Male bonding.

[lykin005]

So something weird happened recently, I hung out with friends. (Whaaaa!) If you know me for more than a week you know I'm a very introspective and very solitary person. (One time I was in line with a bunch of friends for a haunted house and while they were all talking and hanging out I was running around a traffic cone and ducking under a rope in increasingly more complicated ways.) Anyway I was hanging around with them and they all started naming off hot chicks and saying ya or nay. I've always been puzzled by this but I've figured it out. It's sexual validation. If they say x is hot and others agree they know "well at least I'm on the right track!"

[LunchBox]

That is definitely one interpretation but in most of my experiences I've found this behavior to be an unashamed contest of who's libido is high enough to have the strangest interests. Maybe that's just the guys I grew up with though.

[lykin005]

Hmmm... interesting. That's something I hadn't considered before. Is this sort of thing something I should speak out against or is it relatively harmless?

[LunchBox]

Mostly harmless but better to stay away from; you never know when you'll be brought up in one of those games.

[zibber]

I hang out with pro-wrestlers. I am very skilled at avoiding any and all topics which may trigger chauvinist outbursts.

So: "Hey guys! Let's discuss our mutual hobby which is the only thing we have in common!"
Not: "Hey guys! Want to read my thesis about female facial hair and crochet and pee sitting down?"

[monk]

awww cmon zibber, are you saying you don't walk up to the wrestlers and say "Excessive muscle mass is usually a man making up for sexual inadequacy, is that what you're doing?" Where's you inquisitiveness, your need for knowledge?

[Aum]

@OP... I don't know if it's about sexual validation. Groups of guys talk about sex all the time if they are friends. I think it's even more with gay men though. It's a topic that genuinely interests them.

[lykin005]

Well sure they do! They typically want to hide the fact that their sexist assholes! I personally can't imagine sharing conversation about sex in a constructive way unless I'm talking to a doctor or other profesional, significant other or possibly a very close friend. This isn't to say it's not possible I just don't think it's something one should do. Because if you just share details about your sex life with whoever to me it devalues it and makes it impersonal and less meaningful, the opposite of what it should be.

[zibber]

awww cmon zibber, are you saying you don't walk up to the wrestlers and say "Excessive muscle mass is usually a man making up for
sexual inadequacy, is that what you're doing?" Where's you inquisitiveness, your need for knowledge?

Och. Mon. Stories. New trainees having to show their dicks. People shitting in people's bags. Locker room bathroom stalls without locks. Let's just say that I make damn sure I'm all peed out before a show. (And I call matches for 3 hours.) Dancing in their underwear and there's apparently nothing ragingly homo-erotic about that. Nasty ass protein shakes. Some dude came up to me and said I needed to shave my beard because it's not full, and unless you got a full beard it's apparently fucking illegal not to scrape your face with a knife.

Well, fuck it. Gotta do something on the weekends.

[Sonic#]

I've never seen it that way, lykin.

I've seen versions of devaluation of sex through telling it to others which resonated with me. In an episode of The Wonder Years, Winnie and Kevin watch a movie at night and end up falling asleep to it. Kevin tells the guys after some social pressuring that he "slept with Winnie," which means that Winnie gets tons of crap from her friends. In that instance, there were good reasons to not overindulge that involved the reputation (not to mention the consent) of the other person - did she want Kevin to say that? Did she think it was something to share? No.

But conversation about sex in general? Where the person is anonymous? Or you're not strongly bound by the strictures of a relationship? Or where the other person consents? There are lots of ways to talk about it without talking badly about the others involved. I don't see why sex should be any more sacrosanct as a topic except where others' judgments are concerned.

That said, I don't much like talking about sex sometimes, because it feels too much like a competition or a race to see who has the most conforming sex. Also, in nearly every discussion I have a problem with reifying sex as one thing (i.e. orgasm, or penetration), so that these discussions produce conflict. These instances aren't limited to male bonding.

[lykin005]

To Sonic#, Personally I think sex is something that is meant to be shared between to people who love each other. With the exception of the previously mentioned persons it shouldn't be something discussed in detail. I also believe that sex outside of a committed romantic relationship devalues sex and makes it not special or unique.
Sex is the physical expression, experience and exploration of love. Love being the deepest possible connection between two people, a bond which allows said people to freely express themselves and experience each other mentally, emotionally and physically without reservation. At least it should be, but through "casual" dating and "casual" sex and open relationships and other such things this becomes more and more difficult because of pain and hurt that get in the way of pure uncensored love. Too a degree this is unavoidable because people will be inevitably hurt by difficult times in life and thus have certain walls built up to prevent further pain. I know I have a VERY hard time believing anyone will ever be able to know me and my flaws and yet still love me and want to be with me forever, to know and still be beside me even when I make an ass of myself, even when I get enraged and curse at and yell at and kick the refrigerator for crushing my finger.

