Is Hooking Up Dangerous or Liberating?

Evan Marc Katz

Just came back from the gym and heard an interesting piece on NPR – The Hookup: Dangerous or Liberating?

Like any reasonable debate, both sides have merit. I don’t think we’d want to go back to the repressed ’50s, however, I think it’s clear that there’s something damaging about the frequency and availability of hookups. Some combination of post-feminism, technology, and societal mores has taken its toll. Witness all the letters from women who can’t find a guy to commit.

Yet let’s think about it from the male point of view – if there’s always an available hookup out there, and most men don’t have the desire to settle down until their mid-30′s, and most men lose big-time in divorce, why SHOULD they commit?

I’d like to challenge the women reading this to put yourself in the shoes of a man and ask yourself why HE’d make a commitment – not why YOU want a commitment or why you want HIM to make a commitment. You may be surprised to find that it’s more desirable for men to stay single…which is exactly why they so often do.

Your thoughts are appreciated.

Print Friendly

No related posts.

Why He Disappeared is the smart, strong, successful woman's guide to understanding men. If you want to learn how men think, and rediscover how to have meaningful relationships - all from a man's point of view - click here to learn Why He Disappeared.

151 Comments »Filed Under Evan's Press, Sex & Relationship Advice

151 Responses to “Is Hooking Up Dangerous or Liberating?”

1. Steve 1

   Yet let’s think about it from the male point of view – if there’s always an available hookup out there, and most men don’t have the desire to settle down until their mid-30′s, and most men lose big-time in divorce, why SHOULD they commit?

   Evan, speaking for myself, I am looking for a steady girlfriend.

   I know I am just one counter example, but you are also generalizing. No offense intended, just making a point.

   I am not interested in becoming a parent so I am neutral about marriage. If the future steady girlfriend REALLY wants it, I’m there.

   However, without children being involved I don’t see any benefit in marriage for men. The divorce laws are seriously out of date. The way I see it the only reason for alimony is to support children or to *temporarily* support an ex-spouse who became incapable of supporting her/himself as a result of the marriage until that spouse can support her/himself again.

2. Janet 2

   It’s also just as appealing for a woman to stay single–for the same reasons.

3. Lance 3

   I’m with Steve on a couple of points, don’t want children, ambivalent about marriage, would love a great girlfriend. I like “hooking up” but it’s honestly not something I go out looking for. If it happens it happens. My thing is meeting new people and spreading value.

   I do think hooking up can be fun if done safely and healthfully. Don’t make the assumption that hooking up is always a negative for the ladies and a positive for the guys. Often times it’s a positive for both.

   Lance´s last blog post…Now I’m Cookin

4. starthrower68 4

   I guess looking at it from the male point of view, there really isn’t much incentive for them to commit. Men are better able to compartmentalize than women when it comes to sex and emotions. I guess that this is just a sad turn that the world has taken. I will probably catch some flack on this, but I think women have played their hand a little too well and have tried to have things both ways, i.e. “I don’t need a man, but when I want one, he’d better be there to commit”. I’m not sure that’s the view of the majority of women, but the Gloria Steinems and Betty Friedans didn’t do either gender any favors.

5. Ruby 5

   I thought the NPR piece was geared towards college kids and 20-somethings, who aren’t necessarily ready for marriage, but want sex. I know few people over the age of 30-35 who would be satisfied with that. However, given the high divorce rate, it’s perhaps not such a bad idea that younger people are delaying marriage. But at some point, most people, male and female, want marriage, family, or at least a steady relationship. What’s fun and exciting when you’re 25 can be awfully lonely at 35…or 55. There’s a big difference between a superficial hook-up and the deeper sense of intimacy, caring, and growth that comes from a relationship that has the chance to evolve over time.

6. Melissa 6

   hmm…. most of your Blogs are uplifting and make me feel that the “right guy” is out there… so I’m kind of wondering the point of this one?

   Because in a world where I try to stay positive, try to believe in abundance and how you’ve taught me to hold out for the guy who tries hardest to be my boyfriend (your words in our coaching session)…. this almost negates that… unless I’ve missed the point of the blog entirely.

   What purpose does it serve me in my dating world to know that more men than I previously thought don’t want to make a commitment. I’m trying to see the message here.

7. Evan Marc Katz 7

   It may not be entirely clear, Melissa, but as much as I write, I try not to go too heavily on my own opinions. I try to report on the world as it exists, and figure out how to best navigate it. Thus, I don’t post blogs because they support my point of view or negate it – I post things that, as a dating coach, I think are relevant to my readers. We could ignore all evidence that doesn’t support our view of the world, but that would be irresponsible. As you firmly know, Melissa, I’m a short-term pessimist and a long-term optimist. You WILL find the guy who wants to be your special man – you just might have to sift through a lot of players first. That’s not my opinion. That’s reality.

8. Cilla 8

   I think Evan’s point is that it’s more difficult than ever for a woman to find a good match who wants to commit. You’re right, Melissa, this is not very motivating, but Evan is not one to sugar coat the realities of the dating world.

   I guess it just means that we really need to be examining what we want in our relationships and if that’s a commitment, we need to be ready to work hard to find someone who is cut from the same cloth, i.e. not willing to settle for a hookup, desirous of real intimacy, wanting to start a family, etc. It’s a great reminder that finding a good mate is like finding a good job.

   My questions to the guys out there: I’ve had hookups, and they can be fun, but they also get exhausting after a while, in my opinion. I’ve recently heard lots of women say the same thing. Do you ever feel the same way?

9. Karl R 9

   I’ve noticed two general patterns in marriages among my friends and acquaintances. There are the ones who married their high school or college sweetheart, and did so in their early to mid 20s. For those of us who weren’t seriously involved by the time we left college, there was practically a moratorium on serious relationships at least until we hit our 30s.

   I think that’s partly due to accessibility. In high school and college we’re surrounded by a large pool of our peers. It’s easy to get to know potential dates as people as we go about our daily lives.

   Once we leave college, we’re surrounded by people of all ages, most of whom aren’t like us at all. We meet people at bars, clubs and parties … which works well if all you’re seeking is a hookup, but not so good if you’re trying to get to know someone on a more personal level.

   So relationships suddenly require a lot of time and effort. In our 20s we’re trying to start our careers and support ourselves. That doesn’t always leave lots of time for relationships.

   It’s when our life stabilizes and we achieve some level of success that we start looking to settle down. I started getting serious about dating right around the same time my income doubled. And since I don’t want kids, I don’t feel like I need to hurry.

10. andie 10

    Wow, Evan…I think that being in a steady long term relationship is more about wanting to build a life with someone, whether that life includes children or not, than it is about being assured a steady supply of sex. If all a guy is looking for is the latter, you’re right…why commit? But, if he wants the opportunity to build something with someone else, than hook ups aren’t the answer.

11. anon 11

    Good article on this very topic:

    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=105008712&sc=fb&cc=fp

12. Honey 12

    Okay, so my boyfriend is an attorney who makes more than twice as much money than me, and we ABSOLUTELY plan on getting married (he’s more pro marriage than I am) and there will not be a pre-nup, though we have decided we will not get married until we are both 100% free of consumer debt. The benefits as he sees them:

    1) companionship with someone who shares his values (atheist, vegetarian, liberal, cat lover, no desire for kids, relatively similar interests in books, tv, movies)
    2) higher standard of living (2 incomes),
    3) advice on major life decisions from someone as intelligent (he often says more so!) as he is,
    4) the best sex either of us has ever had (guaranteed quality), as often as both of us would like it (guaranteed quantity).

    There’s more that’s specific to us (I am a compulsive housecleaner and cook meals from scratch almost daily as a hobby), but those are the most generalizable.

    Though I am sure he’s had random hookups in the past, I don’t think he’s ever been single (i.e., not in a committed, exclusive, monogamous relationship) for more than a month or two at a time, and most of his relationships have been two years or longer. He is VERY uncomfortable with casual sex, mostly from a safety standpoint, although it is very clear that personality-wise, he is more comfortable in a committed relationship.

    Honey´s last blog post…Now I’m Cookin

13. Donna 13

    I was talking with a good male friend the other day, who is a nice, upstanding 52 year old, twice divorced, with children from both marriages. His take on future marriage was “why should I?” He firmly stated that he wants a longterm relationship with one good woman which would hopefully last for many years, if not for the rest of his life. But marriage again, NO. But he said it was hard to find a good woman who was happy with that, as they all seem to want “the ring and a piece of paper”. This man gets approached by much younger women all the time, but he declines, as it isn’t real and what would they have to talk about? He also stated the statistic that 70% of 2nd marriages end in divorce, and the piece of paper doesn’t keep people from cheating or breaking up. These are all valid points from any perspective, especially a man’s, but I do find it depressing. As for myself, I will not date a man unless he is open to future marriage, and I have learned thru trial and error to find out that information very early on, before it gets personal !

14. JM 14

    I always enjoy hearing both the male and female points of view re: the hook up or “friends with benefits” scenario. I tend to be on the same page with Steve and Lance – will probably not have children, and am a little ambivalent about marriage, but am definitely looking for a monogamous relationship with a great guy. Why else would I torture myself with all these blind dates?

    But the bottom line is, we all have “basic needs”. So if you can handle the occasional “hook up” on your quest for a satisfying relationship, then I don’t think there is a problem with that choice.

    But Starthrower really hit the nail on the head when she wrote that men are just wired better to compartmentalize sex and keep the emotional component out. I also can’t help but think that sometimes a double standard still exists when it comes to casual sex (Although Lance might beg to differ!)

    I’m hoping that in the end, there is a lid for every pot and that those seeking long-term monogamous relationships will find each other. Is that too much to ask?

15. Marc 15

    I think some insight into this subject can be gained by the fact that an overwhelming majority of men who use high priced call girls opt for the “girlfriend experience” when it’s on the menu. (At least that’s true according to a recent report on CNBC).

    So even when they’re paying big bucks, guys aren’t necessarily looking for the quick hookup. They want the cool, attentive, sweet chick with a sense of humor who’ll listen to their problems and tell them everything’s gonna be okay. I don’t think it’s an issue of guys not wanting to commit because they don’t have to. They don’t want to commit to women they feel wont satisfy their needs…and those needs aren’t always sexual in nature.

    Marc´s last blog post…Polish Girls Really Do Love Sausage

16. Cilla 16

    I remember seeing an interview on “Oprah” with Jerry Seinfeld. He’s obviously very wealthy, attractive, and was for a long time considered a very eligible bachelor. I’m sure he could have had any number of hookups or endless going-nowhere relationships like George Clooney. Oprah Winfrey asked him about his wife and why he decided to settle down and get married. His answer was so simple and wonderful: “I like her aroundness.” By that, he explained, he just liked the feeling of having her around all the time and felt better when they were together than when they were apart.

17. Leah 17

    My answer to the question is neither.
    I’ll base my opinion on the 3 single men I know and have dated. They may hook up once in a while but they desire a girlfriend. One lives with his, one has a girlfriend, one is too busy to date (has 2 jobs). Their ages: 46 – 54
    I tried a hook up once…wasn’t what I wanted or needed.

18. Robyn 18

    Everyone – both men and women – needs to read Laura Sessions Stepp’s book “Unhooked – How Young Women Pursue Sex, Delay Love and Lose at Both”.

    The problem with widespread hooking up (as a defacto standard) by the younger generations is that they (both guys and girls) do not learn how to be in a real relationship (the old-fashioned “going steady” “one guy with one girl” “boyfriend-girlfriend” type of deal that we used to do as teens and college students 15-20 years ago).

    So 10+ years down the line when they start to think about “settling down” and “having a family” they are hopelessly ill-equipped to do so (since they have not had any practice in being in a longer-term / committed exclusive relationship) and are a lot less likely to be successful at it. Their chances of success are further hampered if they grew up in a divorced houshold themselves and don’t have their parents’ successful marriage to use an example either.

    If you think the divorce rate is high now, just wait 5-10-15 years and see how today’s teenagers and college students are faring in the marriage arena. The divorce rate is going to be even higher than it is today. Alas.

