Casual Sex: Yea, or Nay?

[Claudia]

Is casual sex, defined as sexual encounters between people not in a romantic relationship, acceptable in your opinion?

Do you think less of someone if you learn that they occasionally, or even frequently, hook up with people for sex only? This could be someone they meet at a bar, or just around town, find online, or even a more organized "fuck buddy" type of relationship.

Does the old stereotype of casually sexual people being "dirty" or "nasty" still get any play? Conversely, are people who dissaprove of casual sex automatically considered prudish by most?

Do you think casual sexual encounters are inherently worse than those between romantic partners?

If you believe casual sex to be wrong or immoral (not counting for religious reasons, that's kind of a given) why?

[squeegee]

I think it's none of my damned business.

[Claudia]

Well of course it's not, that why it's so interesting to talk about.

[The Weird One]

I have no problems with casual sex, or with people who have casual sex, but I do think of it as just something to tide me over until I'm in a relationship again. I think of casual sex as "less than" relationship sex because the emotional bond of a relationship adds so much to the sexual experience for me. Ugh, that's an awful phrase, "sexual experience." Sorry.

As for other people who disapprove of casual sex, I wouldn't necessarily consider them prudish unless they insisted on trying to convince me to stop having casual sex.

[QuickSilver]

Gotta echo the sentiment that it's okay for a bit of fun and diversion. It might even be an opportunity to learn a thing or two for the ol' "catalogue o' trix" to mix things up.

But relationship sex rocks (with the right partner) while the casual sex just kind of keeps the wolves from the door.

Now, casual sex including the relationship partner - well that's a zebra of a whole different set of stripes.

MMV

[lavenderviolet]

For the most part, no, I don't agree with casual sex. Personally, I am just not wired for sex without love. Plus, there is the risk of diseases and unplanned pregnancies. I am not going to be hostile to people who choose to engage in such behaviors but I certainly would not encourage it or want to participate in it myself.

[mrklutz]

Wrong or immoral? No, I don't see any reason to brand it as either of those. That makes no sense to me. Personally, however, I find it unrewarding. I'd rather go without than have sex without the intimacy. (And believe me, I know a thing or two about going without. Heh.)

[Si Amigo]

YEA! Definitly YEA! I vote YEA!

[UrbanChic]

An emphatic yea.

Before I was married, I was all about casual sex. If I ever get divorced, I plan--quite hastily, too--to return to my roots. I can't stand all the fuss and rules and burdens and crap of being in a relationship, but I really like sex. I love and am in love with my hubby, so neither one of us is going anywhere anytime soon. A gal can dream, though. A gal can dream.

[Abbie Carmichael]

Originally Posted by Claudia

Is casual sex, defined as sexual encounters between people not in a romantic relationship, acceptable in your opinion?

No, not acceptable. Seems kinda cold to me.

Do you think less of someone if you learn that they occasionally, or even frequently, hook up with people for sex only? This could be someone they meet at a bar, or just around town, find online, or even a more organized "fuck buddy" type of relationship.

No, I wouldn't think less of them as long as they weren't in a committed relationship and thus cheating. I would definitely worry about their health.

As far as "acceptable" goes, I think I'd have more "respect" (if you could call it that) for a friend-with-benefits relationship than I would a go-out-and-screw-total-strangers-from-a-bar kind of gig. With the former, I think there's a greater chance that both parties have given some thought to what they're doing and have planned accordingly (STD testing, protection, what-are-we-gonna-do-if-there's-a-pregnancy, etc.). Plus with that kind of relationship, both parties are physically safe. Going home with a stranger is really, really stupid. Once the door shuts, you are at their mercy.

Do you think casual sexual encounters are inherently worse than those between romantic partners?

Yeah.

If you believe casual sex to be wrong or immoral (not counting for religious reasons, that's kind of a given) why?

Casual sex is a good way to spread STD's. Those I know who were really into casual sex (as in picking up one or more people every weekend) almost never used protection, nor were they really into protecting others from whatever bug they might be/were carrying. They were in it solely for themselves, regardless of what damage might be done. You could very well end up with someone like that when you go out cruising for strangers, and even being the poster child for condoms may not be enough to protect you.