[njntrubl]

there's a yo momma joke somewhere in here....just...gotta...find....it...LOL

Yes, I'm facetious (V)!_!(V)

[monk]

a bond which allows said people to freely express themselves and experience each other mentally, emotionally and physically without reservation.

Now you see I've had this type of bond with several people minus the physical part since I was 19 and maybe because of that when I did fall in love with someone i gave all that AND had the physical part as a bonus but that's all it was, a bonus, the other part, the mental/emotional connection part was much more important(as I think it should be) than the physical expression so that after that relationship ended I have no problems with having purely physical interactions just for fun.

there's a yo momma joke somewhere in here....just...gotta...find....it...LOL

I don't need to find yo momma, she finds me.

[lykin005]

Because it's been devalued and reduced to mere pleasure. It sounds like you think of sex that is only a part of a romantic relationship as a limitation or as a bad thing. Personally I want to be able to have sex be a special,unique and totally intimate and personal experience. If I've had sex with other woman then I might be reminded of experiences I've had with other woman or compare her to other woman I've been with. The idea that she would feel like I don't find her special or cherished hurts me and scares me. Thus sharing this with a woman other the one I love sounds like the most horrible thing I can do to her right now.

[Eravial]

Sex is the physical expression, experience and exploration of love.

Sometimes, yes, but it is also carnal, biological, hard-wired into us like our love of fats and sugars, put into our brains for the original purpose of putting our genes somewhere where they might get more attention after we die. Nature for the most part doesn't care about love; society does. Sex has been co-opted by society to have more meaning than just biological necessity. This is not a bad thing, but to say that sex=love is to deny the fact that we aren't just brains floating in space, nor should we expect ourselves to be.

Back to the OP, I don't think this is limited to males, and I also don't necessarily see it as problematic. This is coming from a view that sex can be good and worthwhile and healthy even between people who are not in love and who are not committed.

It is rather common in my friend circles, which mostly consist of a mix of genders, to openly discuss sex. My school has a tradition of taking "purity tests" and comparing to see who has the lowest score, and it is not uncommon for my friends to tell stories of sexcapades with the goal of having the most interesting tale. "Never have I ever" is an outrageously popular game in most college-aged groups that I'm familiar with (at least in the U.S.), and usually delves into some pretty revealing stuff. I don't really see this as damaging in principle, other than that it could have the potential to indirectly encourage people to engage in behavior for the sake of having the story.

Specifically the scenario that the OP describes, it seems like the only problematic potential is if it encourages the participants to objectify people habitually, though I don't usually see that to be the case. Just as it isn't problematic to notice an attractive person privately, I don't think it's problematic to share your sentiments with a private group of people. Since it is an almost universally common human experience to find some people attractive and some people not, finding common ground and learning about what's going on inside your friends' heads regarding attraction isn't all that unexpected. And the thing is, not everyone will have the same opinion, hence why the question "hot or not" is interesting to ask in the first place. I know the "preferred types" of most of my close friends, and they know mine (which is quite different from theirs), and we're not hurting anyone by sharing these things privately. My boyfriend and I (since I'm also into girls) also point out to each other who (of strangers we encounter together) we think is attractive, because we acknowledge that just because we're in a relationship, we don't stop having eyes that notice people we think are pretty.

Even though we are objectifying people by only considering their appearance/"first impression", it causes no harm since we don't tell them what we think and they never experience any different treatment for our sharing our thoughts privately. We also don't learn to see people as just pieces of meat, because even as we focus on the body, we realize that they are people with feelings and thoughts and autonomy and all that good human stuff. The vast majority of people you encounter in your life (assuming you don't spend your whole life in a small village or similarly very-low-population area) will only ever be a "first impression" based completely on appearance, because we simply do not end up conversing or interacting intellectually with every person we see. You can say "I'd do her" to friends and always mean it, and they always understand it, with the implied "...if the situation ever were to occur and consent was given," which I do think is how most people regard it, even if they don't think in those words specifically.

Now, upon some more thought, I suppose these conversations ("hot or not") might inadvertently promote a beauty ideal within the group if the group's preferences are similar, which could be a perpetuation of a much larger, society-scale problem. Any thoughts on that?

[drunken dragon]

awww cmon zibber, are you saying you don't walk up to the wrestlers and say "Excessive muscle mass is usually a man making up for
sexual inadequacy, is that what you're doing?" Where's you inquisitiveness, your need for knowledge?

