluding them.

I'm not really sure how this relates to the discussion. Not liking a particular activity such as riding a motor bike doesn't get into how people fit or not fit into identity groups.

Quote:

Participating or defending sex positive things is not a requirement to being sex positive..simply accepting the healthy ideas of others is.
Nobody ever said that it was a requirement.

Quote:

All inclusive anything is a bullshit idea because every person is unique. There is no one thing in the universe that everyone will see the same. Some one will disagree with everything. They just need to sit back, shut the fuck up and live their life without hindering the lives of others...unless their doing something that is unhealthy...then others have a responsibility to correct that behavior...than we have a responsibility to judge.
I don't get this. Are you saying people should shut up if they disagree with something that's said on this forum? And only speak up if a person exhibits things that are unhealthy? By what standard?


I don't think there's such a thing as all inclusive. However there are philosophies that are inclusive in their underlying ideals. This isn't always a bad thing. For example this forum attempts to be inclusive of all sorts of different ways people practice polyamory. People disagree here all the time. I don't see how those disagreements hinder lives in this case (since it's a discussion forum).

However when people start putting out ideas that identities include certain people and exclude others, then you can bet the people who are being excluded are going to have something to say about it. Especially if the reason for such exclusion includes assumptions that may not be accurate or elements that are only peripherally related to the basic identity.

MonoVCPHG 01-07-2010 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ceoli (Post 18964)
I'm not really sure how this relates to the discussion. Not liking a particular activity such as riding a motor bike doesn't get into how people fit or not fit into identity groups.

That's ok, I was more venting than anything. Sometimes I just like to put things out there without ever revisiting them. It even frustrates me lol! I rarely direct energy at ideas I have little interest in. I must have been tired.

Take care
Mono

CielDuMatin 01-07-2010 03:43 PM

So what are your criteria for the terms "Sex-positive" and "sex-negative", Ceoli - or anybody? I would like to understand better.

GroundedSpirit 01-07-2010 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CielDuMatin (Post 18976)
So what are your criteria for the terms "Sex-positive" and "sex-negative", Ceoli - or anybody? I would like to understand better.

We (both of us) feel that sexuality should be as much of a non-issue as choice in food ! Period.
With the one restriction that it be consensual and harm none.
That to us is "sex positive". Our inborn sexual nature is something that should be embraced fully without reservation and we should be encouraged to explore it to it's full potential the same as we'd encourage exploration of any of our other human potentials that adhere to the "one rule".
Anything less than that starts sliding towards the other end - negativity.

Seems simple ??

constlady 01-07-2010 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ceoli (Post 18964)
Constlady, I'm confused. Where have you been accused of being sex negative?

I didn't say I was "accused" of anything, simply that it seems some others hold a belief about me (the general "me as a member of a group of people who expressed similar views") that doesn't fit with my belief about myself (the specific "me as an individual human being".)

Actually, I found that an interesting choice of words, since to me an accusation tends to be inherently negative in connotation.
Therefore to accuse someone of being sex negative indicates the person using the word feels that being sex negative is not a positive thing.
To accuse someone of being sex positive would indicate that the person using the word feels that being sex positive is not a positive thing. (Wow, that is an awkward phrasing, sorry I couldn't figure out how to state it differently!)
Either way, the conversation begins with an undertone of negativity that can cloud further discussion.

If we are to attempt conversation from a non-judgmental framework, that might be a word to avoid.

I did a quick search in this forum for "sex negative" in an attempt to find examples of the posts that led me to feeling the way I do, but there were 58 multiple page threads returned and I simply don't have the time or energy to cull through them all at the moment.

The basic synopsis for me is: When some people expressed their opinions on their definition of polyamory being skewed more towards love than towards sexual involvement, some responses indicated that meant those people must believe that "sex is dirty" and that they should stop perpetuating prejudices against those who define polyamory in a more sexual way.
That felt like an enormous leap to me and one which does not accurately define who I am as a person, even though I do share the same skew in my definition. Being love positive doesn't automatically mean I'm not sex positive as well.

Given that other posters on this thread responded that they too felt the same way, I'm fairly comfortable that my reaction isn't based on a personal bias.

My intent here is not to devolve this conversation into an argument over specific words or intents but rather I hoped to share with others that the labeling of some as sex negative was just as disconcerting to them as others may have felt being labeled as "not really poly" was.


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:01 AM.