    And by the way, it is absolutely 100% true that unless a single man wants a family or a divorced man wants to add to his existing family, the incentive for him to marry these days is very, very, very small.
    “Why buy the cow if you can get the milk for free” says it all!!

    Thank God I am past the (st)age of wanting to have children and being under the time-crunch of needing to find “the right guy” & succeed in getting to an exclusive commitment and marriage before the biological clock strikes midnight.

    I really feel for the women that want marriage and a family and are struggling to find the men that have the same inclination.

19. M 19

    I wish I had heard that NPR piece. I was just having this internal conversation with myself the other day. I have a boyfriend who felt when we first started dating that he just wanted to play the field and keep casually dating and hooking up with people, which was fine with me because that’s all I was really looking for too. That’s not what ended up happening, though I think that there are a lot of men out there that hook up bc they haven’t found that one girl. I’m starting to consider lately that men want that same kind of deep connection that women do, and it seems they may want it as much as women do as well. That wasn’t what I was reflecting on, I just wanted to stand up for the men here, bc it seems like EMK is saying men would rather hook up, and I just don’t thinks that’s a safe stereo type to make. I’m looking back on my days of hooking up thinking, man that was fun…if I’m going to be perfectly honest. It can be dangerous, but if you’re smart, it’s just a good time. I think the only concern I would have with it now is in considering the amount of risk I exposed myself to (not just std’s but personal safety as well), not whether it would impact my desire, or mens desire, to commit in the future. I don’t think the two are mutually exclusive, and I don’t really think it’s a fair association to make to say hooking up, and having the desire to be single forever, have a causal relationship on each other. For men or women, bc I had just as mch fun hooking up as he did, maybe more

20. Honey 20

    @ Cilla, #8 – unlike the BF, I was essentially single for 5 years and had PLENTY of hookups during that time…I agree, it IS exhausting:

    From an emotional standpoint – no real connection with another person – like a caffeine high, the thrill of the hunt will keep you awake, but it’s also going to make you jittery and give you a headache

    From an intellectual standpoint – there is not much that is worse than spending a whole evening with someone who doesn’t share ANY of your interests or, even worse, with someone who can’t even talk about his own interests passionately and intelligently

    From a physical standpoint – did the condom break? is the pill working? does he have any diseases? not to mention things that condoms don’t protect against, like HPV, and non-STD issues like yeast infections, which are more common when you switch partners frequently – and then there’s the fact that sex is not nearly as good when you don’t know what each other prefers

    Honey´s last blog post…Now I’m Cookin

21. Carol 21

    The only way I think a guy wants a permanent relationship is if he is just so “gone” on a woman he can’t imagine his life without her. There are men who want this. Our culture has taken so much away why a man would “need” a woman. It used to be home was where you got your meals, now there is food available everywhere. It used to be regular sex was hard to be found outside of marriage, not today. Maybe I am just old fashioned (and I was part of the sexual revolution after all), but the number of women willing to easily jump into bed continues to astound me. Is that old saying our mothers told us really true after all? “Why buy the cow if the milk is free?”

22. Steve 22

    Am I alone in really not liking the saying “Free milk from a cow”? I don’t like framing all of the women I have known/know like that. As several people wrote better than I could, what people want from the opposite sex depends on where they are at in their lives.

    If you have to have milk, make it soy. Cows milk promotes sex related cancers. Google on the author Dr. Jane Plant .

23. starthrower68 23

    At the risk of sounding like I’m pontificating, since dating and hooking up seem to be about “I think I want I feel” it will be more difficult for people to connect for the long term. There has to come a point when it’s not just about what we think, what we want, and what we feel. I don’t mean to be preachy but people really can be very self-absorbed creatures, and I’m saying that about myself just as much as anyone. I know my attitude needs to keep changing.

24. Jennifer 24

    **Yet let’s think about it from the male point of view – if there’s always an available hookup out there, and most men don’t have the desire to settle down until their mid-30′s, and most men lose big-time in divorce, why SHOULD they commit?**
    Based on these assumptions, Evan, they shouldn’t and most won’t unless they get caught up in a rare emotional moment, a failure of the system if you will. But I don’t believe the second assumption (men don’t have the desire to settle down until their mid-30′s) is entirely sound. The things I’ve read push that age limit a little sooner- late 20′s to early 30′s for college educated men, and even earlier for high-school educated men.

    What I’ve observed usually happens, is a man runs across a ‘special ‘woman, one that meets all of his needs, and feels that losing her would be more painful than the pleasure he gets from hooking up and being ‘free’, so he does what he has to do to keep her around, which is, in most cases, committing.

    So I think men commit to relationships for the same reasons that they do anything- to maximize their perceived pleasure and decrease their perceived pain.

25. Evan Marc Katz 25

    You nailed it, Jennifer. That’s why I got married. But a lot of the guys I know are in their mid-late 30′s and still enjoying hookup culture. Maybe it’s an East Coast/West Coast thing.

26. Steve 26

    @Carol, post #21

    Um, I know how to cook for myself, is that why I am single?

27. Jennifer 27

    Good point Evan, I didn’t consider geography. I am on the East Coast, mid-atlantic area.

28. Kenley 28

    M,

    The poster of #11 provides a link to the NPR piece so you can listen to it. What I found interesting is that the piece focuses slightly more on women preferring the hook up over relationships not just men. And, one social scientist was lamenting the fact that women have taken on the male model of just wanting sex without intimacy while men have not taken on the more feminine model. So, for the younger generation, there are a lot of males AND females who want to be free and single.

    Carol, I would argue that our culture has taken away both gender’s need for the other. Women can provide for themselves just as well as men. And, men will often reject women who they feel don’t need them. Moreover, when women reach a certain age and can’t find a man willing to commit, they just have children on their own.

29. starthrower68 29

    Jennifer, I understand what you are saying in your comments. But in a way, it almost sounds like the only reason to commit to a woman is because he feels better when she’s around than when she’s not. That doesn’t sound like love really enters the equation. I don’t think that’s quite what you meant, but it almost makes one want to say if that’s the only reason anyone’s with me, then they’re free to go. But I’m trying to stop being so prideful….

30. Ruby 30

    “For many of us, the requisite vulnerability and exposure that comes from being really intimate with someone in a committed sense is kind of threatening.”

    And the thought of being in love with someone, Wilkerson says, “is the most terrifying thing.”

    The above is from the NPR interview, from a 25-year-old woman. It’s kind of sad. In my college days 25 years ago, we hooked up too. But the girls were always hoping it would turn into a relationship.

    Interestingly, in the NPR poll, 22% say hookups are fun, while 38% are split between calling them “dangerous” and “degrading”.

31. M 31

    Maybe that’s the part I’m struggling with the most here, is the ‘need for each other’ that keeps coming up. I don’t need a man, I want one, or at least the one I’m with right now. And I don’t want to be with a man that needs me; I want him to want me far more than he needs me. Yes, we can all cook for ourselves (most of us), and get sex where-ever we want it essentially, but I do truly think, and I think most of the posts by men support this, men *want* to be with a woman on that deeper level, whether they have hookups or not. I think the same is true for women. Just because a man or woman is single does not mean they don’t want the relationship *ever*. It means single is what fits them at that time. Some people don’t want a relationship ever, but I really think that’s the minority, and I don’t think hooking up has any deterring effect on most men’s desire to commit. A long-term relationship and a hook up are two entirely different things. I would be kind of insulted if I were one of the men on this blog. It directly implies that you are all so shallow that you need nothing more than sex to be happy. I’m kind of insulted for you… And just because a women has a child on her own doesn’t mean she has given up on finding a committed man to spend her life with, it means she realizes that she wants children, she is not getting any younger, and she doesn’t need a man to have a child.
    I think a lot of the sentiments being expressed here are based on old-fashioned values that just don’t really apply anymore. Fortunately, there are old-fashioned men out there that want the same things. You just have to want to find them, because they want to find you.

32. Zann 32

    “I think it’s clear that there’s something damaging about the frequency and availability of hookups.”

    I disagree with Evan’s comment, but I agree with Steve’s response. I find that the majority of men I meet — over age 45 usually — say they’re tired of dating & their goal is to meet someone for the long haul — someone they can develop a relationship and have as a lifetime companion — with or without marriage. Most of these men are sincere, but there are still some in this age group who are clearly what I call “Hit & Runners.” They usually tend to be the most charming ones, as well. Damn. I don’t try to analyze that anymore — everyone’s got their own reasons, and men tell me that the same is true for women.

    But damaging? There are obvious safety issues involved if you’re hooking up with a stranger, but I think it can work for some people and I don’t think it’s morally wrong. It’s another choice an adult can make when seeking intimacy with others. For many people, it just gets old after a while, and they find (maybe as they mature?) that they want something deeper and longer-lasting. Personally, if a guy can articulate right from the start that hooking up is all he wants, I see that as a valuable piece of honest information for me. Then I can choose whether that works for me. But I really don’t think the hooking up phenomena is new; it’s just been given a more defined label now, an identifier, spelling out an intention or preference. If a woman is interested only in meeting someone with whom to develop a long-term relationship, isn’t it better for her to know right up front that this potential date has a different preference. I also don’t think that the ability to state this preference makes men or women any less likely to seek a committed relationship. I see it as a form of evolution in the same way that woman are now more likely to choose to remain single or have children until well into their 30s and have no intention of limiting their careers or other interests any more than their man is willing to. The world is a different place than it was even 20 years ago. I think the ability to state that what you’re primarily interested in is a sexual partner, reduces mixed messages and can prevent disappointment (and lowered self-esteem) down the road.

33. metsgirl 33

    This really is a discouraging reality. Hookups are so easy and common. It seems the men I know have been too influenced by porn and have the misconception that women benefit/enjoy the encounter as much as the men do. I will say….in rare cases there are women who may have chemical imbalances that makes a non-commited no fuss hookup enjoyable or perhaps the woman is just hard as nails (emotionally). I just don’t know of too many women that enjoy being used for that purpose. In fact, I would be willing to wager that a woman who makes herself available for repeated hookups probably has some type of emotional investment in the relationship (in some fashion).

34. Isabelle Archer 34

    False premise. There is no dichotomy between hookups and marriage. Young people these days are still falling in love and entering into exclusive relationships all the time. Hookups, whether or not they happen, are not preventing this. The NPR-Washinton Post-Laura Sessions Stepp obsession with hookups is nothing more than the old folks getting titillated about talking about the sex lives of the young folks. Twas ever thus.

    The real question is — why does anyone (male or female) get married these days, when it is completely socially acceptable to have a long-term, live-in relationship without marriage, and when marriage has such a high failure rate?
    (And, despite what Evan says, marriage failure hurts women economically more than men, given women at least as many reasons as men to be wary — single motherhood being highly corrolated with poverty. Men are only “more” damaged financially by divorce if you do not place any economic value on women’s domestic labor. But I digress.)

    Indeed, in Europe young people have basically given up on marriage altogether, but not on commited relationships and parenthood.

    Ultimately, though, I do think the answer for what US-Americans are still getting married is gender related and largely being driven by women. First, there is still a stigma on having children out of wedlock, and most women generally want to have children. Men’s reluctance to marry in those circumstances is probably more related to their reluctance to parent, not to marry. Second, there is still a lot of social pressure on women to have a wedding (as opposed to getting married) which is related to old fashioned gender norms. Many women are motivated chiefly by the fantasy of the princess wedding and the status of being “a bride,” with little incentive to think about what happens next. In fact, from a certain perspective, even if they get divorced they have been “a bride,” so…mission accomplished. Men, obviously, don’t get the same utility out of the wedding.

35. JerseyShortie 35

    I don’t like the old school of thought either about “why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free”. There is something in that line of thinking that seems pretty disparaging towards women AND men and how far we have come.

    I think the standard ideologies people think of when they hear “hook-up” is: hook-up = good for men and hook-up = bad for women. On one hand, I like that I live in a world where I can be more sexually liberated then my mother. I don’t always want a long-term relatoinship from every guy I date. Many have wanted that with me and *I* have been the one that backed out. On the other hand, I do think it limits the way men and women interact with each other. Girls that turn into women don’t learn how to relate to men and boys that turn into men don’t learn how to relate to women.