It's also a good way to get/get someone pregnant, which creates an even more difficult situation.

Another way I saw casual sex backfire: one woman I knew, years ago, went nuts, left her husband and started hoing around with guys half her age, and quite openly at that. The whole county knew about it and her kids were humiliated (and this was without anyone teasing them about it, too). If you're a parent and are going to have casual sex, I think you owe it to your kids to be as discreet as possible. What you do in the bedroom may be your business, but it affects others too. Expecting everyone in the world to just "get over it" isn't practical -- it's not going to happen, and it's unfair to drag your family into your drama.

Lastly, since this is IMHO, I think sex should be about more than just getting off, so I'm not wired for the casual thing.

[StGermain]

I don't believe in casual sex and wouldn't want a relationship with someone who did. Not only the threat of STDs, but just the fact that they don't equate love with sex would mean we probably wouldn't be compatible.

StG

[monica]

I have no problem with it. I mean, I wouldn't sleep with someone I'd just met, but I don't really have to be in a romantic relationship.

[Si Amigo]

Originally Posted by UrbanChic

An emphatic yea.

Before I was married, I was all about casual sex. If I ever get divorced, I plan--quite hastily, too--to return to my roots. I can't stand all the fuss and rules and burdens and crap of being in a relationship, but I really like sex. I love and am in love with my hubby, so neither one of us is going anywhere anytime soon. A gal can dream, though. A gal can dream.

Please keep me posted on any further developments.

[CrazyCatLady]

For myself, a definite nay. I look at it the same way I look at playing with snakes or spending hours climbing a staircase to nowhere--I just don't understand the appeal. For others, I don't think it's inherently wrong. I do think that exposing yourself to the risk of disease and pregnancy over something that's meaningless isn't exactly the smartest thing you could do, but as long as everyone involved is a consenting adult assuming those risks freely and willingly, I don't see the harm in it.

[START]

Originally Posted by Claudia

Is casual sex, defined as sexual encounters between people not in a romantic relationship, acceptable in your opinion?

Do you think less of someone if you learn that they occasionally, or even frequently, hook up with people for sex only? This could be someone they meet at a bar, or just around town, find online, or even a more organized "fuck buddy" type of relationship.

Does the old stereotype of casually sexual people being "dirty" or "nasty" still get any play? Conversely, are people who dissaprove of casual sex automatically considered prudish by most?

Do you think casual sexual encounters are inherently worse than those between romantic partners?

If you believe casual sex to be wrong or immoral (not counting for religious reasons, that's kind of a given) why?

Well all I can say is that I don't feel sorry for the people that go on talk shows and test like 50 men and never find out who the dad is. If they have to test more than 3 or 4 guys then they don't deserve to know who the Dad is.

I know you said not from a religous perspective but I was always taught that when you have sex with someone you share part of their spirit...spooky.

[AHunter3]

I harbor no down-the-nose-looking attitudes towards people male or female for engaging in casual sex, whether as an occasional thing or as a primary modality.

I've never been able to make it work for me, but if anything I'm envious rather than judgmental towards those who can.

[Shakes]

I'll say yeah, I'm all for it in theory but I do tend to be cautious. All too often in my experiences I've been with a woman and we clearly discussed: "This is just a friends with benifits thing right?" Then later on down the road these same women get all upset at me because I start seeing other women or I don't call them enough.

In other words, what I'm trying too say is: The women I've been involved with can't seem to help but get their emotions involved when they're having sex with someone (me) for an extended amount of time. (Or even once or twice in some cases)

And in the end I wind up feeling like an A-hole for hurting these ladies even though I did nothing wrong.

[davenportavenger]

If other people want to do it, cool, but for me, nah. I can get along just fine without sex with another person for awhile, and would rather wait till I'm in a relationship to do anything. Just personal preference. If it's a monogamous "fuck buddy" relationship that's a little different; I was still sleeping with my ex after our romance fizzled out but neither one of us was seeing anyone else and we were still living together so it's not quite casual sex.

