BYU Understanding Same-Gender Attraction

[Fredjikrang]

And I don't think that anyone's sex drive is a selfish desire.

I don't think that sex drive is selfish either, just natural. However, I would say that many people have sex for selfish reasons, primarily to satisfy that desire.

I think that being entirely unselfish in a sexual relationship would be an extremely rare case, while the opposite, of it being almost entirely selfish, is very common, and some kind of reasonable mix of the two being fairly common as well, though primarily in stable relationships. But then again, who am I to comment on this? I know practically nothing about the sex life of the average joe, so feel free to ignore my comments entirely, but honestly (and I know I'm going to take flack for this one), I think that purely "selfish sex" is wrong.

But then again, if you disagree, go back and read what people have been saying about sex in this thread, and how many of them talked about anyone other than themselves with regard to their motivation. I think that the most common phrasing is "I want" "I need" "I wouldn't" "I do not want." No one has mentioned wanting to satisfy the desires/needs of their partner. It has all been about what they want so that they can be happy, not about what their partner wants so that their partner can be happy. I hope that I at least think about the desires of my future spouse as much as my own. I think that that is something to aspire to.

And Nerdgirl, I have a question. Does that mean that if your husband someday looses his desire to have sex with you, you're done with him? Because that is the only thing that I am arguing against, that a relationship be based so heavily on something so relatively unimportant that when that is gone the relationship ceases to exist.

[TheBlackSheep]

Fred, you know I love you. My little tender, (Marduk would say) guilty soul always worries that people will somehow forget that in print so there you go.

Your last comment reminded me of Peter Pan, how if children say they don't believe in fairies, a fairy somewhere drops dead, only in this case, somewhere Dan Savage's head exploded. (If you don't know who Dan Savage is, you probably don't want to Google him. He is the person who started the It Gets Better movement, but he is more famous for being a rather... colorful sex columnist.) Moving on.

I feel like in this discussion there are two extremes. (I was going to say sexual selfishness and sexual... benevolence, but that seems super weird.) Other possibilities do exist. And I'm not talking about sometimes there is one and sometimes another and in stable relationships they even out to some sort of medium, I'm talking each sexual experience.

And when I say that I don't want to be in a relationship with someone I am not sexually compatible with, that is not a comprehensive list of who I am, could be, or could provide for someone else sexually. Let me tell you, the fact that I am aware of my inability to be in a long-term committed relationship with a straight woman or a gay man does not make me sexually selfish. There is a difference between self awareness and selfishness. Sex is important to me and to how my relationships are and progress, and even in Mormonism that's one of the biggest points of sex. How people deal with all of that in their own relationships is their business, but my awareness of the most basic things I need in my relationships does not make me a selfish person. It's healthy.

[NerdGirl]

And Nerdgirl, I have a question. Does that mean that if your husband someday looses his desire to have sex with you, you're done with him? Because that is the only thing that I am arguing against, that a relationship be based so heavily on something so relatively unimportant that when that is gone the relationship ceases to exist.

If my hypothetical future husband loses his desire to have sex with me am I done with him? Probably not, depending of course on the reason for his loss of desire. Reasons that might make me lean towards ending the relationship would be him withholding sex to manipulate me in some way or him not wanting to have sex with me because he doesn't love me anymore or because he had fallen in love with someone else and was only interested in having sex with them. If it was simply a low sex drive or erectile dysfunction or something like that, then that's fine, there are other ways to be physically intimate. If he loses his desire to have any kind of physical intimacy with me at all (including kissing, hugging, holding hands)? Then potentially yes, if he's not willing to work on that issue, but it wouldn't be an automatic deal-breaker - I would want to find out why he had lost interest in it and see if there was some way to work on the issue together or with the help of a counselor or healthcare professional. But again, if the reason was manipulation or he was no longer interested in the relationship and had no desire to make it work, then yeah, I might end it.

When I say physical intimacy in a relationship (a hypothetical relationship, in my case) is important, I don't mean that it's important just because it makes me feel good. If the actual physical sensations were all there was to having sex, people can do that on their own and they wouldn't need to form relationships. But to me physical intimacy is a natural manifestation of the kind of emotional and spiritual intimacy that should be present in a marriage. I realize that individual circumstances and disabilities may necessitate adaptation, and I would actually be okay with a marriage that didn't involve sex in the traditional way if we could still be physically intimate in other ways (honestly, even just holding hands or touching each other would be okay with me if I was married to someone who was physically disabled to the extent where nothing else was possible). But I would not want to be married to someone who has no desire for physical intimacy of any kind with me. I do agree with you that the purely self-gratifying aspects of sex should not be the basis of a relationship. But having some kind of mutually desired and enjoyed physical intimacy is important to me, not only because it makes me feel good, but because it's a way of connecting and showing love for each other. And being a monogamous person, it's a way that is reserved for the one (hypothetical) person that I am going to be the most intimately connected with.

