After mentally comparing ramwella's wonderful thread on Man-to-Man sex with SpoiledPrincess's response, "...one of the main points of sex is that it's interacting with another person, so what's the point of gloryholes, if i were a man I'd rather have a good old wank." to earllogjam's thread, Men at the Gloryhole, the old stereotype emobdied in the saying, men see sex as a reason to commit and women see commitment as a reason to have sex occured to me. I think it's essentially true that men can engage in sex with no emotional attachment to it at all. In fact I know, at least for myself, it is and for many other men as well. I do know men who have cheated on their wives yet love their wives no less, claim to have no marriage issues. In these cases sex seems to be nothing more than a relatively novel alternative to masturbation. I also know gay couples frequently have rules about outside play built-in to the relationship.
Pre-feminist morality told us that sex is very important to women because they become emotionally attached to the people they have sex with. It's an unwritten rule among men that if you know a guy is having occasional quickies, as opposed to an affair, you keep your mouth shut because other men know what it's like. Then came Erica Jong's Fear of Flying and the introduction of the zipless fuck, essentially the female equivilent of the quickie. You may not remember the book but it was a huge best seller and very controversial because it showed women essntially treating casual sex as men did. Perhaps the old stereotype about women wasn't true. Maybe Senor Rubirosa's quote as seen in mercurialbliss's signature, "A slut is a woman with the morals of a man," ala Samantha Jones from Sex in the City, is accurate and the stereotype of women and sex wasn't true at all.
Or is it that as DC_Deep's reply to the Men at the Gloryhole post, "That's the whole reason I've never done a gloryhole, and have no intention ever of doing it. I absolutely do NOT want to have any sexual contact with someone I don't know," simply illustrates that emotional attachment or no is up to the individual more than it has to do with the individual's sex?
Pre-feminist morality told us that sex is very important to women because they become emotionally attached to the people they have sex with. It's an unwritten rule among men that if you know a guy is having occasional quickies, as opposed to an affair, you keep your mouth shut because other men know what it's like. Then came Erica Jong's Fear of Flying and the introduction of the zipless fuck, essentially the female equivilent of the quickie. You may not remember the book but it was a huge best seller and very controversial because it showed women essntially treating casual sex as men did. Perhaps the old stereotype about women wasn't true. Maybe Senor Rubirosa's quote as seen in mercurialbliss's signature, "A slut is a woman with the morals of a man," ala Samantha Jones from Sex in the City, is accurate and the stereotype of women and sex wasn't true at all.
Or is it that as DC_Deep's reply to the Men at the Gloryhole post, "That's the whole reason I've never done a gloryhole, and have no intention ever of doing it. I absolutely do NOT want to have any sexual contact with someone I don't know," simply illustrates that emotional attachment or no is up to the individual more than it has to do with the individual's sex?