    While sex feels good for all parties invovled, and men are more likely to be statisfed with that, I don’t think the hook up culture allows women or men to meet their potential. I think both genders are *better* for having learned to respect and relate to the other gender. And hooking up with random people doesn’t allow for that. Couple that with the amount of internet porn out there that is also an easy way to have some kind of needs met, it sadly makes men more passive and lazy. So while we think of the hook-up culture as only being bad for women, it clearly isn’t so great for men either.

36. Jennifer 36

    @ Starthrower68 #29- In my view it’s not the sole reason to commit, but it is the first, most basic, and most necessary one. I believe that part of loving someone is liking it better when they are around than when they are not, so that’s how I see it fitting in…. it is a part of the foundation of the ‘deeper’ feelings that come with loving someone. My response sort of distilled it to what I believe is it’s most basic essence. I hope that’s more clear!

37. Jennifer 37

    @metsgirl#33- I don’t know if you are purposely being incendiary, but I’m going to try to assume positive intent on your part.

    As a general statement, if other people are doing something that you don’t feel comfortable with…don’t do it. It’s the easiest way to stay happy.

    A hookup, as it’s defined in my peer group, can be anything from making out to sex. Does a women feel ‘used’ after a kiss? Dry-humping? What about having oral sex performed on her? A hook-up can be as involved or not as the parties wish.

    Just like people have expectations in their daily interactions (I expect when I am walking on the sidewalk that I will not be hit by a car. I expect that when I’m driving through a green light the other drivers will obey their red light) people have expectations in their hookups. The difference is the depth of those expectations.

    If you hook-up with someone with relationship-type expectations (calls, eating out, spending lots of time together) yep, you’ll feel disappointed and likely used. If you go in simply expecting to have your sexual boundaries respected, physical needs met, and for the person to be as cordial/friendly after the encounter as they were before, you have a better shot of having those needs met and not feeling used.

    Of course there are people that behavely rudely or otherwise inappropriately towards their hook-up partners- just as there are spouses that behave inappropriately towards each other as well. Neither one is good, but bad behavior is not reserved for the hook-up set.

    Now there are some people that are uncomfortable being physically intimate with anyone they are not also emotionally intimate with- that’s fine and understandable; hooking up is not for them. But then, it’s also not for them to pathologize everyone who doesn’t feel the way they do.
    I know that I don’t need every kiss or sexual encounter to lead to a LTR or marriage in order for me not to feel ‘used’, and I have no chemical imbalances that I’m aware of!

38. Jennifer 38

    I dont think that there is anything inherently bad about women having the occasional hook-up along with regular dates, relationships, etc. If you adopt it as a lifestyle and deep down (or even on the surface) you aren’t satisfied with it, but that’s the only form of interaction you have/know how to have with men, that’s where I think problems come in.

39. girl-with-glasses 39

    Why would men desire a committed relationship? Maybe because they have a penis, and they have a heart? How satisfying is it really to devote the entirety of one human life to the pursuit of pleasure, your own mainly, and to discard the other person when they cease to thrill or titillate you? Men are a little deeper than that aren’t they? Yes, they have strong sex drives, so up til their 30s, that kind of lifestyle might be more appropriate to their needs. But I think if I were a man and I wake up in my mid-thirties, and I still see relationships that way, I’d feel like dying of shame and self-hatred. Part of the masculine soul is about self-sacrifice, devotion, and service as well, no? How fun is it to wake up in your mid-30s and realize you’ve never shared anything with anyone worth protecting?

    Well, from where I sit, I don’t see it as that difficult of a task in getting men age 30 and up to commit. To find women worth committing to….well, that’s totally another topic. That’s where the *real* problem is, if I may be so blunt as to point out.

40. Ann 40

    A lot of people must read this blog at work.

41. metsgirl 41

    I appreciate your insight Jennifer. I’m not sure I see where my comment was provocative for you. I didn’t insinuate that all women who hookup are chemically imbalanced or even hard as nails…..but they both exist. And both champion “bold declarations” of how much they love sex and don’t need men. (which makes hooking-up all the easier)

    Is “making-out” dangerous? Not too often. I don’t think the hookup this article is referring to pertains to casual knecking or dry humping. I appreciate your viewpoint though and I’m not disputing that you feel the way you do….so good for you.

42. casualencounters.com/blog 42

    A lot of men don’t even want to end up “settled” in their mid-30s. More often than not they’re trapped into “settlement” by children, other responsibilities, or some harping self-esteem-ravaging douchette wife-unit.

    casualencounters.com/blog´s last blog post…Weekly Roundup – Top 10 Casual Sex Links from Around the Web

43. Cilla 43

    @ casual #41

    Wow, and they thought Ann had an axe to grind…

44. Honey 44

    @casualencounters, # 42 -

    If those are the kind of women that these men choose, then aren’t they responsible for the state of their lives?

    That is precisely why I chose my partner very, very carefully.

    Honey´s last blog post…New Car!

45. vino 45

    “Yet let’s think about it from the male point of view – if there’s always an available hookup out there, and most men don’t have the desire to settle down until their mid-30′s, and most men lose big-time in divorce, why SHOULD they commit?”

    Indeed. WHY?

    Why? My thought is men are trained like labradors that ‘settling down’ and ‘committing’ are the so-called right way to do things. However, when you look at what really happens AFTER committing, the guys are the ones who should be committed – to an asylum for doing it. Marriage is a losing proposition for men (not going to get into divorce stat war). So guys are shamed into wanting (against their better instincts) to settle down.

    Look at this blog, how derisively guys are characterized as immature, or selfish, for not committing. I don’t see that as great salesmanship. Of course, every guy has at more than one close friend or relative (maybe himself), who got dismembered in divorce court. After seeing that in enough people, many are finally starting to see that committing is more likely than not to end up badly for them, and are choosing accordingly. Read – they are choosing freedom.

    This isn’t an indictment of women as a whole. Not at all. It is one of the “family” laws. This is the losing endgame to committing, which is why it merits mention. Yet another area area that more government meddling produces horrible results, but I digress…

    Hookups, when presented, are a nice diversion but not a primary pursuit.

    Sure, it’d be nice to have a committed relationship. But to most, that means marriage, which rules me out for the vast number of women. From what I gather, increasing numbers of guys feel the same way also.

    So keep on hooking up!

46. Hadley Paige 46

    Robyn @ 18 says And by the way, it is absolutely 100% true that unless a single man wants a family or a divorced man wants to add to his existing family, the incentive for him to marry these days is very, very, very small.

    I ask why is that? I have concluded that over the last 35 years the laws of marriage and fathering have changed dramatically to the financial detriment of men. (note: I am not saying its good or bad, but just is) Therefore I infer that the increased financial risk to men mirrors the increased reluctance of men to marry. (after all are we not rational optimizers?)

    Men don’t want to marry? Women, I challenge you to try the following thought experiment.

    Imagine that when couples got divorced both men and women perceived that the men got the better financial deal in the divorce; or even that men got whatever they wanted financially. Now– Do you think men would be reluctant to marry then? Do you think women would be reluctant to marry then?

    So then for men, marriage is not about men unwilling to commit. It is about the damage to their finances that happen when they commit & the women they commit to leave to go find themselves; or a more emotionally fulfilling relationship; or more space; or, or or.

    I deeply desire a committed relationship and tend to be in LTRs. BUT if the committed relationship requires marriage>> NO THANKS!. Or at least no thanks as long as the way that divorce currently will affect me financially stays that way.

    So in summary (sorry but I am a lawyer) I believe that men are not adverse to marriage per se but rather they are unwilling to expose themselves (at least those who have something to lose) to the risk of divorce as currently structured to disproportionately negatively impact men (as they perceive it).

47. Jennifer 47

    @metsgirl #41
    Your comment was provocative to me becuase you stated flat out that only the rare woman with a ‘chemical imbalance’/or that is ‘hard as nails’ enjoys a casual hook-up and you insinuated that any hook-up involves a woman being used. I felt those statements were too general, judgemental and inaccurate which is what inspired my repsonse to you. But I see more of where you are coming from with your second comment, so thank you for the clarification (inserting smiley face to show that I’m not trying to be a smart-ass here)

48. Diana 48

    Why should they commit? I think the question is, “What would make them want to commit?” I guess I’m splitting hairs. I believe that deep down inside, most men, like most women, crave and yearn for something more.Hookups, as I understand them, cannot possibly compare.

    This doesn’t mean they necessarily want marriage. There are a lot of people on both sides who do not want marriage. You can have a fulfilling, lifetime commitment without legal representation.

    I don’t think of myself as old-fashioned, yet the thought of women doing hookups because their lives are too busy to invest time in dating (based on an article I read a while back on this subject and college girls), is disheartening. I think that a lot of women nowadays give their bodies away far too easily and truthfully, I think guys often think this, too. But hey, they also like the perks.

    Do guys really respect women who will so casually put out, even when she’s not on the corner? I know it can be mutually satisfying for both parties and all. Somehow it still feels degrading of femininity. If a guy reaches that point where he really does want something significantly more, is he inclined to go with the hookup of the day? My feeling tells me no, but what do I know?

49. starthrower68 49

    Vino, I admit being female makes it difficult to see it from the other perspective, but I am really giving it my best try. I admit that the thought of getting married again is a much more serious thing to contemplate now than it was when I was a naieve 21-year-old. I’m not saying I wouldn’t do it again, but I would have to give it a great deal of thought, but I’d have to take that slow.

50. Michael 50

    The primary reason I want to be married is because so many people I went to college with are married, and I want to measure up to them.

    I want to prove to them that I am just as good as they are.

51. Kenley 51

    The point of the NPR piece wasn’t that young men don’t want to commit it was that both young men and young women don’t want to commit….and not simply because they want to pursue careers. One major reason that are rethinking marriage is that they don’t have any positive role models…bitter, ugly divorces have loomed large in their lives. Another reason, as someone pointed out, is the extreme emphasis on looking out for #1 makes these young men and women less likely to want to be concerned about the needs, desires, and wants of someone else.

    I think another interesting question is will marriage survive these trends? If yes, how will these trends force it to change? If marriage doesn’t survive, what would be the advantages and disadvantages for both men AND women of a society without marriage?

52. Diana 52

    Also, I was married for a very long time and if I decide to ever marry again (which is debatable and assuming someone asks), there is one thing I will most definitely do differently the next go round; to keep what is mine, and he can keep what is his. I do not want anything of his, i.e. money, property, etc., and I like the idea of keeping that part of our lives separate. I am independent. Having names on nearly everything together was incredibly stressful to untangle. Of course, I’m not selling my house, and he’d likely not sell his, so we’ll be at a stand-off. [LOL]

53. Michael 53

    
    Do guys really respect women who will so casually put out, even when she’s not on the corner?
    I would.

    Generosity is a virtue, you know, as long as you are not giving away something that someone else has a legitimate interest in.

54. Steve 54

    FYI, there is more agony in a failed marriage then just getting taken to the cleaners.

    I know it doesn’t work like this ( usually ), but there is no reason why casual sex can’t grow into something more. Two people, with similar interests who enjoy each others company? Do the math.

    I guess it comes down to what your deep down attitudes about sex are. People can hold conflicting beliefs and not be aware of it.

    I think a lot of people who think of themselves as progressive, modern, liberated etc still think of sex as something dirty at some level. So that leads to looking at casual sex as a “woman giving it up”, the “it” being her respect since she didn’t put up a fight or stall first.

    If you don’t look at it that way then casual sex is just an activity two people enjoy that shouldn’t preclude people who have important things in common from hooking up if they enjoy it “too soon” anymore than taking a paddle boat ride.

55. Robyn 55

    Hadley Paige @ 46:
    You are spot-on re: the potential effects of divorce being a major disincentive for marriage. Especially in the state where I live (Massachusetts).
    But it’s not only men that have these concerns.
    If I ever consider getting married, a pre-nup will absolutely be part of the deal!

56. Selena 56

    “Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?”

    Feminist version:
    “Why buy the whole pig when all you want is some sausage once in awhile?”