Casual sex would mean less for me, but I don't think it inherently means less for everybody. Truth be told I wish I enjoyed the act of sex enough that I would be compelled to do it without the added romantic (or at least some kind of mental/emotional) connection.

[Agent Foxtrot]

Originally Posted by continuity eror

Truth be told I wish I enjoyed the act of sex enough that I would be compelled to do it without the added romantic (or at least some kind of mental/emotional) connection.

You don't enjoy sex?

[raz]

I'm all for it. I'm in a similar "relationship" right now - the guy and I get together every few weeks for sex. We both understand that it's 100% casual. We've discussed it before and made sure things were clear. Neither of us has feelings for the other. We are also friends outside of the bedroom. We share the same circle of friends and hang out quite often. Most of our friends know about what goes on between us and no one really cares. No one thinks less of him or I for it.

And also he's the only guy I'm fooling around with so it's not like I'm slutting it up all over town which is (IMHO) rather more wrong.

And I will agree that sex with romance/a relationship is FAR better. I'm just not in a place right now where I want to be in a relationship and until I am, this is fine for me.

[kimera]

I'm all for casual sex!!

However, I only have casual sex with individuals after they've had a recent STI test, I know they aren't having sex with anyone else and while I am on birth control.

I think that people who have sex with people they just met are engaging in stupid and risky behaviors, but I regard it the same as people who drive recklessly or drink too much alcohol. I'll be friends with them, but if they try to convince me that I should do what they are doing, I will give them a stern talking-to.

[Yookeroo]

Hell yeah.

[Muad'Dib]

I vote nay. For humans 90% of the pleasure of sex is the intimicy between two people. To go about having sex with random people and no meaning behind it strikes me as a little sick.

[Muad'Dib]

BTW, it may be helpful if you stated your gender in this thread. I am male.

[davenportavenger]

Originally Posted by Agent Foxtrot

You don't enjoy sex?

Not when it's divorced from a relationship, no. What I mean is... I like sex, but I'm not so crazy about it that I'll seek out partners just to do it with. If it happens, it's nice, but I really can't see myself liking it if I didn't really like my partner. It's more like enjoying the totality of the romantic/emotional/sexual experience, as opposed to just the deed itself. If all the elements aren't there, I can't get into it. Which can be kind of a handicap sometimes.

[Catalyst]

Tried it once, didn't like how I felt about myself afterwards. I'd be lying if I said I didn't lose a little respect for people who make a habit of it. It's not that I have some moral or religious opposition; it's just a visceral reaction that I don't have any particularly good reason for and won't attempt to rationalize.

[Jervoise]

Originally Posted by UrbanChic

An emphatic yea.

Before I was married, I was all about casual sex. If I ever get divorced, I plan--quite hastily, too--to return to my roots. I can't stand all the fuss and rules and burdens and crap of being in a relationship, but I really like sex. I love and am in love with my hubby, so neither one of us is going anywhere anytime soon. A gal can dream, though. A gal can dream.

Ditto. (Except substitute gal for man, and hubby for boyfriend.)

Originally Posted by Muad'Dib

For humans 90% of the pleasure of sex is the intimicy between two people.

Well that and the enormous crushing orgasam.

[don't ask]

I am confused by the question. What does "not in a romantic relationship" mean? My last marriage?

I have been having fairly regular sex with a woman that I don't think I will ever live with but we go out and do other stuff because our tastes are similar. A while ago she thought that she had met a guy she could get serious with and we stopped the sexual part of our relationship. I was happy for her good luck because I like her very much and care about her well being. I feel the same way about every woman I have had sex with but the times it turned out to be a one night stand would, I guess, not qualify as "a romantic relationship".

I approach any sex in the same way. It's a really intimate expression and the only way I could consider it "casual" would be to know absolutely nothing about my partner. Even the briefest encounters I have felt a connection by the time we got to bed. And the sense of gratitude alone is enough to make me appreciative of my partner.

[plnnr]

Sport fucking has its place.

