[NT] Does Sex = Love for NTs

[jenocyde]

...feel they can control their emotions...
...need to believe...
...Tenderness means capable of being hurt...
...XNTP's are the most afraid of being hurt...

no no no, this thread comes down to sex does not always equal love. period.

 

[Synarch]

no no no, this thread comes down to sex does not always equal love. period.

Nothing is ever always anything.

If sex does not involve love or is not done with an attitude of love, it should be. Otherwise, you're just rubbing your greasy bacon together like an insect. No emotion. No tenderness. Just my ovapositor snaking into someone else's shell to deposit seeds.

 

[jenocyde]

Nothing is ever always anything.

If sex does not involve love or is not done with an attitude of love, it should be. Otherwise, you're just rubbing your greasy bacon together like an insect. No emotion. No tenderness. Just my ovapositor snaking into someone else's shell to deposit seeds.

also, tenderness and emotion are not synonymous with love.

(and don't tell me what I should be doing...)

 

[Synarch]

also, tenderness and emotion are not synonymous with love.

(and don't tell me what I should be doing...)

Now we're just hair splitting. I get it. You want to get your bone on without it meaning shit.

 

[jenocyde]

Now we're just hair splitting. I get it. You want to get your bone on without it meaning shit.

It's not hair splitting, you are being deliberately obtuse. And you know it.

 

[Synarch]

It's not hair splitting, you are being deliberately obtuse. And you know it.

Where's the emote for whatev?

 

[Salomé]

This thread comes down to one simple thing.

Those who feel they can control their emotions need to believe you can separate tender emotions from physical intimacy. Tenderness means capable of being hurt. XNTP's are the most afraid of being hurt, so I would expect them to support this conceit the most vociferously.

Lots of unfounded assumptions....

If sex does not involve love or is not done with an attitude of love, it should be. Otherwise, you're just rubbing your greasy bacon together like an insect. No emotion. No tenderness. Just my ovapositor snaking into someone else's shell to deposit seeds.

And judgments.

 

[01011010]

Serotonin
Endorphins
Vasopressin
Norepinephrine
Phenylethylamine
Dopamine
Oxytocin
Estrogen
Testosterone

Those are the chemicals associated with desire, sex, and love. It's true that positive chemical reactions tend to take place between people that become sexually involved. Yes, humans are wired to continue the species. Procreation is rewarded by reactions in the body for evolutionary purposes.

However, Oxytocin needs to be released during orgasm for the process of becoming emotionally attached to begin. Increase the number of times the reaction occurs during sex, and the emotional bond becomes more intense. People don't initiate that chemical cycle with everyone, or in every single sexual interaction. Nor will both parties always do it at the same time, at the same percentage, with everyone they encounter. Much less stick around long enough for it to build to a level that's consciously recognizable.

Lacking romantic emotions during sex, has nothing to do with whether an individual is a sociopath or not. It's merely the nature of certain chemical reactions. What about couples that no longer love each other anymore, but continue to have sex. Or one person that's in love with someone, but it isn't reciprocated. Yet, they too have sex. Or one night stands, friends with benefits, or any other casual sexual encounter. This happens all the time, far more than interactions that lead to love.

Sensation doesn't equal emotion. Yet, emotions can bring up physiological sensations.


Sensation:

1 a: a mental process (as seeing, hearing, or smelling) resulting from the immediate external stimulation of a sense organ often as distinguished from a conscious awareness of the sensory process — compare perception b: awareness (as of heat or pain) due to stimulation of a sense organ c: a state of consciousness due to internal bodily changes <a sensation of hunger> d: an indefinite bodily feeling <a sensation of buoyancy>2: something (as a physical stimulus, sense-datum, or afterimage) that causes or is the object of sensation.


Emotion:

1 disturbance b: excitement2 a: the affective aspect of consciousness : feeling b: a state of feeling c: a conscious mental reaction (as anger or fear) subjectively experienced as strong feeling usually directed toward a specific object and typically accompanied by physiological and behavioral changes in the body.

This thread comes down to one simple thing.

Those who feel they can control their emotions need to believe you can separate tender emotions from physical intimacy. Tenderness means capable of being hurt. XNTP's are the most afraid of being hurt, so I would expect them to support this conceit the most vociferously.

Control is an illusion. We don't even know ourselves that well, I imagine.

Wrong.

There's nothing to separate, if it never creates itself in the first place. All emotions are chemical reactions. They don't always occur with everyone. Therefore, it's not always about suppression. This is your moral judgment. It's not scientifically valid.

 

[Synarch]

Lots of unfounded assumptions....

And judgments.

And tasty bacon.

 

[jenocyde]

Wrong.

There's nothing to separate, if it never creates itself in the first place. All emotions are chemical reactions. They don't always occur with everyone. Therefore, it's not always about suppression. This is your moral judgment. It's not scientifically valid.

thank you. (I loved your post, btw)

And tasty bacon.

I'm a vegan.

 

[Ardea]

And tasty bacon.

I loved that quote! ^^

Bacon...

The sounds of people having sex... not their vocals... but their bodies...

 

[01011010]

thank you. (I loved your post, btw)

“Well, that’s science. And science is a cruel mistress wearing a 14″ strap-on.” -Masuka (Dexter)

 

[Misty_Mountain_Rose]

Nothing is ever always anything.