57. Curly Girl 57

    On May 10 I responded to a post about a woman who was opting out of passion for the stable guy and was slammed for my view that some people are into dating for passion and hookups, and not nec. to get married. Even EMK dissed me with the comment that most everyone on the site is looking for an LTR. One woman even questioned why I was posting to a dating site if I was against the Ltr (which I am not). I responded:

    “I said that not everyone is dating to get married, and dating for passion is as good a reason as any. Being married is not the only type of viable relationship nor the only reason for dating, and being involved in other forms of relationship does not mean that you are not taking your love life seriously or that you don’t understand the opposite sex. But that that is how you understand what I am saying just goes to prove my point that this view of dating & relationship is pushed at as from all angles all the time, along with the subtle message that if you don’t go along that there is something wrong with you. There are people who are happily single and dating. There are people for whom a passionate fling that does not lead to marriage is neither destructive nor pathological. That is why the message of this post that passion and love are opposed is strange to me. So what if passion fizzles or doesn’t lead to marriage? Why is one wrong and the other right?”

    Vino and Steve express the dangers of marriage and the desire to avoid it and they are not slammed. Why the different treatment? Is it because I am a GIRL???

    Not getting on your case, EMK. I’m really happy to see you addressing the broad range of topics that you do and I really enjoy reading the variety of responses from all sorts of guys and gals.

    Wishing you all happiness on your journey. Or barring that, something that makes it all worthwhile.

58. Selena 58

    Re: Isabelle Archer #34
    “The NPR-Washinton Post-Laura Sessions Stepp obsession with hookups is nothing more than the old folks getting titillated about talking about the sex lives of the young folks. Twas ever thus. ”

    Yep.

    I agree with that as well as everything else you wrote Isabelle. Great job!

    People of both genders date primarily to find someone to connect with. At some point in a person’s life that may mean “just a hook-up”. Or it may turn out to be just a hook-up, or a brief fling, or a relationship that lasts only a few weeks/months because either or both parties find they don’t have the connection they’d like to have with the other. JNTIY.

    People do still fall in love though. All the time. Men, being people, do too! Committment: what’s in it for men? Simple: so he won’t lose that woman who is special to him to another man. We form attachments to fulfill our need of belonging. Marriage or not, we all sometimes crave that sense of belonging to someone, and they to us. Men and women are not different in that way.

59. yankee 59

    For me, I can’t hide the fact that it ticks me off that sex has come to mean so little. I care about the standards in society because (for instance) if a woman feels there’s nothing wrong with getting her physical needs met and has no emotional ties to the man she’s hooking up with….at what point does she know (or care) whether she’s hooking up with someone elses husband or so called “committed” boyfriend? (Yes, it’s easy for men to cheat when they have such an abundance of willing participants)

    I happen to believe in marriage and commitment. So how does having sex and walking away really work? When you decide to suddenly have a meaningful relationship, do you meet someone and discard all of your previous sexual hobbies as though they never occured and have a warm and loving relationship with the person you’re currently interested in? Or do you never invest in the person you’re interested in (because one or both of you are unable to emotionally connect) because your still hooking up with others? Do you just enjoy it while it lasts with no residual effects? My guess is…..there’s absolutely no need for commitment or any reason to be vulnerable to another human being…..because it is far too easy to “get off” on the here and now. If hookups are so cool and liberating and no one gets emotionally involved (because after all, it’s just a hookup)….then why are we even debating whether hookups are dangerous?

60. Diana 60

    To Steven #54: Most definitely! There can be far more agony and profound grief in a failed marriage than the cleaners aspect of it, speaking only from my own experience. I think that my interpretation of “hooking up” may be different from some of our other posters. To me, it’s not about two people who have things in common going for casual sex without commitment. They never even get to what they have in common. They meet, have their fun, end of story.

    As Evan himself has repeated, make sure he’s into YOU first before you go to that next level, if that’s what you’re seeking of course.

61. Steve 61

    Gadzooks. I thought some of the people who complained at the beginning of this thread about it being depressing were wuses(sp?).

    I think I am going to buy a pineapple farm on a tropical island and just casually shack up with a woman who resembles Evangaline Lily’s character on Lost.

62. Diana 62

    To Michael #53: When she hooks up with you at the drop of a hat, that doesn’t show that’s she’s very discerning, and you kind of take your chances that no one else has an interest in the merchandise.

63. metsgirl 63

    #51
    I think you’re right Kenley about the lack of positive role models for a lot of people.

    I’m not quite clear why society is so ready to scrap marriage altogether. If it’s for financial reasons, which I can clearly understand, then why not go with a pre-nuptial agreement. It can’t be anymore offensive then living with someone for years and never investing in anything together (for fear that you’ll lose out). And does anyone really walk away from a committed relationship after 5 or 10 years and say “Whew, I’m glad we never married” simply because they could have lost financially? I think the emotional investment comes into play as well not just money.

    I personally believe marriage is important because it indicates that you are willing to make the ultimate commitment to the other person. Let’s face it, sex doesn’t bring much to the relationship because apparently anyone can do that and with as many people as they want. If a man’s not married then he technically considers himself single…..which translates his freedom to do whatever he wants, even in a committed relationship. DISCLAIMER: This does not mean all men. The same can happen if your married but you have more to lose. I think marriage (like sex) needs to mean more.

64. Steve 64

    @metsgirl, post #63

    I’m not an expert and I don’t play one on TV. In the U.S. prior to the late 70s I don’t think more marriages worked. I think people just stayed married, happy or not, because divorces were hard to come by and had an onus on it.

    I thought the “ultimate commitment” was death, but maybe I have been watching too many action movies lately .

65. Selena 65

    metsgirl #63

    A pre-nup is essentially an insurance policy “just in case” the marriage doesn’t last a lifetime. If one feels the need for such an insurance policy why bother to marry in the first place? Why not just live together as long as it lasts?

    You are not quite clear why society is so ready to scrap marriage altogether? Seems clear to me: 50% of all marriages do not last a lifetime despite the best intentions of the individuals involved. Subsequent marriages fare no better. You see marriage as ” the ultimate commitment to the other person”. Yes, so did the other multi millions of people who made the same commitment. And were proved wrong.

    If something does not work for half of all people who try it, maybe scrapping it, as a symbol of “the ultimate commitment” isn’t such a terrible idea.

66. metsgirl 66

    Steve #64
    =) I’m not sure anyone has to commit to anything in order to die….it’s more like the ultimate “given”

    So I wonder how much research is devoted to the success rates of hookups or short term live-ins….or maybe it’s too difficult to keep up. (It still doesn’t make marriage a bad thing).

67. Lance 67

    Going way back to Cilla in #8, yes, hookups are exhausting. The sex part isn’t that bad, it’s all the work that goes into making the hookup happen and sometimes the fallout. I’d say this affects me at least as much as it affects her, and in fact, the exhaustive nature of hookups (I just call it dating) causes me to go through lulls.

    Marc in #15 dropped a very interesting comment about men choosing the girlfriend experience from high priced call girls. I think it’s totally true…guys PREFER to have the gf experience prior to having sex. I know I do, and I’ve imagined what it would be like having sex with a professional. I think it would totally suck if it was just the sex, but if she acted like an awesome gf and made me feel great, that would be worth paying for.

    My conclusion from that is most men and women suck at being good girlfriends and boyfriends. I broke up with my last girlfriend because she wasn’t skilled or mature enough to act like a cool girlfriend. In the end, she made me feel like crap more often than she made me feel good.

    Lance´s last blog post…New Car!

68. Janet 68

    Fidelity has not traditionally been part of marriage. Shocking, true. For 5,000 years people married for economic reasons and sex was not a sentimental, loving act. Of course, people did fall in love and have passions for each other, but these passions were usually not for one’s spouse, and in many Western cultures too strong an emotional attachment to one’s spouse was seen as unseemly and in some cases dangerous.

    Marriage did not become sexualized until the Victorian era, which attended an exultation of motherhood and female “purity” (Victorians were the first to promote the idea the women did not enoy sex, and this idea has made it into our modern definition of what is a “good” female–self-effacing, nurturing, defenseless, docile, etc.) This time period — the dawn of the Industrial Revolution–is also where we first see men and women occupying different spheres of endeavor. Prior to that time, these non-erotic marriage partners were team mates in commerce, governance, or whatever the economic field of endeavor was. Work was determined more by class than by gender: the lower classes were servants for the upper classes, the merchant class was made up of family businesses where all family members worked, rulers received their power from their family name, and so on. Families and marriages were not private affairs but social agreements.

    In the 20th century, the notions introduced in Victorian England expanded, along with the acceptaance of individual freedoms and more openness about sexuality (relative to the Victorians), until you hit the apex of the marriage ideal: the post-WW2 nuclear family, neatly enconsed in a private home with segregated worlds for men and women; a warm love nest of sexual union; the well-cared-for offspring of that union; and severe prohibitions against anything that threatened that precariously balanced little unit. Like divorce, extramarital sex, homosexuality, female empowerment, male sensitivity.

    And then the 70s arrived and this model blew up in everyone’s face. The divorce rate skyrocketed, people began experimenting with other types of family setups and sexual agreements, and hooking up became a tolerated-to-accepted norm.

    Men didn’t do this, women didn’t do this, and these new ways of relating (or not relating) do not serve one gender over the other.

    But yes, the genie is out of the bottle and we are not going back to the days of segregated work and male-breadwinner families. This is always an option that people can choose if it suits them. And if people want hookups and non-married living, or exclusivity and non-married living, they can choose that. And that’s the best news: We as responsible adults get to determine what is the best way for us to live and love, and we are free to share these ideas with each other and bond with those who are in agreement and support our happiness.

69. Michael 69

    When you decide to suddenly have a meaningful relationship, do you meet someone and discard all of your previous sexual hobbies as though they never occured and have a warm and loving relationship with the person you’re currently interested in?
    Yes, that is the general idea.
    When she hooks up with you at the drop of a hat, that doesn’t show that’s she’s very discerning, and you kind of take your chances that no one else has an interest in the merchandise.
    I take that same chance just talking to women.

    At least by having sex with them, you take a piece of them with you.

70. metsgirl 70

    #65 Selena

    There’s all kinds of insurance policies (as you call it)….there’s nothing wrong with having one if losses are you’re main concern (whether marriage, life or auto). That doesn’t mean that it devalues the commitment….in some cases it could be smart.

    Living with someone for “as long as it lasts” doesn’t sound like it’s oozing in commitment either….so why get in a relationship at all?

    I believe 50% of the marriages that do fail could be blamed on peoples’ ideals of perfection and bliss….mismatched values and beliefs….insecurities and unreasonable demands. Some of them probably needed to end because of some form of abuse. The world’s an imperfect place. (There’s no way to know if those that failed in marriage the first or second time would have fared any better or lasted longer if it was a live-in situation).

    Since we know that, 100% of the time, the euphoric feelings you had in the beginning of a relationship will fade (to some degree or another) if we use your example, then we wouldn’t have much hope of ever being in a satisfying relationship. That’s not reason enough to not try to build something solid….but it’s a free country.

71. Casey 71

    My idea of what goes on in a man’s head about commitment vs. just hooking up:

    “Hmmmm….do I want to commit…probably not…that’s a lot of work, women are crazy and just want to control you. Why not just hook-up and move on? There are plenty of fish in the sea. I don’t just limit myself to one kind of fish when I’m out to dinner…night after night…the same fish. Sometimes I like salmon, others I like cod…or hey hey…a little chilean sea bass can sure hit the spot sometimes! And look…an ocean of possibilities are available to troll right in my own home. I don’t even have to put any real work into it, like taking a shower, shaving, dressing nicely. So why bother committing and getting to know someone? She will expect so much…the endless talking about feelings, blah, blah, blah. And what if she doesn’t like the real me? I can’t go through the pain of break-up again. Just easier to have sex with her and never call again…any woman who has sex right away is a tramp anyone. No need to treat her with courtesy and respect…not like someone you’ve committed to would expect. Besides, the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence. I’ll just go on-line and find someone I have more chemistry with or who blah, blah, blah. I’m sure there is someone perfect for me just around the corner or on the next page of my web search who will be perfect and I won’t have to do anything in the relationship and it be perfect.