[UnwrittenNocturne]

Before getting married I was a proponent of casual sex. I always wondered why it was looked down on in some circles. I see it on a par with any other activity you can enjoy with another person or group of persons

[iampunha]

It isn't for me, but then it joins a long list of things I think are perfectly fine (standard disclaimers apply, of course)

[UrbanChic]

Originally Posted by Muad'Dib

I vote nay. For humans 90% of the pleasure of sex is the intimicy between two people. To go about having sex with random people and no meaning behind it strikes me as a little sick.

I disagree with this statement. If you'll allow me to grossly oversimplify, sex is strictly for procreation. As with any species, the body's goal is to propegate, propegate, propegate. As an incentive to spawn, our bodies are designed to make sex feel good--make that frickin' awesome.

I don't think it's sick to have fuckbuddies (and that's what I think of when I think of casual sex). As long as the sex is safe and all parties involved understand the rules, it's all good.

[AngelicGemma]

Casual sex is not for me, but if that's what someone else wants to do then then its up to them. I don't think it's 'wrong'.

[badbadrubberpiggy]

I've no problem with it, and in fact have done it before. However, I think it's something I basically grew out of - the risks aren't worth it to me. I'm in a committed relationship now anyway, but even if I wasn't I probably wouldn't be having casual sex.

I don't look down on people who sleep around, provided they're safe (ie, condoms, not just BC!). I'm sorry to say, I have little respect for people who sleep around and aren't using condoms. If they were only putting themselves in danger, I'd be less inclined to have an opinion, but they're also exposing others to what they may have. Granted, the other person should be concerned as well, and needs to be responsible, but people can (and I'm sure do) lie about having been tested when really they're just assuming they're clean b/c they don't have symptoms or just want to get laid. Also, there's the risk of pregnancy.

[Anaamika]

Originally Posted by squeegee

I think it's none of my damned business.

Agreed!

For myself, I would most definitely be for it if I wasn't in a committed relationship, but these days the risks are so high I'd be veeery careful..

[Johnny L.A.]

I haven't read the thread, but I'll post my opinion.

I see three basic levels of sex: Fucking, Having Sex, and Making Love.

Fucking is just what it sounds like. Doesn't matter who she is; you just fo it. Having Sex is what you might do with a fuck-buddy. That is, your partner isn't just a random person, but more like a friend or acquaintance. In this case, you actually like the person instead of the person being 'any port in a storm'. Making Love adds the component of a love. that is, you really, really care about the person.

I'm pretty much celibate; not that I want to be, but I just never seem to 'hook up'. (I'm very unlucky that way. ) I haven't had any play since December, and I'm embarrassed to say how long it had been before that. So if I were to encounter a woman who just ants to fuck, there's no way I'd turn her down! (As long as she didn't have any STDs, of course.) I mean, I'm a guy! But Fucking (as defined) has always left me feeling a bit empty and unsatisfied.

Casual sex (i.e., Having Sex) is better. In this case, it's more like playing with a friend than just 'mating'. There's the possibility of it turning into a romantic relationship. (There are some Doper Wimmins I'd like to 'play with'; but I'm not saying who! )

Making Love is the best. Pardon the glurge, but it's like the joining of two souls.

I have nothing against casual sex, and don't think the less of people who engage in it. I'd do it myself, given the opportunity.

[panache45]

Originally Posted by UrbanChic

If you'll allow me to grossly oversimplify, sex is strictly for procreation. As with any species, the body's goal is to propegate, propegate, propegate.

My sex is definitely not for procreation, and my body's goal . . . well, my body doesn't actually have any goals of its own.

I met my partner in an almost random, anonymous sexual encounter, and we've been together, monogamously, ever since. If we hadn't been engaged in casual sex at the time, it's very unlikely that we would have ever met. We're both happier now than we ever were before, but how can we be judgmental about our "casual" past that brought us together in the first place.

[overlyverbose]

Originally Posted by Claudia

Is casual sex, defined as sexual encounters between people not in a romantic relationship, acceptable in your opinion?

I think it's acceptable. I've actually had casual sex a couple of times (with the same person), and while it didn't work for me, it was fun, we both enjoyed ourselves and managed to part ways with no emotional problems. But I don't think I'd do it again because, while I didn't have any regrets or problems, it's not the safest thing to do. I'm also married and I'd never cheat, but if I weren't married, I don't think I'd do it again.