[Fredjikrang]

Fred, you know I love you.

Of course! Don't worry, you are my friend! You basically have no chance of getting rid of me at this point. ;D (Though we still haven't had lunch, and it's been almost six months. ;D )

And when I say that I don't want to be in a relationship with someone I am not sexually compatible with, that is not a comprehensive list of who I am, could be, or could provide for someone else sexually. Let me tell you, the fact that I am aware of my inability to be in a long-term committed relationship with a straight woman or a gay man does not make me sexually selfish. There is a difference between self awareness and selfishness. Sex is important to me and to how my relationships are and progress, and even in Mormonism that's one of the biggest points of sex. How people deal with all of that in their own relationships is their business, but my awareness of the most basic things I need in my relationships does not make me a selfish person. It's healthy.

And that is something that I can agree with.

But yes, perhaps I believe in fairy tales. I think that life is better that way. ;D (I seem to remember arguing in favor of a line from Second Hand Lions a while ago. Guess I haven't changed in that respect. ;D)

I guess that what I am talking about is more what I feel like the aspirations should be in a relationship, and in all parts of it, not just the sexual part. I honestly think that the world is a better place when we think more about the wellbeing of others, in whatever circumstance. I can see obvious signs of that in your last post, TBS. It seems to me that you don't want to be in such a relationship partly out of concern that it wouldn't be fair(?) to the other person involved. And I think that that is a noble attribute.

So I guess to kind of splay out my thoughts on the matter, I feel like there is a difference between being in a relationship, and looking for someone with whom you would like to be in a relationship with. In the looking, awareness, as you pointed out, is healthy, maybe even essential. But I think that in a relationship, especially a committed relationship, selflessness is even more important. (Though there are obviously situations that can't be fixed by that either.)

And NerdGirl, that is pretty much what I figured, and what I am arguing for.

[TheBlackSheep]

So I guess to kind of splay out my thoughts on the matter, I feel like there is a difference between being in a relationship, and looking for someone with whom you would like to be in a relationship with. In the looking, awareness, as you pointed out, is healthy, maybe even essential. But I think that in a relationship, especially a committed relationship, selflessness is even more important. (Though there are obviously situations that can't be fixed by that either.)

Oh, there we can totally agree, as long as it's the healthy kind of selflessness with boundaries and whatnot. Boooooooooo enmeshment, etc.

(Edited to remove a last-minute addition by my morose cat.)

[Marduk]

Fred, arguing your line of logic, do you think someone without much of a libido would want to be married to someone with a large libido?

[Fredjikrang]

Fred, arguing your line of logic, do you think someone without much of a libido would want to be married to someone with a large libido?

I think that the question is a lot more complicated than that. Do I think there are cases where people with highly mismatched libidos would want to be married? Yes. Do I think there are cases where people with highly mismatched libidos wouldn't want to be married? Yes. Just like I think that people with very different exercise philosophies sometimes want to get married, and sometimes don't. We are multifaceted beings.

[mic0]

Nerdgirl and TBS: Thanks for your opinions. I really, deeply agree with them and could not have phrased it better myself.

As for the selflessness in sexual relationships topic goes, Fredjikrang, I think you're vastly underestimating the number of people who are selfless in such relationships. Yes, here on the forum we can all say "this is what I'd want," but in reality there is a lot of give and take. That's all, just something to think about. *going back to my hole now*

[Fredjikrang]

Could be. As I said, I'm hardly informed. Just spouting off media influenced opinions. ;D

I do think that the most common would be a more moderate kind of relationship, which probably wasn't clear from my earlier post.

[Marduk]

Right, so it looks like you're getting my point. Namely, that sexual compatibility is a factor for consideration. It certainly isn't unreasonable to acknowledge that one wants certain things out of a relationship, and sexual compatibility is far more important than say, liking the same kind of cereal, which seems to be about the importance you're giving it. I'd say it is up there with "have similar views on how to spend/save money" and "similar outlooks on raising children." Can a relationship function without any of these? Sure, and they do all the time. But it would cause one pause if one of these aren't considered.

[Fredjikrang]

Never said anything to the contrary.

[Tao]

Of course libido is not in and of itself selfish. It just is what it is, and how individuals address it determines how it affects others. To say "I'm not marrying you unless we get to have sex X times per unit time" sure comes across to me as a dangerous proposition. And considering the number of variables that go into such an account, it can get rather challenging to make any such definite statement prior to marriage. Yes, I think it is important to know where you and your potential spouse stand before getting married, if one person is thinking the same number per day as the other is thinking per year, there's going to be a lot of strain compromising. But compromise there must be, in all cases, because regardless of where things are at any given time libido is part of life and different things will cause it to peak and trough, and sadly such cycles are not going to be synced between spouses.

The selfishness is not in the sex drive, but in saying it is my sex drive that must be fulfilled, regardless of the wants and needs of my spouse.