72. Selena 72

    metsgirl #70

    If marrying someone is the “ultimate commitment” then what does a pre-nup say? “I’m committing my life to you, but not my assets”? That’s not really committing your life now is it? It’s not really *believing* the marriage will last a lifetime, so if you don’t really believe that, why marry at all? Certainly it’s pragmatic, but if one feels the need to be so pragmatic, why bother with a license from the state and paperwork from attorneys?

    For the record, I don’t believe marriage should be scrapped because it is about love, and HOPE. I think it’s wonderful when people can stand up and promise each other they will be there for each other until death do they part. As long as they BELIEVE it at the time. If they don’t, it’s a mockery.

    I didn’t give you an example of any kind to infer there was no hope for ever having a satisfying relationship. Perhaps you are projecting. Thanks for informing me it’s a free country – that’s new.

73. JerseyGirl 73

    A lot of men don’t even want to end up settled in their mid-30s. More often than not they’re trapped into settlement by children, other responsibilities, or some harping self-esteem-ravaging douchette wife-unit.

    ——————————————————–
    Men aren’t “trapped” into anything, children or not. Men are adults who are capable of making their own choices. If a man ends up having childen he didn’t plan for or want, it is just as much at fault.

    And I do think men’s lack of wanting to commitment is immature. But society as a whole has become immature and has given the message that self gratification should be our number one pursuit.

74. Curly Girl 74

    Thanks for the history lesson, Janet@68.

    You touch on what I mean–we have this “traditional love & marriage” message shoved down our throats from the day we’re born, only males get one message, females an opposed message, and none of it’s even based on anything traditional, and rarely on anything that is workable, and never on anything sustainable. What’s up with that?

    And if you don’t follow the party line and if you question any of it, you get accused of being man-hating/misogynistic or pathological or something else negative. Any normally observant kind of person can look around and see that “love & marriage” doesn’t work very often, and as Steve@64 said, maybe they weren’t even working so well in the pre-1970s golden age of coupledom. And still everybody is chasing it.

    I don’t know about you all, but I’m really not caring so much about relationships as an entity anymore. I don’t care about hookups one way or the other. I don’t care about gold-digging/trophy chasing. I don’t about anybody’s hardwiring. I don’t care why people get married or why they don’t.

    (Even though I did find the history of marriage lecture interesting and helpful.)

    I am starting to feel such peace.

75. Janet 75

    Thanks, C.G. It is astounding that all of our contemporary ideas about dating and marriage stem from a teeny, tiny window in human history–the 20 to 25 years after World War 2. That these ideas (males as exclusive providers, women as exclusive nurturers, couples as separate and private from the rest of society) still drive our beliefs about who we are as men and women and in relationship is quite mind-blowing, when you think about it. Even though these beliefs have shown to be myths, people are still chasing the perfect relationship dream, as you suggest. Atheists and agnostics, who toss off other forms of idealization, still worship at the altar of The Perfect Relationship. Very curious.

76. LK 76

    “society as a whole has become immature and has given the message that self gratification should be our number one pursuit.”

    This is, I believe, the crux of the problem. And as a single woman who wants to have a family, it depresses me.

77. Janet 77

    Hmm. Did something get dropped there?

78. starthrower68 78

    I must agree with you, Jersey Girl. This person isn’t making me happy so I’ll go get another one, women and men both. I don’t think either side has the market cornered on lack of maturity. Lord knows I’ve had plenty of my own growth to do. While I do find this site fascinating and insightful and I like to particpate as much as the next person, we live in troubled times and I think the day is soon coming when the stuff we talk about here won’t mean a whole lot to us anymore.

79. Selena 79

    Starthrower #78:
    ” This person isn’t making me happy so I’ll go get another one, women and men both.”

    You say this like it’s a bad thing lol!

    I’d rather have it that way then the way it used to be: being expected to live out your life with someone who made you unhappy because of the stigma attached to divorce. A lifetime can be a very long time to be unhappy with someone you yolked yourself to when you were young. But staying unhappy for years, decades is somehow a virtue? Why?

80. Selena 80

    Lance #67
    “In the end, she made me feel like crap more often than she made me feel good.”

    That would seem to be the heart of it. We choose one person over another because they make us feel good. We feel more fulfilled as a person when we are with them. And return that in kind.

    What is the mechanism that makes this change? When the person we chose makes us feel “less than”, when respect, the sense of being united, even the commradarie we had with them are lost?

    I’ve read a significant factor in infidelity is because the “new person” made the other person feel good about themselves when their SO did not. Restored a measure of self-esteem that had been lost along the way in the existing relationship. So what is it that makes us slowly erode the specialness we started with? To stop caring about making our partner feel good? To not caring if we are making them feel like crap? Even taking satisfaction in doing so sometimes?

81. Janet 81

    I don’t find it so depressing. How about this: We, all of us, men and women both, are hard-wired for hookups. But we are not at the mercy of our so-called wiring. Marriage/LTRs arose as a way of organizing society and addressing needs that all humans have–survival, being the main one. There is no “natural” order to marriage–it changes as societal needs change. To help us along, our brains change, our sexual reactions change, in response to our environments.

    Today we have a great deal of choice in what kind of environment we want to live in–unlike our parents in the 50s and the 60s and, to an extent, the 70s, who were shoved into very rigid sexual and family roles, which was accomplished through a great deal of societal brainwashing, which is how most societal standards are set (watch “Mad Men”).

    But what we have to give up today is the Disney fairy tale belief that there is one person out there who is going to make your life meaningful and purposeful. That person doesn’t exist, and that relationship structure does not exist, even though every movie, every TV show, every dating/mating advice book/column/blog in the U.S. is pushing this idea (as C.G. alludes to).

    But today we get to be individuals with rich lives, whether we choose to be in partnership or fly solo.

    It would be nice to see our lives celebrated in their fullness instead of always measured against the relationship yardstick.

82. Sylvia 82

    Everyone is just so confused about dating now a day, esp. me. We put titles on emotions. Something that is a subjective thought experienced differently by everyone. No one knows what to do because both sides are playing stupid mind games. Does he/she like me, will he/she call, he/she calls too much, he/she doesn’t call me enough, what does it all mean!? Too many questions… it gets confusing. The right one is out there and personally believe (and hope) that they aren’t so confusing…. it will take work (relationships require work….get over it) but both sides are willing to give and take….

83. Jenn 83

    I’ve been pondering the power of habit. I’ve dated lots of men in their mid-40s to early 50s, and the divorced or widowed guys seem most interested in finding another relationship. A bit of a surprise, given some of the divorce stories.

    But it’s the ones who’ve never been married (or had a live-in relationship) who talk a good game (I’m ready to settle down, want to find “the one” and maybe have some kids) but seem to go from hook-up to hook-up…or 2-month “relationship” to 2-month “relationship.” Some are up-front about it (let’s just have sex), and I move along. Most of the time. But I wonder, at some point, if it’s just what they DO, and they’re not interested in (capable of?) sticking with one woman. I know that I’m generalizing, but here’s my question: Should we not count on guys in their 40s/50s who’ve never been married to break their habit and be with just one woman?

84. Selena 84

    @Sylvia # 82

    “it will take work (relationships require work. get over it) but both sides are willing to give and take.”

    The old gem “Relationships take work” has been around for God knows how long, but what does it really mean?

    Keeping a bad relationship going certainly feels like hard work to the person in it. So what is the “work” required of a good relationship?

    Anyone care to define what the “Work” actually is?

85. metsgirl 85

    You did give me something to infer from….If your logic is to scrap something that has a 50% success rate then we should be scrapping relationships as a whole because 100% of the time you don’t feel the same a few years down the road. And according to some on here, we’re not even hardwired to be in relationships in the first place.

    Why would someone need to marry their spouse’s assets. Divorce is about assets. You simply get to enjoy them the same way as a live-in situation. People don’t generally get a prenup in a live-in situation so how is this less favorable? If you’re going to be with the person forever anyway then a prenup (a piece of paper, if you will) won’t give you anything to worry about.

    Your welcome about the free country thing….

86. Selena 86

    @ Jenn #83

    I’ve only known one man in his 50′s who had never been married. He had had serious lengthy relationships however, including one that lasted 9 yrs. and produced a child. Once he told me marriage scared him, but he couldn’t say why.

    An acquaintence of mine married at almost 51, a woman who caught his glance across a crowded room and ignited him. He said by age 50, he had given up on ever finding someone to marry – that it just wasn’t in the cards for him. He was happy that turned out not to be true.

    I can’t think of anyone I’ve known over the age of 40 who hasn’t had at least one serious relationship in their life married or not. If someone does reach 50 with only a history of 2 month “relationships” I’d have to wonder if that really was by choice. And I’d think it different from someone who had had years long relationships yet never married.

87. Michael 87

    But staying unhappy for years, decades is somehow a virtue?
    It is called commitment.

    Make a promise, keep it.

88. Eli Grubman 88

    People who are married find it better than just hooking up (most of the time).

    Hooking up is better than being a virgin, that is for sure!

89. starthrower68 89

    Selena, perhaps I should have been more clear on #78; I would not advice anyone to stay in a bad relationship otherwise I would not have gotten divorced. However, I think we go into these things without giving them a lot of thought and oh well if it doesn’t work, I’ll just walk away, as more of a lackadaisical approach. We require others to do their part without thinking about the role we play. Let’s face it, even couples who’ve been happily married for 50 years have some “irreconcilable” differences. There is a “grass is always greener” mentality out there in this day and age; we want what we want and we want it now and we don’t want to do the heavy lifting to get it. All I’m saying is that we should be more deliberate about these things.

90. starthrower68 90

    @ Selena #84

    I’ll tackle your question regarding #82. I think a better word than “work” would be “nurturing”. We reach a point where we stop “courting” or “wooing” the other person, especially after a few years of marriage. I’m willing to be that Evan and his wife understand the importance of maintaining that connection by having “date” nights, being mentally and emotionally present for each other, and having plenty of time for intimacy. I know there’s not a lot of fans of anything Christian on this site, but I think the movie “Fireproof” is just a fabulous example of where society is missing the mark. Even if you don’t embrace the Christian faith, there are still a lot of good relationship things to take away from it.

91. Newbie 91

    For me, Kohellet (Ecclesiastes 9:9) said it best when he commented Enjoy your time with the woman you love all the days of your fleeting life…this is your only reward for your toil and labor beneath the sun.

    Might I note he had 1000 wives and concubines, though? I’ve wondered, does that make him an expert or a hypocrite? LOL

    I assert, “an expert”.

    So it’s out of respect that I write what I’m about to.

    For me, the words of Kohellat mean that even a thousand sexual relationships do not equal a single quality relationship with a very special woman. I love this blog because I think that while on the whole it advocates for that position, I learn so much from all those who disagree, too. Your opinions fascinate me because I literally come from a different world – an orthodox religious world that I am already no longer a part of, but whose values with regard to community and relationships I still retain.

    I am in the process of ending a 26 year marriage with the ONLY woman I’ve ever been with. I’m trying to figure out if in your world, the one I’ll soon enter, the values that cause me to retain my chastity or exclusivity is a fault or a strength. I have a very hard time getting my arms around the concept of “hookups”. I just cannot fathom (as much as I try) how people can “just have sex” unless it’s within a relationship of commitment. And, I’ve never tried

    I imagine hookups as being like chewing on gristle when you can have steak. I know you gotta eat, but can’t you eat something else in the meantime, rather than risk thinking that gristle is all there is? Or, is it like having steak all the time, and never then being able to appreciate it as something special? I’m not sure. I think the former.

    When I hear myself asking this question, I castigate myself for judging with no experience. So I try to learn from others, like here – on this blog. Many of you seem so confident in the worth of what you gain from relationships without commitment. I ask myself whether my values are useful in such a world.

    In a historical context of the sort Janet laid out, it seems my values are “wrong” for your world, if even ever they were right. I don’t think her historical perspective provides the full context though.

