h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I would shy away from sex if it meant getting pregnant. In fact, I'd almost definitely stick to lesbian or asexual hetero relationships.
What little sex drive I have I can satisfy myself anyway *ahem*, although I guess that's not such an appealing thing to other people.

Well men can, and do, too, but do women prefer that to hooking up with a stranger?

Agapanthus, you're serious is one I wondered about years ago. I came to the conclusion that a lot of people conceal what they really think and do regarding sex for fear of beiong branded in some negative way by people who do things just as off the beaten track as anyone else.


VIP, just because a guy is a bit of a "tom cat" doesnt mean that he wont stick around for the long run, just that he might pop out for the odd one night stand now and again aswell as being a loving caring father. The two are not mutually exclusive. Women have every right to demand fidelity they are foolish to expect it though.

Most women are repulsed by how men really are and some are hoodwinked into putting up with it, but then there are some who actually like this sort of thing from their man. The more of a rascal he is the more attractive he is to some.

Wea re all different in our own quirky little ways and we can often have our boundaries stretched if we are getting our egos rubbed in the right way. Ive seen people sweet-talked and physically rewarded to the point where they are doing things they had previously swore were seriously off-limits. Anyone who thinks they know their limits obviously havent been close enough to the edge to really know.

one love

Alsowanted to say that from what I remeber and I what I see now there is a great deal of pressure for men to be sexually active at younger and younger ages. Adverts hint at it, films exploit sex to sell tickets and songs in the poop charts seem to be going on about "getting jiggy with it" every three minutes or so.

The big separation is that for males it is only seen as a positive thing and aside from the risk of preganancy losing ones virginty is losing ones virtue while for a man losing it is important for gainiing manly respect according to the way people talk about it.

This is changing and while it may be less socially acceptable for women than men to be promiscuoous it does not draw the same gasps of astonishment that it used to. I remeber when a childrens TV presenter drew letters of complaint for having a child outside marriage!


While attitudes of times gone by may have stiffled the rates of teen preganancy and STIs they didnt actually stop them. People were still catching clap and abadoning babies in the good old days. Hopefully now with a more frank attitude and outlook people will be able to look after their reproductive health more sensibly.

"VIP, just because a guy is a bit of a "tom cat" doesnt mean that he wont stick around for the long run, just that he might pop out for the odd one night stand now and again aswell as being a loving caring father. The two are not mutually exclusive."

Of course; I was generalising grossly for the purposes of my post, for both genders.

Media everywhere is pressuring both sexes to start having sex earlier and earlier (seeing teetering five year old in high heeled shoes is just plain *wrong*). The main difference is that girls are at least presented the opposite argument more strongly than men.

And when you generalize, you make a general and the ize out of you and me.

I kind of think that once you're a grown-up you should have to stop using media pressure for anything though.

Whoops, let's try that again:

I kind of think that once you're a grown-up you should have to stop using media pressure as an excuse for anything though.

Ha. Perhaps. However, I'm just as worried about the social conditioning that comes through media exposure as the actual media/peer pressure-type thing.

There've been a couple of books on this topic recently, "Unhooked: How Young Women Pursue Sex, Delay Love, and Lose at Both" by Laura Session Stepp (a Washington Post reporter), on how an urban trend of women engaging in casual "no-strings" sex are hurting their chances at later relationships more lasting relationships because of the earlier patterns of behaviour.

And another that seems to be making the same argument as the one that started this thread, "Unhooked Generation: The Truth about Why We're Still Single" by Jill straus, which seems to be more along the moralizing vein than anything else. Seems the use of all our high-tech stuff is giving us the idea that we've got oodles of options, whatever the that means...

One wonders then - are we really sexually driven, or are we merely conditioned to it by the media? Is it fair to say that during the Victorian Era they had a lesser sex drive since they were not expected to have one?

I'm surprised that a Washington Post reporter would write such a book. That gives it extra credence in my mind.

I find something vaguely offensive about the notion that the media could actually condition a feeling into someone. It seems such a gross abdicational of responsibility for the content of one's own mind.

I believe that my bisexuality is- at least in part- due to media forces. Everywhere you look there are beautiful women looking sexy at you, trying to sell you things. When you're expected to see these 'things' in a sexual light, you start to.
Perhaps I was going to be inclined that way anyway, but in a society where females are sexualised to this ridiculous degree I'm sure it made me think in a different way.

I like my mind, but in the same way that your parents, peers and social upbringing influence you so does the media.
You can't escape it, even when you don't have a television. I find the idea that you *couldn't* be affected by the media as rather deluded. What's important is to try and see it and figure out whether or not you can live with it.

Life without television is bliss. You still can't escape, but it certainly helps!

I was in Copenhagen yesterday, and some shop advertised with being the largest supplier of Playboy-themed fashion. Isn´t it amazing that after women for years have fought to be seen as more than just eye candy, today´s women actually walk around adorning themselves with the logo of a porn mag?

*Some* women.

*Some* women fought hard to be recognised as equals to men others even fought hard to be recognised as superior. While others didnt really bother that much at all one way or the other.

While there are enough women who blithely adorn themselves with what other women see as symbols of patriarcal oppression there will be people (some of them women) willing to make money selling heavy books to one lot and fluffy high heels to the others, while *some* women will buy both the books *and* the high heels.

Its a bit like the N-word. Some people will use it but I dont necessarily agree with its use just because Im brown doesnt mean I agree with everything other brown people say and think.

Its a complicated world Xan.

onelove

Yes I don´t expect all women to agree on things. I just find it interesting, in the same way as that thread "Raunch culture and the death of feminism" that Luckystar started.

That was another point she brought up in the book. Basically that the feminists would hand out "Proud Hussy" stickers one day, and scream about porn and date rape the next.


Of course media conditions people! We are all brainwashed by our surroundings. Media, unfortunately, creates most of it.