Och. Mon. Stories. New trainees having to show their dicks. People shitting in people's bags. Locker room bathroom stalls without locks. Let's just say that I make damn sure I'm all peed out before a show. (And I call matches for 3 hours.) Dancing in their underwear and there's apparently nothing ragingly homo-erotic about that. Nasty ass protein shakes. Some dude came up to me and said I needed to shave my beard because it's not full, and unless you got a full beard it's apparently fucking illegal not to scrape your face with a knife.

Well, fuck it. Gotta do something on the weekends.

I can't stop laughing.

[lykin005]

To Eravial, I just wanna say that everyone here has treated me with decency and respect and furthermore has been willing to debate in a constructive way and so I have a lot of respect for you individuals. But I have to strongly disagree. Sex and love are inexorably linked. Firstly because if you look at sex from a physical standpoint it's three things. 1: The closest you can possibly be physically to another person. (Hence it being a metaphor for an emotional and mental bond 2: Your metaphorically one being in hetero or homo sex and symbolically in lesbian sex (Though their may be a similar lesbian counterpart to penetration I'm unsure.) 3: It's an extremely intense experience that can shake your body and soul not unlike certain drugs which indicates it's meant to develop a bond or a desire for the other person.
You can also see that sex involves two people working towards a goal of dual satisfaction and pleasure, an apt metaphor for pure uncensored love.
Sex is a metaphor for emotional intimacy but also a way to deepen and express and experience love in a physical manner, just as you express this emotionally by sharing your feelings and thoughts and struggles and by being there for each other. Due to these things and other's I cant see sex as anything other than directly connected to love.

Edit: As to your question about discussions on sex creating an objectifying mindset. Yes this is one of the reasons I object to this sort of discussion. I also view sex as (I've described above) as a very personal and intimate and thus private sort of thing. To discuss various "conquests" or experiences... I'm sorry but its horrible me. It's taking something that should be pure, beautiful, emotional and intimate and making it casual, shallow and valueless. It's also glorifying the casualisation of sex which is horrifying to me.

[rowan]

Sex and love are inexorably linked

It may be that way for you, but do not project what you feel is true for you onto other people. You can feel that way, but that does not mean the rest of us do, and you should also be respectful of that and not say that it's impossible for the rest of us to find differently for ourselves.

Physical closeness also does not imply emotional closeness.

"dual satisfaction and pleasure" does not mean one has to be in love with the other person, even. It just has to mean respect and choice.

metaphors are just that - metaphors. The insistence of penetration as an indication of love I find repulsive. One can be in love without sex; one can have sex without love. I think that good sex has to have some kind of caring attention* and respectfulness about it.

*by which I mean the partners must care about making sure both are satisfied.

It's an extremely intense experience that can shake your body and soul not unlike certain drugs which indicates it's meant to develop a bond or a desire for the other person.

I don't think that you can possible prove, scientifically that it's "meant" to do that at al.

THAT SAID:
To discuss various "conquests" or experiences...
Discussing of "conquests" is a different realm of things; this is disrespectful to your partners, unless they've said it's all right to do so. Boasting and bragging about conquests is rarely done in a respectful manner.

Discussing experiences may or may not be ; it depends far too much on the context. Of course if one is respectful, it is all right.

[Tookie]

Sex can be a lot of things, for a lot of people. For you, it is inexorably linked to love. For myself, and Eravial, and many others, it is not. I've had really fantastic, intimate sex with both people I've been in love with, and with people I haven't. I've had slow, passionate, staring-into-each-others'-eyes sex with people I wasn't in love with, and mindless, let's-just-get-each-other-off sex with people I was in love with. For me, fucking is fucking, and so long as everyone involved is interested in communicating effectively, it's probably pretty grand. I also don't think that this mindset devalues the sex I have, and I think my partners would agree.

Also, from a physical standpoint:

1. Sex does not have to involve penetration. Some of the best sex (with people of varying genders) I've had has not. So no, it's not always the closest you can physically be to another person.
2. See above, re: penetration. Also, what about sex with more than two people? Does a threesome still become one?
3. It can be an intense experience. Not every sexual experience is going to be earth shattering. There's something to be said for pleasant, every day sex, especially in long term relationships. Also, just because someone can provide me with earth shattering sex, that doesn't mean that we would be good for each other in a relationship.

[lykin005]

I'm not projecting, I'm convincing. I gave my reasons why I believe sex is linked to romantic love, You were not convinced. This is fine, I wouldn't want anyone to agree with me just because I say so.
As to your saying that sex can be had with or without love. Of course it can, we have free will and can choose our actions. And while I did say sex is the physical side of love I failed to mention that just regular physical closeness can be the same thing or even cuddling or foreplay with no actual sex, it's the physical closeness and intimacy that matter.
I hear you saying that sex can be about pleasure and not love. Their are plenty of things that would bring me pleasure but I'm not allowed to do. (For example, Choke a child molester until his eyes fall out of his sockets, infiltrate area 51, blow up rocks in the middle of a field with c4.) So just because something CAN be done without any meaning beyond pleasure doesn't mean it's alright to do.
About proving how the intensity of love is meant to build a connection, I did say it indicated that to me not proved it.
Talking about sex outside of the relationship or not with a professional destroys any intimacy, specialness or value it has by making it something you share with whoever's listening instead of something shared between the two participants.