    For me, my relationship with a woman, and hers with me, creates the smallest and most potent form of “community” known to civilization. The “LTCR” (“C” is for “Committed”). True, it’s only a “community-of-two”, but it’s a community nevertheless. As Janet noted, “community” is a way we organize for survival, and it seems I’m fairly alone here because I’m not analyzing the question from the exclusive perspective of what we personally get from relationships. I’m asserting we have an obligation to more than ourselves in making our choices so that”survival” means not only physical survival, but also “spiritual” survival – the ways we cultivate the safety of relationships to grow as individuals and couples (I’m not defining “spiritual” religiously), but also how we channel that growth to strengthen the institutions that served as the framework that enabled those relationships so that future generations might benefit from it, too. To be explicit, I think we NEED relationships – and have an obligation to future generations to cultivate them as previous generations did for us.

    When my marriage ceased being a nurturing environment for me, it lost its value in this sense. Nobody has an obligation to stay in relationships that aren’t working. But I think people DO have an obligation to treat others with enough respect, that we have an obligation to demand respect, such that our relationships with others can have the environment needed to develop, and once developed never devolve to being merely “hookups” – even within the context of our own marriages.

    When “hookups” become as legitimate as a relationship choice as relationships of respect (rather than mere “mutual interest”), I think we undermine more than just ourselves – we undermine the whole institution of relationships as a context for individual growth, and make good relationships a rare find because fewer and fewer have the patience to cultivate them. With time, as we cease imparting the values and skills of relationship building, fewer of us have ever seen good relationships we can use as models.

    So, I vote against hookups – as exciting as they seem to be, I think they’re “snack food” when we need a “balanced diet”.

92. starthrower68 92

    Newbie, it’s not that your values are no longer useful in this world. It’s that everybody wants to make up their own. See we’re “evolved” now. We’ve all got a lot of head knowledge but not very much wisdom. I think you expressed wisdom in your post and I’m sorry that after 26 years you’ve had to call it quits. I’m sure that’s a painful thing.

93. Selena 93

    Mets#85

    No dear. Those are all YOUR own inferences.

94. Selena 94

    Re:Starthrower #89 & 90

    I agree with you on both posts.

    I think sometimes people do not do enough deliberation when deciding to marry, rather choosing to marry based on primarily on Isabelle Archer’s observations #34.

    Nurturing is a better word than “work” when it comes to what good relationships require. I think of it as *tending* and willingness to compromise when needed. Neither concept I would describe as “work” .

    Haven’t seen the movie “Fireproof” yet. Looking forward to catching it.

95. Newbie 95

    Starthrower68, communities (and couples) are basically people who gather around the same values, and that’s one of the reasons a “couple” is the most basic of communities. They are cooperative ventures to the core, based on the sense that we gain more from our association than we could apart from it.

    I admit I’m speaking from a very rarified place here – I never tried “hookups”, nor did I ever look for the opportunity to do so. I imagine myself as the studious kid who walks passed the smoking pit where all the cool kids are in High School on the way to my first class, knowing I’ve chosen to be apart from them – even as I’m very curious about how they see the world. What have they experienced of it that could make my life richer? Can I be so sure my choices are better ones. The truth is I don’t know. That’s why I “lurk” here – to learn more.

    Yes – “everybody wants to make up their own” values, but I think there is a nobility and dignity that we must ensure we do not violate in others when we make our choices. The consequences of our choices affect them. So, much as a society where nearly everybody lies throws into question the veracity of those who only tell the truth, treating all kinds of relationships as though they are of equal objective value undermines the “ideal” many of us seek in relationships. That I think is the underlying question about values that underlays Evan’s post.

    I dunno. For me, hookups are the “second hand smoke” of the world of relationships, I sense. But again – I am really curious about those kids at the smoking pit I’ll probably just keep walking, though.

96. Janet 96

    In long post on the collective history of marriage in the West, I am not advocating anything. I am merely pointing out that not everyone throughout human history has viewed relationship and s*x the same way nor defince “valuable” in the same way. There has been a clear evolution in behaviors. And today we have ways to study physiology and behavior and history that lead to an understanding of where we come from, where we are, and where we might go. There have always been hookups, even in orthodox religious settings. Whether one partakes or not is an individual choice. Agreeing to abide by a particular group’s rules/agreements about behavior is as valid a choice as choosing not to. There are good reasons for both. I believe that what I was saying is that there is something for everybody–each needs to find his/her others to build a life with.

    But every choice for something is also a choice against something else. It is usual for us to hold our way as better (of course we believe that, or we’d choose something else, no?) and others’ way as of less value.

    So we can expect disagreement and offense.

97. Newbie 97

    Janet, in 81 it seems to me that what you’re advocating is that “choice” is what makes our decisions “rich” ones. Without it, you concluded that we are “shoved” and “brainwashed” into decisions we wouldn’t otherwise make. I just don’t think most people live their lives so conscientiously – most people, even today, are led to behaviors that they mimic or comply with, without the thought that makes their behavior “choice” in the vaulted sense I think you meant it.

    I thought you advocated for a position opposed to mine because of the way you framed the history and the way you used your words to approve current mores, and deprecate those of the Victorians (not that they themselves found them sustainable, either, and not that I’m Victorian – I don’t see value in extremes). Mores, irrespective of the side of this debate one advocates, are “shoved” at us – it’s the price we pay for our association with others. It’s why I asked my question – I’m trying to get my arms around the rules of the game of the world I live in, which are different from the one I lived in.

    So, living on the edge of two worlds and being forced to choose, I see clearly that all that’s changed is that the side of the argument that predominates today is not the same one that predominated 50 years ago, and you wrote that what predominated 50 years ago did not predominate before it. But both views DO enforce themselves on their respective generations, and most of us comply, never actually choosing.

    I think probably where we believe alike is that we both agree people should choose wisely – where we disagree I think is regarding the scope of issues that define which choices are wise ones. My scope is very broad still – a throwback to my background. I’m not certain that’s a bad thing.

    Currently, I’m trying to figure out where the middle path is – the proper balance of nature (chemistry and attraction) and nurture (developed relationships). I’m here looking for common ground – trying to improve nature with nurture, and the reverse, rather than the obvious ways we disagree. Eventually, I hope I can just stop thinking about it

98. Janet 98

    Newbie: I’m not advocating choice, I’m pointing out what is obvious–we have many more socially acceptable choices in the forms that our relationships may take than we did a few decades ago. There have been other times in history where societies did approve of/tolerate many different domestic situations. These are not my ideas. They are the ideas of Stephanie Coontz in her book, “Marriage: A History,” that I am sure everyone is sick of hearing me plug on this site.

    But she’s a highly credentialed historian and author, specializing in family systems.

    So you believe that you have higher moral standards than most re: relationships and sex because of your religious background. I hear ya. I’m fine with you believing that.

99. Curly Girl 99

    You know, I used to read this blog and get all mad and I really didn’t like a lot of the people on here. But now I’ve melllowed, and I’m really starting to appreciate everyone. Except I still have a small problem with Vino. I think it would be fun to drink wine with him b/c he says he knows a lot about it, which is really fun, but you’d have to be all pretty and girly and perfect with him, which is hard when you have curly hair. Still, I’m sure the wine-drinking would be fun and informative.

    Stop being so smart and bookwormy!

    Janet, I like ya, sister, but I think you’re being too hard on our Newbie. He’s been married for 26 years in a wedding-night-virgin-faithful-guy kinda way. He can hardly be expected to understand hookups and historical marriages of convenience and so forth. We need to be nice to him.

100. Curly Girl 100

     I don’t know what happened there, but the “smart and bookwormy” comment was for Janet and was supposed to come AFTER my sisterly advice to her.

     I do not think that Vino is being too smart and bookwormy. But Janet is. Definitely.

101. Curly Girl 101

     Janet: No offense.

102. casualencounters.com/blog 102

     @Cilla

     Sure, though it’s more like an axe I like to grind on others’ behalf.

     @Honey

     Well, y’know. Yes and no. Of course the hypothetical individual is at least 50% “responsible” in a technical sense, but it’s hard to feel like a bad drunken decision to stick your dick in someone which results in life-of-misery-with-vampire-hellbitch, say-goodbye-to-your-financial-future-and-personal-development-plans, or universally-loathed-poster-boy-for-deadbeat-dads-the-world-over as double thumbs up possibilities of consequence is a case of the punishment fitting the crime. Even though it does.

     tl;dr: I’ve seen friends’ lives ruined by minor failures with major consequences.

     *shrug*

     casualencounters.com/blog´s last blog post…Bondage.com review

103. Janet 103

     None taken.

104. Newbie 104

     Janet, that you concluded with being fine with my believing what I believe is emblematic of the point I was making – choices about how we enter relationships echo beyond us and our partner, and return to us – and eventually reflect on our own ability to access and retain deep, intimate, long term relationships. Karma? Maybe.

     And it’s not really relevant whether my view is right for me, if at the same time it cannot also make the world more right for others. Yet our generation believes the rightness of those choices is created the moment we choose.

     I kinda get that. It makes things simpler for us. My life is complicated now – I’d like it more simple. I find that thinking alluring.

     But our view of relationships infect or have been infected by a generational world view that the quality of our choices can not be measured by the consequences we all know we suffer as the price for fragmenting relationships into a sexual part and a relationship part.

     My cultural views developed in religion – that’s true. Still, for those who’d dismiss them for that reason, try Kant’s 3 maxims on for size – maxims he developed to guide human ethical relationships in the absence of religious dogma. It is, actually, based on these maxims that I have had such difficulty understanding “hookups” – so similar are his maxims to the essence of what I think religion tries to do.

     1) Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law

     2) Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, always at the same time as an end and never merely as a means to an end.

     3) Therefore, every rational being must so act as if he were through his maxim always a legislating member in the universal kingdom of ends.

     So, as much as I appreciate historical analysis of what WAS, I’m also interested in the history that all of us create every day with our actions – what WILL BE. I’ve got 4 kids still – whom I care for deeply. What choices would I want them to make so that they could leave richer lives? Those are the choices I am seeking to model – and it’s in part why I’m using this forum to explore the choices in all their aspects.

     I recommend for those who haven’t to listen to the NPR recording – it presents a very well rounded view of all sides of the argument.

105. Janet 105

     But it’s OK for a woman’s life to be ruined and an unwanted child to be born b/c a drunken guy makes a “bad drunken decision” to stick his dick in somebody without one thought to the consequences? Oh, please. I guess it’s OK for the drunk guy to drive himself home. It’s everybody else’s fault for being in his drunken way, right?

106. Selena 106

     @casualencounters #102

     Perhaps bottles of alcohol should come with warning labels for men. Something along the lines of: “Warning: Consumption of this Product could result in a bad drunken decision to stick your dick in someone which results in life-of-misery-with-vampire-hellbitch, say-goodbye-to-your-financial-future-and-personal-development-plans, or becoming a universally-loathed-poster-boy-for-deadbeat-dads-the-world-over . Drink responsibly.”

107. Janet 107

     First of all, I’m 48. Raised in a very strict religious home myself. Have moved beyond Kant and categorical imperatives and into Bertrand Russell and, ultimately, Sartre and the subjectivity of experience. Thus, I don’t know how anyone can have the hubris, or “bad faith,” to assume s/he knows what kind of world is “right” for others. And now we’re back to the patriarchy discussion.

108. Steve 108

     @casualencounters #102

     I would love to tell you that the only person you can control is yourself and that ending up in a bad marriage is 100% your problem as it is fallout from your judgment at the time as well as your decision.

     I would be right, but it wouldn’t feel right to tell you that. People make mistakes. It *hurts* to lose most everything you’ve worked for. There isn’t much you can do if a spouse changes and has no interest in working on themselves. Your anger is real and it is common.

     Post #102 sounds very similar to the things my mother and father used to say about each other for years after their divorce. They said those things around me forgetting that the *&^%$ mentioned is *my* [mother|father].

     If you don’t want your kids to hate you, don’t talk like that around them. Otherwise you will be injecting cynicism and other emotional issues that will likely stay with them, to some degree for life.

     You might want to stop it for yourself too. It comes as ugly and is a fairly good anti-person repellent.

     No offense, we all have problems.

109. Steve 109

     Janet Jun 10th 2009 at 05:43 am 107
     Have moved beyond Kant and categorical imperatives and into Bertrand Russell and, ultimately, Sartre and the subjectivity of experience.

     God, I love when women talk philosophy! . Its almost as much of a turn on as fishnets and high heels .

     Okay, so I am perv…….