Do you think less of someone if you learn that they occasionally, or even frequently, hook up with people for sex only? This could be someone they meet at a bar, or just around town, find online, or even a more organized "fuck buddy" type of relationship.

I've got no problems with someone who hooks up occaisionally for casual sex. With someone who has sex a lot with people he/she doesn't know, I might worry more simply because I'd wonder if there was something other than the desire for physical satisfaction driving them to have sex with strangers or people they don't know very well. For example, I had a friend who absolutely could not sleep alone. So she'd sleep with just about anyone so she didn't have to. She destroyed a lot of relationships that way, including several friendships. She calmed down after a while and she's happily married now, but the behavior she exhibited was pretty self-destructive for a while.

I'd worry about both people equally for their safety and health, particularly if they were just picking up people in bars.

Does the old stereotype of casually sexual people being "dirty" or "nasty" still get any play? Conversely, are people who dissaprove of casual sex automatically considered prudish by most?

I don't consider people who disapprove of casual sex prudish at all. I can certainly see why casual sex is not the best way to go; however, I also think that someone else's sexual encounters aren't anyone else's business, so whether someone approves or disapproves is irrelevant.

Do you think casual sexual encounters are inherently worse than those between romantic partners?

I think that depends on the encounter and what you're hoping to get out of it. If all you're looking for is an orgasm, casual sex is an easy way to achieve that. Of course, your hands provide ample opportunity for orgasm, too, but that's beside the point. Still, I think it's easier for casual sex to get "sticky," so relationship sex might be better simply because both partners are ideally already emotionally connected, thereby decreasing the chances of one person having feelings that the other doesn't share. But relationships can also offer their own set of issues, so I'm brought back to my original statement that it depends what you're looking for.

[whiterabbit]

It's none of my business what other people do, but it's not for me at all. I do love sex, but not outside an actual relationship (waited a month with this guy, for example, though some of that was just waiting until the pills had kicked in properly, I admit, it had been a looooong time and he's a great guy). The risks are too big for me to feel comfortable with, and I have this nagging feeling that for me, at least, sex is bigger than just getting off.

[Pushkin]

I couldn't possibly comment based my own personal experience.

My casual encounters with girls happened when I was a virgin and quite drunk, I didn't loose it till I met my first (and current) girlfriend. So I've no idea what casual sex is like at all

[Bippy the Beardless]

So how are you doing Claudia

Casual sex is fine so long as it is understood as such and does not involve breaking trust with a current partner. Propper precautions should be taken against STDs and pregnancy, but appart from those considerations I'm all for casual sex.
I would say that casual sex should be somewhat romantic, in a ships meeting in the night sort of way, and I wouldn't want sex with someone I didn't like no matter how hot she might be.

[Anaamika]

I don't think casual sex is anymore than scratching an itch. You eat when you're hungry, drink when you're thirsty, and when all you're looking for is to get your rocks off, casual sex is fine, provided you take all precautions.

HOWEVER: I am highly, highly against having casual sex while either partner is drunk or stoned to the gills. Not to say I think picking someone up in a bar is unfeasible, but jeez, if (s)he's falling over drunk, people get different when drunk and one thing people often get is careless.

[AndrewL]

I have no problem with casual sex, at least in theory. I don't have any particular moral hangups about it, and there are far more risky activities people do for fun.

I don't know that I'd feel comfortable having sex with anyone who I wasn't at least good friends with. That's partly since for me, sex is a significantly emotional experience, and partly because I'd like to know I can trust my partner when it comes to sexual history and STDs.

I got into a "fuck-buddy" type relationship with a woman some years ago. After a few years we decided that we were compatible enough to live together, ended up getting married. I'm still not sure if my experience should count as a point for or against casual sex.

[Clothahump]

I never "screwed a stranger", so to speak. I wasn't into one-night stands and all that when I was younger. The old adage about "never go to bed with someone that you wouldn't want to wake up and talk to the next morning" has stood me in good stead.