Edit: This is a response to what I believe to be an edit of your post. The fact that you have shared that level of intimacy is even more disturbing than mindless fucking. Because now even emotional intimacy is something shared between you and others it's not special or unique or even really intimate anymore because it's been shared with others and that sounds horrifying to me.
As you'll notice in my edited post I've acknowledged physical intimacy need not be a sexual matter but could include other more simply pleasant experiences.
Yes a threesome could achieve the same thing to a lesser extent. However I'm very... suspicious for lack of a better word of relationships involving more than two people because in my opinion someone will be shortchanged at all times in that relationship. someone will be getting more attention or two of the three will not get along and then a choice must be made between them. I also question whether or not someone can love two people romantically.
On the third point I'll have to just concede and say yes I perhaps overblew the experience and made it seem like this would be an all the time every time thing when in reality it does take skill, communication, and trust in order for this to occur. Which I believe can be done through developing a loving, trusting romance which allows both parties to bring down the walls and be freely open with each other.

[Tookie]

Are you suggesting that having sex without love is wrong?

[lykin005]

To Tookie, Not wrong but it does devalue it, it makes it less meaningful, less special. If I share sex for the first time with my future love then it's because I value that connection and the means to express it. It's also because I want it to be special and unique. If I've shared sex with many people then when I have sex with my future love it's not special or unique and I'll be thinking about other times that maybe were better or more impressive or maybe something about this time just reminds me of a time where I've had sex with someone else. I don't want to think about someone else while being intimate with her, I don't want to compare her to others and I don't want her to feel like she is competing against other women I've been with. I want it to be about our connection, our love, and our passion for each other! So is it wrong? No but I think it deprives you of a powerful, beautiful and awe inspiring experience that I wouldn't trade for mere pleasure.

[rowan]

I don't see how it devalues it for anyone, except for you since you seem to have this particular feeling wrapped up with sex. My having premarital sex (even with people I didn't love) certainly did not devalue any sex I had later with my husband. And frankly, I think that the idea that having sex could possibly deprive me of later "awe inspiring powerful experience" is incredibly naive. Some sex is good, some sex isn't; some of the worst sex I've had was with a virgin guy, who was so uptight he was too afraid to do anything. Some of the best sex I've had was with a virgin guy, who was very interested in trying to find out how to make the experience pleasurable for both of us.*

Personally, I think you have romanticized sex beyond what's reasonable. That's fine; I certainly held views like that a long time ago. Good luck with that. Just try to understand your first time may not be awesome, it takes practice and hard work and open communication to make sex fantastic.

*Despite all that I have never spent any time during sex thinking "gosh, so and so was sooo much better". that's bs. you're kind of focused on the moment, y'know?

[lykin005]

I realize this does sound pretty idealistic but that's because I'm explaining it as it should be not as it will be. As I said before various walls and defenses are built to protect oneself from harm. Through developing emotional intimacy and thus trust, you can break these walls down eventually enabling you to experience what I described before. Also just because this is naive and idealized doesn't mean you should embrace the opposite way it just means you need to put more effort into realizing it.

Edit: Do you not see how sharing partners before your husband has made that experience not special? I'm not trying to demean your love or connection, but it's not unique it's not something you have only shared with him thus less special and meaningful. You also seem focused on how pleasurable it is as a means of saying that it's worth pursuing outside of marriage. As I said before "Their are plenty of things that would bring me pleasure but I'm not allowed to do. (For example, Choke a child molester until his eyes fall out of his sockets, infiltrate area 51, blow up rocks in the middle of a field with c4.) So just because something CAN be done without any meaning beyond pleasure doesn't mean it's alright to do."

[Tookie]

See, this is the thing. You have these particular ideas about sex, and while what you're saying may be true for you, we're saying that they are not true for us. I am in a long-term relationship, and my partner and I both have sex and emotional relationships with other people. If anything, our relationship grown stronger since deciding not to be monogamous.

Something I tell students in sex ed workshops is that, "The biggest secret of relationships is that you can do whatever you want to do, as long as everyone involved in the relationship is happy." For you, this would mean having a single partner. For me, this means having the freedom to pursue other relationships, and seeing my partner happy in his other relationships.

Sexuality is an incredibly personal thing. Please don't try to generalize it.