110. Steve 110

     @Selena post #106

     Thank you for the Wednesday morning LOL!

111. starthrower68 111

     Wow, has this question taken some twists and turns….

112. vino 112

     Curly Girl Jun 9th 2009 at 05:09 pm 99

     Pretty & girly with curly hair – not mutually exclusive items & great in combination. Keep the ‘perfect.’ I hate perfect, as it’s a sham. One of the best, maybe the best, woman I dated had long curly hair.

     And you would have tons of fun drinking wine with me. I’m a friggin’ blast. Of course, you’d probably disagree with me on dating matters.

     Selena Jun 10th 2009 at 03:52 am 106
     responding to
     @casualencounters #102

     The exchange reminds me of the debate in another thread regarding sex & responsibilities for birth control. As a guy, even if you are ‘hooking up’ (as ill-defined as that is), you should never, ever, have sex with someone unless you can verify that she is also on birth control. Live by that rule & you avoid much trouble, though you may forgo a few romps.

     Basic premise is that neither wants to have a child from the sex, so therefore each person is responsible for using some birth control. Him – condom. Her – pill or one of the other ten or so forms available to women. If she ain’t using or going to use one, then you ain’t gonna bump uglies. Simple as that.

     This is some of the downside to hooking up. That said, it’s far better than the legal entanglement of marriage.

113. vino 113

     Janet Jun 10th 2009 at 02:50 am 105

     “But it’s OK for a woman’s life to be ruined and an unwanted child to be born b/c a drunken guy makes a bad drunken decision to stick his dick in somebody without one thought to the consequences? Oh, please. I guess it’s OK for the drunk guy to drive himself home. It’s everybody else’s fault for being in his drunken way, right?”

     Taking rape out if the equation, the woman in this scenario sounds like a mannequin that can happen to bear children. Apparently, she didn’t choose to not take birth control. She didn’t choose to have sex with the guy. She didn’t choose to think about the consequences. She didn’t choose to have an abortion.

     I guess she made no choices in this whatsoever.

     Give us a break. Stop the one sided demonization.

114. Selena 114

     Vino #112

     Agreed on the birth control.

     Gotta wonder how many of these drunken guys sticking it in vampire-bitches are conscientious about wearing condoms though. Maybe condoms should be supplied with each alcoholic beverage sold?

     Unplanned pregnancy is indeed one of the possible downsides of “hook-ups”. Doesn’t seem to deter the determined however.

115. Cilla 115

     @ Vino #112

     What is your definition of “verify” regarding a woman’s birth control? Do you need to see a medical chart that an IUD was inserted? Do you ask a woman you are thinking of sleeping with for the first time to bring her birth control pills to the date? I would hope verbal verification is sufficient…

116. Janet 116

     Vino: Just responding to casualencounters’ one-sided demonization by presenting the other. I personally don’t participate in these kind of situations. But I do understand the law and the reasons for it.

117. Curly Girl 117

     At least Vino isn’t saying we all have to be on the Pill, like he used to.

118. Jennifer 118

     On the birth control thing, particularly in a hook-up type situation, guys have to wear condoms all of the time if they don’t want to father children, or get vasectomies. Not that either one of these is even fool-proof though.

     I don’t think verbal verification of woman’s birth control status is enough, particularly in a hook-up type situation, as pills can always be forgotten, she could be on antibiotics or some herbal medications (St. John’s Wort) and not know that they may render the pill ineffective, she could get food poisioning and throw up a pill, etc. Because once the sperm leaves the guy’s body, he is *completely* out of choices. Women have more options (as unpleasant as some of those may be). If there is anything that guys should be particularly paranoid/careful about, it’s unwanted pregnancies.

     But I’m glad this thread is slowing down. All of the contentiousness annoys the hell out of me and makes me tired.

119. vino 119

     Selena Jun 10th 2009 at 10:05 am 114
     Vino #112

     “Unplanned pregnancy is indeed one of the possible downsides of hook-ups. Doesn’t seem to deter the determined however.”

     Reminds me of something I heard once, though I don’t recall the source. – The poor & the stupid will always procreate.

     Take out the ‘poor’ & I think that statement may be an absolute (typo intended) truth…

     Cilla Jun 10th 2009 at 10:10 am 115
     @ Vino #112

     Verbal assurances mean nothing. Sorry. I don’t want to be a daddy and I’m not taking someone’s word for it they are also using contraception. Otherwise, the guy makes the case for his detractors that he ‘should a known better.’ Lady has to be using it also, or no sex. Not the most romantic POV, but the most responsible course for someone who doesn’t want kids. I can’t wait for the male pill.

     Janet Jun 10th 2009 at 11:27 am 116
     “Vino: Just responding to casual encounters one-sided demonization by presenting the other. I personally don’t participate in these kind of situations. But I do understand the law and the reasons for it.”

     Cool. Good on ya.

     Curly Girl Jun 10th 2009 at 11:52 am 117
     “At least Vino isn’t saying we all have to be on the Pill, like he used to.”

     Where did you ever read that? That’s a lie, and I’ll call it as such till you prove otherwise.

     What I’ve said is as above – women who truly don’t want kids WILL take one of the 11 or so available methods of birth control. Anything else is equivocating nonsense.

120. Cilla 120

     @ Vino

     You didn’t answer my question. If verbal verification is not sufficient for you, how do you go about proving a woman is on birth control?

     If a woman tells you she is unable to bear children, do you demand to see copies of her medical records and then call the doctor to verify they haven’t been falsified?

     For your dates on birth control pills, you will need access to her complete records, as well, including prescriptions and over the counter supplements. You could ask a woman to bring her birth control pills to your date, but you still have no verification that she is actually taking them or, as a PP pointed out, that she’s not taking something else that competes for CYP 450 metabolism. Do you perform directly observed therapy every day for at least 30 days to make sure your date is actually taking the pills (and at exactly 24-hour intervals)?

     Do you perform a pelvic exam to ascertain that your date’s IUD is in place?

     Do you inspect your date’s diaphragm to ensure that it is intact, and do you then check your date’s weight to make sure she has not gained or lost enough since being given the diaphragm to possibly render it ill fitting?

     If verbal verification of female contraception, in addition to the use of a condom, is not enough, then perhaps you shouldn’t be having sex, hook up or no. I can’t imagine you get anyone to sleep with you if you demand actual physical proof that she is on birth control (and of course, that it’s working).

121. Michael 121

     On the birth control thing, particularly in a hook-up type situation, guys have to wear condoms all of the time if they don’t want to father children, or get vasectomies. Not that either one of these is even fool-proof though.
     How would two layers of condoms work?

122. Curly Girl 122

     Vino@119: I remember it very clearly, my friend. It was maybe a year or so ago, and it was a particularly vitriolic thread. You were insisting that women be on the Pill, that dating men should not have sex with women unless those women were on the Pill. Because women were saying 1) the Pill isn’t 100% effective, so the risk was still there, and 2) not all women can take the Pill because of adverse side effects. And then you, maybe other guys, poo-pooed the side effects. I remember it b/c I have had horrible side effects on the Pill–it was terrifying. So I thought your stern advice was really ignorant and uncharitable at the very least. But you’re right. We wouldn’t agree about dating. Or about sex. Or about birth control. So why bother drinking together? We see on this thread what that leads to.

123. Cilla 123

     @ Michael

     Wearing two condoms is like wearing two pairs of surgical gloves: if one pair is breached the second pair hopefully provides a back-up barrier.

124. vino 124

     Curly Girl Jun 10th 2009 at 03:00 pm 122

     I noticed you didn’t prove I said that as I asked.

     Now you’re going to get an argument. PROVE where I said At least Vino isn’t saying we all have to be on the Pill, like he used to.

     Provide proof I said that, or you’re just a bald-faced liar for intentionally mischaracterizing what I said. You can’t prove it. I am confronting you on this, because you lied as a means to attack me and what I’ve said. The rest of what you said is mere distraction. As I’ve said ad nauseam, there are about a dozen forms of birth control for women, and women who are sexually active AND do not want children will take one of those forms. It ain’t limited to the pill only. Those who take no birth control (a condom’s not woman’s birth control) and have sex want to have a kid on some level.

     So PROVE where I said At least Vino isn’t saying we all have to be on the Pill, like he used to. or drink a few pints of STFU.

     We wouldn’t have fun drinking anything together. I detest liars.
     ______
     Cilla Jun 10th 2009 at 02:30 pm 120

     While your characterization seeks to make me look unreasonable, I’ve had women say they would never have sex unless they saw a blood test because they are, you know, careful. I do the same, and ask to see ‘scrips and other similar proof. I also ask follow ups about other meds, antibiotics, etc. She also has to prove she’s responsible enough for me to have sex with her too, ya know.

     I’m also very open about not wanting kids, which is the first great filter. If you get blow back on that, you’re better off not having sex, for it’s more likely she isn’t taking ‘precautions.’ Like I said above (113), being open about it will get you fewer romps. It’s worth it.
     ———————
     Do I detect a bit of anger at how I suggest men take control of their sexual and reproductive lives? It may not be the most romantic way of looking at things, but it is the most responsible. It prevents unwanted pregnancies. Oh wait, that must not be a laudable goal.

     Geeze, where are those who lament that people should wait longer before having sex till you really *know* that person better? After all, aren’t we talking about troubles of hookups before *truly* knowing someone deeply?

125. Michael 125

     Yes.

     I wonder if there are concerns about the effectiveness of surgical gloves in preventing the spread of communicable diseases.

126. vino 126

     And I agree with Jennifer’s 118 re: contentiousness (and in all other respects too).

     Lying can’t be tolerated, though.

127. Cilla 127

     @ Michael

     Hand washing is still the gold standard for preventing the spread of most diseases.

     The worry with surgical gloves is that they can tear easily with sharp objects (e.g., scalpel, broken glass in a motor vehicle accident, etc.).

128. Cilla 128

     @ Vino

     You ask girls to bring prescriptions to dates (I assume the bottle or packaging, since the scrip itself has to be turned in to the pharmacy when being filled), and you follow up on antibiotics, etc.? I would tell you to f*** off, but apparently your method works with some women. Creepy.

129. Curly Girl 129

     Vino, are you drinking again? I’m not going to wade through all of EMK’s old posts to find the thread in which you were ranting yet again about women and birth conrol. You crazy goof ball.

     Call me a liar all you want. Sticks and stones. I remember it clearly. If there were an emoticon on this board with a tongue sticking out I would throw it at you.

130. Karl R 130

     Curly Girl said: (#129)
     “I’m not going to wade through all of EMK’s old posts to find the thread in which you were ranting yet again about women and birth conrol.”

     Here’s the thread.
     http://www.evanmarckatz.com/blog/where-are-all-the-cute-successful-funny-interesting-men/

     vino said: (#124)
     “Provide proof I said that, or you’re just a bald-faced liar for intentionally mischaracterizing what I said.”

     Let me introduce you to my favorite quote:
     “Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.”

     I agree that Curly Girl mischaracterized your quote, but given that the thread was over a year old, it’s highly probable that she didn’t remember precisely what you said.

     Furthermore, by accusing her of intentionally lying, you’re guilty of the same behavior that you’re accusing her of.

     vino said: (#124)
     “I suggest men take control of their sexual and reproductive lives?”

     Then why do you rely on your girlfriend’s use of the pill? If you’re going to take control, then take control.

     Get a vasectomy and use a condom. That’s two forms of birth control and one form of STD prevention. Since they’re male forms of birth control, that puts the control firmly in your own hands. And when the men get their own version of the pill, you can take that for added protection.

     I advocate personal control too … but I mean control of my person, not the other person.

131. Curly Girl 131

     Ahh, thanks Karl! This clears it up. Vino said there were 11 forms of birth control for women, but the ones he kept citing were all estrogen-based drugs, i.e., variations on the birth control pill. Meaning the same principle (suppression of ovulation through drugs) but different ways of administering (tablet, implant, ring, etc.). He mentions the diaphragm briefly, so I give a nod to that. You guys might not know all this about the pill and its derivatives, never having been on it yourselves. The point Simone was making on the thread is that if you can’t tolerate estrogen-based birth control Vino’s way is not going to work. For some reason the diaphragm got short shrift on that thread. Ah, well.