If sex does not involve love or is not done with an attitude of love, it should be. Otherwise, you're just rubbing your greasy bacon together like an insect. No emotion. No tenderness. Just my ovapositor snaking into someone else's shell to deposit seeds.

So you admit that sex can happen without love being involved? Even if you disagree with it?

 

[marmandahalf]

Objectively, though, it would seem that the sex-means-nothing side would have more impetus to be biased. Because if y'all are wrong, that's a ton more cognitive dissonance than mistakenly ascribing meaning to something that might not have it.

 

[Aleph-One]

*puts on a biohazard suit and gets his Ayn Rand books out of containment*

You're the man who's spent his life shaping matter to the purpose of his mind. You're the man who would know that just as an idea unexpressed in physical action is contemptible hypocrisy, so is platonic love—and just as physical action unguided by an idea is a fool's self-fraud, so is sex when cut off from one's code of values. It's the same issue, and you would know it. Your inviolate sense of self-esteem would know it. You would be incapable of desire for a woman you despised. Only the man who extols the purity of a love devoid of desire, is capable of the depravity of a desire devoid of love.

There. The one thing written by Ayn Rand worth quoting. Now I need to go take a shower.

[Edit]: You know, in all of this time, I don't think I answered the OP's question. My answer: NTP girls are just like that -- my relationships with them have a high attrition due to flakeout.

 

[Misty_Mountain_Rose]

My thought on that one Aleph is that its still subjective and can be argued from either side. Who's to say that those proponents of sex as only ever an expression of love aren't deluding themselves into believing they are in love for a self-serving, moral purpose? They want to have sex, therefore convince themselves that they are in love to justify the act that is, by definition, instinctual and driven as much by nature as anything else?

Would this too not be "self-fraud" and "shaping matter to the purpose of the mind"? Even if subconsciously done?

 

[runvardh]

Gah, I can't help but break in now. Sex, I want it, badly. Apparently not badly enough to screw anything bipedal with the equipment I prefer, but I won't say the desire is not there. The thing I always have to deal with is the fact that I am more emotionally affected by sex than most guys are. However, though I can't do it with just anyone only for recreation, I know a lot of people who have no problem with it at all. Unfortunately I'm no endocrinologist and I don't have samples from them all for hormone research, but I'm pretty sure the way things go for them is a bit different from how they go for me. Then again, perhaps my understanding of it is due to the fact that my emotions are more sensitive than my morals.

 

[jenocyde]

Gah, I can't help but break in now. Sex, I want it, badly. Apparently not badly enough to screw anything bipedal with the equipment I prefer, but I won't say the desire is not there. The thing I always have to deal with is the fact that I am more emotionally affected by sex than most guys are. However, though I can't do it with just anyone only for recreation, I know a lot of people who have no problem with it at all. Unfortunately I'm no endocrinologist and I don't have samples from them all for hormone research, but I'm pretty sure the way things go for them is a bit different from how they go for me. Then again, perhaps my understanding of it is due to the fact that my emotions are more sensitive than my morals.

That's very real. I can understand that. It's also very sweet. Do you feel that you and your partner must be in love, something beyond an emotional connection? And how do you really know if someone loves you back in the same way? I'm only asking out of genuine curiosity, not trying to trick you into a debate or anything...

 

[Aleph-One]

My thought on that one Aleph is that its still subjective and can be argued from either side. Who's to say that those proponents of sex as only ever an expression of love aren't deluding themselves into believing they are in love for a self-serving, moral purpose? They want to have sex, therefore convince themselves that they are in love to justify the act that is, by definition, instinctual and driven as much by nature as anything else?

Would this too not be "self-fraud" and "shaping matter to the purpose of the mind"? Even if subconsciously done?

There's perhaps good evidence to indicate that's actually the case. People who do not engage in premarital sex get married earlier, on average (but this may not mean anything since the promoters of abstinence are also promoters of getting married early).

The claim is too sweeping as made in the Atlas Shrugged quote, but I do still think that there's probably a compartmentalization that must occur to believe in desexualized love which will also tend to promote sex without intimacy. I've usually felt that anyone who is quick to attempt to prescribe the definition of the word "love" is usually trying to justify that compartmentalization for self-serving reasons.

But on the flipside, it would be worse still to try to act as a kind of emotional vampire, trying to thrive off of disposable intimacy, rather than just having sex. If that's the kind of confusion a person is able to cause because they don't understand that what they're feeling is a basic sexual urge, then that is damaging and inexcusable.

 

[runvardh]

That's very real. I can understand that. It's also very sweet. Do you feel that you and your partner must be in love, something beyond an emotional connection? And how do you really know if someone loves you back in the same way? I'm only asking out of genuine curiosity, not trying to trick you into a debate or anything...

Let's just say I'd like to be able to do the recreational, I just know that right after the first time I get too attached. Another problem is, if I don't have a decent enough mental connection when the emotional connection is made it tends to rip me up a little. As for telling if someone loves me back in the same way, I can never be sure so I end up having to run on trust instead. If it feels like there is a decent enough chemical attraction and the mental is definitely there; as long as she has a decent amount of loyalty I'll base my trust off that and go from there. It's asking for a lot of pain if she's not really worth the trust, but living life itself is nothing but a long string of risks. I'm just hoping I'm calculating them enough.