I think sex is a heckuva lot more fun between friends. It's even more fun when love is involved. If it's between strangers, it's only one step up from masturbation.

But that's just me....

[Yookeroo]

Originally Posted by Clothahump

I think sex is a heckuva lot more fun between friends. It's even more fun when love is involved. If it's between strangers, it's only one step up from masturbation.

Maybe true....but I LOVE masturbation. Casual sex (while taking the proper precautions) is even better.

[taxi78cab]

Casual sex: yea! With a few caveats though. I've never done it with someone I've just met and don't think I could. I have to feel at least some sort of a connection, at least to the point where I know I can carry on a conversation with the guy. (And yes, there has to be protection!)

I have done it before, and it can be great, and I would do it again, but the conditions have to be right, which they usually aren't. (But if that hot guy from the gym keeps lookin' my way and smilin' his sexy, dimpled smile... well, those conditions might just find themselves right!)

[Misnomer]

Exactly what taxi78cab said.

(In fact, I'd seen this thread earlier, and was just about to go look up an e-mail I sent to someone a little while ago that expressed my thoughts on the subject so I could copy/paste ... so glad I checked the latest posts first! )

I do think that relationship sex is better than casual sex: I've never had casual sex go beyond two or three encounters (and it's usually just the one), but with relationship sex you're taking the time to really get to know your partner's likes/dislikes -- and vice versa. The best sex I had with my ex was 2.5 months into our relationship (we started on the 3rd date): unfortunately it was also the last time we had sex, but if we hadn't broken up I know there would have been even better experiences to come. So to speak.

[SpartanDC]

I really liked the way Johnny L.A. differentiated between fucking, having sex, and making love (though I can't say that term seriously without laughing). Now, I think a married or otherwise committed couple can actually do any of those three with each other, but when you're single, it's a different story.

Being a single male, and having experience with all three, I'd say "fucking" -- sleeping with someone you met very, very recently, or online, or whatever -- just isn't very fulfilling. In fact, I can barely keep my mind focused on it during the act. If others can enjoy that and be safe about it, more power to 'em.

I have had sex with a couple friends though, and it can be a lot of fun. I'm a big-time endorser of "fuckbuddy" arrangements for people my age (mid-20s) who haven't been able to develop a serious relationship for whatever reason. There's trust between partners, and it's a great way to, as [b]QuickSilver/b] said, keep the wolves from the door. Plus, the casualness of it all makes it a great way to try out some new things that you think you might be into, but aren't really sure.

But nothing beats sex with someone you're in love with. Absolutely nothing.

[Loopydude]

I see no moral issues involved with sex of any kind so long as everybody's mature and the sex is consensual. My brief foray into promiscuity taught me in short order that I can't really handle the stress of juggling. Worse, I tend to attach perhaps more emotion to sex than is warranted at times, so I'm also ill-equipped to be cavalier about sexual encounters and view it all as simply good fun. I rather envy those who can, actually, and I imagine those who can actually function in "open relationships" are having a wonderful time of it. Nothing immoral about that.

The only major, big-time caveat to all of the above is disease. If you throw HPV into the mix, a disconcertingly large percentage of the sexually-active folks out there are infected with an STD-causing virus or microbe. Warts may or may not be a big deal, depending on the strain of virus. Herpes is something I think most people would really rather live without. Neither of those two cooties' transmission can necessarily be stopped by use of a condom, so even responsible and functioning protection will not guarantee safety. HIV transmission can be virtually eliminated by dual use of condoms and spermicide; but when the consequence of accident is eventual untimely death, is "virtually" close enough to zero for most people's tastes? It's a tough call.

Maybe I worry too much, but if by some grave misfortune I find myself in the dating pool again, casual sex would probably freak me out too much (not that I'd be beating women off with a stick or anything). Compared to the health concerns, the moral concerns are practically irrelevant. And the health concerns, sadly, cannot be responsibly ignored. Free love just ain't a viable option.

[GuanoLad]

I'd be much more accepting of it if I was getting any. But I'm not, so I am jealous and therefore don't like it.