     But Vino also states that the condom is the BACKUP form of birth control, that female birth control (via suppression of ovulation, one might infer) is the primary form to be used, and that all women who are dating and having sex should be using it if we are to be fair to men and their entertainment needs.

     Read the thread–it’s very lively!

     I believe I stand vindicated.

132. Curly Girl 132

     Update: It was Simone who mentioned the diaphragm once or twice. In Vino’s posts, I didn’t see that as a suggested option–might have missed it in my search. He mentions the IUD three times. But far and away he talks about estrogen-based birth control, even using it in his example against the poster. Hence my takeaway.

     It’s really amazing that I remember that post from over a year ago. Or maybe that is scary.

133. vino 133

     Karl R Jun 10th 2009 at 06:57 pm 130
     “Then why do you rely on your girlfriend’s use of the pill? If you’re going to take control, then take control.”

     “Get a vasectomy and use a condom.”

     How do you know I haven’t & don’t? Big ASSUMPTION. Just because the subject was what I feel women should do, that doesn’t mean I don’t practice what I preach. Of course, you assumed otherwise. Big mistake, White Knight.

     Further, since you actually took the time to find the thread where Liar intentionally mischaracterized my statements you provide simple proof that she could easily find it to prove her assertion.

     “Furthermore, by accusing her of intentionally lying, you’re guilty of the same behavior that you’re accusing her of.”

     Hardly. She’s a liar for intentionally mischaracterizing what I said and for failing to prove it after being asked to prove it TWICE where the source is readily available, as you proved. Truth is a defense to slander/libel. She STILL hasn’t proved her lie and you gave the source to do so. That’s because I never ever said that. Ergo, she lied. Deal with it.

     “I advocate personal control too but I mean control of my person, not the other person.”

     A simple reading of what I wrote indicates I do not attempt to control anyone. If you can’t/won’t take birth control and provide proof of same, that’s fine, but I’m not going to have sex with someone who won’t. No one is forcing someone to take/not take it. There is no control or duress there, and mischaracterizing it as such is fallacious and disingenuous.

     Where’s your favorite quote again?

     And keep your assumptions to yourself. You clearly don’t know it all, particularly about this.
     ______
     Curly Girl said: (#129)
     I’m not going to wade through all of EMK’s old posts to find the thread in which you were ranting yet again about women and birth conrol.

     Nice cop out Liar. Now it’s changed to “ranting about women & birth control” from At least Vino isn’t saying we all have to be on the Pill, like he used to.

     Be consistent & prove the latter. Until then, you are simply a Liar.
     _________
     Cilla Jun 10th 2009 at 05:00 pm 128

     And I would tell you the same, for in not being open about it, you prove yourself someone to definitely not have sex with. But of course it is okay to demand a guy provide blood/std tests….. no castigation about that, I noticed.

     Reminds me of a date I went on a year or so ago. Attractive, seemingly nice. During the course of the date, she tells me she wants kids. Ok. No big deal. Then she proceeds to tell me she’s been broken up only a few months. You see, she further tells me she was with her ex-bf for a few years. She knew he did not want kids, as he had a child from previous marriage.

     A couple of years into the relationship and she decides she wants one, unbeknownst to him (about a year before I met her). *Poof* She gets pregnant, against his wishes and knowledge, for they had been together for a few years (knowing he did not want kids). Then she had a miscarriage and had the cojones to tell me he wasn’t supportive during that. Duh. Otherwise, he’d be a daddy against his wishes. She was dumb enough to tell me this. Her ex was lucky. He dodged a bullet with a manipulative liar who he’d be legally tied to for decades…

     That’s why you verify. If you can’t understand that, there’s no talking sense with you.

     So just what is your objection specifically, Cilla?

134. Cilla 134

     @ Curly Girl

     Even the most popular IUD currently, the Mirena, releases a small amount of progesterone, meaning it is not entirely hormone free. There are precious few alternatives for those who cannot tolerate hormone-based contraception.

135. Curly Girl 135

     Cilla: Did not know!! Wow. That’s really interesting.

136. Karl R 136

     In response to my suggestion that vino get a vasectomy and use a condom… (#130)
     vino replied: (#133)
     “How do you know I haven’t & don’t? Big ASSUMPTION. Just because the subject was what I feel women should do, that doesn’t mean I don’t practice what I preach.”

     I believe that you preach exactly what you practice. No more, no less.

     And in two vitriol filled threads, you’ve never mentioned that you had a vasectomy. Given the lengths you will go to to “win” an arguement, it seemed highly likely that you would have mentioned it.

     But until you replied to my post, it was just an educated guess. Then you replied and confirmed it.

     Vino, like most people you are basically honest. You don’t want to state an outright lie in your post. So you accused me of making an assumption (and you were correct). You told me that making assumptions is a big mistake (which is a valid opinion). But you didn’t directly state that you’ve had a vasectomy … because it isn’t true.

     So you danced around the subject; it appears to me that you were hoping that I’d assume that my first guess was wrong.

     Now you’ve piqued my curiosity. You go to greater lengths than anyone I know to avoid unwanted pregnancies. You’re also less trusting of your partner than anyone I know. (I’ll take my girlfriends’ word that they’re on the pill or have had their tubes tied.) And I may be wrong, but it sounds like you sometimes engage in hookups; that would increase the chance that you’d sleep with a partner who doesn’t use her birth control correctly.

     Why haven’t you gotten a vasectomy? I’ve strongly considered it, and I’m a lot less sexually active than you are. To the best of my knowledge, they’re the most reliable form of birth control after abstinence. It seems a little surprising that you haven’t gotten one.

137. Cilla 137

     @ Vino

     I didn’t ask WHY you verify. I asked HOW you verify. “If you can’t understand that, there’s no talking sense with you.”

     You still haven’t answered my question. You’ve only provided a long-winded diatribe about one situation several years ago that supports your argument in a minimally anecdotal way.

138. Steve 138

     I would like to point out that “birth control” is not the only issue. There is also STD prevention. Given that infidelity is common, some sort of barrier method will always be a relevant option.

139. Selena 139

     #136

     Karl,
     I’m not convinced Vino is alot more sexually active than you are. Given the attitudes you each hold regarding women, I suspect he runs into the strong response Cilla gave (#128), more often than you ever would.

140. metsgirl 140

     Karl, I like your attitude. It’s good to know that not all men have intense anger/hatred towards women. I’m thinking this may be why hookups could get dangerous….there seems to be a lot of anger regarding an activity that some people swear should be so simple. I personally think it’s a bit more complicated.

     Everyone has a different idea of what constitutes a hookup and who (gender-wise) should be responsible for anything bad that may happen. It seems a high price to pay for something that may last a few hours (I’m being optimistic).

141. vino 141

     To LIAR:

     - Ah, the dissembling and obfuscation begins.

     “Vino said there were 11 forms of birth control for women, but the ones he kept citing were all estrogen-based drugs, i.e., variations on the birth control pill.” “He mentions the diaphragm briefly, so I give a nod to that.”

     - So its, morphed again, LIAR. PROVE I said At least Vino isn’t saying we all have to be on the Pill, like he used to. You can’t. I never did. You lack even the common decency and minimal honor to admit it.

     “But far and away he talks about estrogen-based birth control, even using it in his example against the poster. Hence my takeaway.”
     - No. I said they can use one of the 11 or so forms and used one or 2 examples off the top of my head. You again mischaracterized my words, Liar, and prove yourself incapable of minimal paraphrasing skills or reading comprehension. I suppose it depends on what the meaning if ‘is’ is, right?

     “I believe I stand vindicated.”
     - Only in your hubric Owrellian fantasyland where up is down and lies are truths. Liar. Your word means nothing. You still haven’t proved I said that. And, as we see, your story now shifts and dissembles.
     _______________
     Cilla Jun 11th 2009 at 07:59 am 137

     I did answer your question. I’m just not going to format it like a television script. Answer mine in return, or take a hike.
     _______________

     Apologies to many readers for the harsh bluntness of my responses. However, when people blatantly lie about what you said in order to try and win or discredit you in some fashion, they should be called to account. I suspect most people would not take such behavior towards them kindly in person, and I won’t take it here either.

142. Evan Marc Katz 142

     I’ve done this before, and I’m afraid I’m going to have to do it again: STOP THE NEGATIVITY!!!

     Seriously. This is a dating advice and relationship advice blog. I post articles, provide my 2 cents, and hope that you take something insightful away. It should not be a forum for sniping, hatred or pettiness, that’s for sure.

     It’s easy to get sucked in – I admit it, I do. But it’s ultimately bad for all of us. So I’m not sure if I’m going to shut down all comments, or just stay above the fray entirely, but I will ensure there will be no more personal attacks. If I see any personal attacks, they will be deleted, along with the rest of your post.

     Respectfully disagree with each others’ opinions all you like – but please, no insults. I will do the same.

     Many thanks.

     -The Management

143. Selena 143

     Metsgirl brought up an interesting point:
     “Everyone has a different idea of what constitutes a hookup ”

     I suppose I’ve thought the term to be a synonym for “One night stand” – that kind of thing where people meet at a bar, club, party and after a couple/few hours decide “What the hell” and go home to have sex with each other. Alcohol usually involved the decision.

     I can see how “hook-up” concept could be expanded to include “booty-call” arrangements. Those were the two people involved get together for sex now and then, but don’t really like each other enough to have an actual relationship.

     What about dating casually though? The type of thing where you date (with sex) until you realize one or both of you aren’t into the other enough? Or the kind where you enjoy each other’s company as well as the sex, but for whatever reason you don’t feel ‘serious’ about each other, or see it going in that direction? Do these scenarios fit the definition of “hook-ups”, or are they something different?

     Curious as to how others define hook-up. Any takers?

144. Ava 144

     Personally, and in general, I think hooking up is when you know from the get-go that it’s going to be casual and nothing more, and when you are in it just for the sex and the short-term. I guess there are people who have long-term flings like that, or even something more serious that comes out of the hook-up, but that’s rare.

145. Honey 145

     Selena – funny you should ask! I posted a while back on a pretty hilarious (in retrospect, though not at the time) misunderstanding because where I went to college, “hook-up” meant “make out” and where the BF went to college it meant “have sex”…needless to say I inadvertantly gave him the impression that I was pretty slutty:

     http://honeyandlance.com/speaking-the-same-language

     Enjoy!

     Honey´s last blog post…How Much Do I Invest in Someone Else?

146. Jennifer 146

     @Honey- my school was the same way! Any chance you attended college on the East Coast?

     As I mentioned in an earlier post, in my peer group hooking up came to mean anything sexual, up to and including intercourse.

147. Honey 147

     Yes, I am from the East Coast – the BF is from Arizona, so I think it was a regional difference.

     Honey´s last blog post…How Much Do I Invest in Someone Else?

148. Selena 148

     Honey,

     That was funny! Thanks for sharing.

     I don’t remember the term “hook-up” being used much when I was in college (back when dinosaurs roamed the earth). Anything of short duration was “went out with”, which could mean making out, sex, or nothing happened, depending on how one was so inclined. Thinking about it, I still use that term in conversation today: “I went out with him a few times”, or for a couple months, or “I went out with this guy once who…” Having “gone out” with someone did not mean they were ever a boyfriend. Back when I was in high school/college the term “dating” seemed old-fashioned; something our parents did back in ’50′s. Now it’s current lexicon again.

     I like your bf’s expression “kick it in the head” too. Never heard that, it’s great!

149. hunter 149

     I am glad we have several definitions of “hook up.” I was beginning to say to myself, “where I have been, all this time?”

150. Mikko Kemppe 150

     I think “hooking up” and can be both dangerous or liberating depending a lot on the person doing the hooking up.

     I agree with Janet in that today women stay single for those very same reasons many men do. There is a lot more to life than just easy sex, but I think it takes maturity to realize that, especially on our men’s part. But on the other hand, I would not judge myself or those who would enjoy a liberating hookup.

     Mikko Kemppe´s last blog post…Do Men Just Want Sex? Should My Decision Be To Wait Or Not To Wait?

151. Michael 151

     There is a lot more to life than just easy sex
     There is career and gambling and drinking, so I have heard.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply