Blue Spiral's Adventures in Solitude

[Batya33]

It may be that they do not express it -perhaps they have self-esteem issues, perhaps they settle for the warm body/sex despite feeling objectified, etc. These are women who would like a committed relationship with you (as you've described) but settle for sex so perhaps they're just settling for the trade-off and keeping quiet about feeling objectified.

[Blue Spiral]

It may be that they do not express it -perhaps they have self-esteem issues, perhaps they settle for the warm body/sex despite feeling objectified, etc. These are women who would like a committed relationship with you (as you've described) but settle for sex so perhaps they're just settling for the trade-off and keeping quiet about feeling objectified.

 

You seem to be implying that it isn't possible for me to hide that; that women will somehow sense it. Do you concede that it's possible that I'm right, and that I have indeed hidden it?

 

For the record: yes, a few women have said they want a relationship with me, but that's only because they don't know what a relationship with me would really be like. I've cut ties with any woman that wanted more, because I don't want to make them suffer through the whole "well I want more but I'll settle for this" process. I know how miserable that can be, though in a different way.

 

Just out of curiosity, do you think that emotionally-healthy women can enjoy a FWB-type arrangement? Or only women with low self-esteem? I've found that there are certain preconceptions about people that do FWB...particularly women, for some reason. Women that do FWBs seem to be judged more harshly for it than men, especially by other women.

[Blue Spiral]

Bullet points:

 

--I sort of forgot to eat, today. I had toast for breakfast (a big breakfast, for me), but I skipped lunch and had a tiny dinner, because things got in the way. I don't weigh much to begin with, and I've actually been losing weight, lately, so I may be below a healthy weight. I'm sort of afraid to weigh myself; if I'm below 120, I should really have some crackers or something. I'll make sure to eat more tomorrow.

 

--I'm ready for winter to show up. We're having one last heat-wave, and that brought out the bugs. Ugh. Come on, winter!

 

--and yet, winter means much less cleavage. Cleavage is good. So, so conflicted.

[notalady]

Just out of curiosity, do you think that emotionally-healthy women can enjoy a FWB-type arrangement? Or only women with low self-esteem? I've found that there are certain preconceptions about people that do FWB...particularly women, for some reason. Women that do FWBs seem to be judged more harshly for it than men, especially by other women.

 

That's an interesting question. I do FWB arrangements (granted only twice in my life), I consider myself emotionally healthy and stable, don't have low self esteem and won't put up with any disrespect from men or anyone really. I do it when it suits my needs at a certain point in time, and have no problem walking away from such an arrangement if it stops suiting my needs or if I want more for myself than something casual. I know a friend who had done a similar thing and she is in no way, shape or form have low self esteem, really strong and confident person that takes no crap from anyone.

 

To me it's an in-transition, temporary state of play and ultimately I would want a LTR, I bet most emotionally healthy women who do FWB arrangements are the same, they will move on relatively quickly to find something better. It is more likely the emotionally unhealthy ones that are perpetually in this type of arrangements and can't seem to break the cycle (or don't want to), so you probably would notice more of them than emotionally healthy women in this situation.

[Batya33]

on reflection if these are women you're just interacting with sexually then it's not about skill at hiding anything -the limits of the interaction make it easy or easier (just like acting professionally and calm in an office setting when you have personal issues at home)

 

I think women who are confident and honest with themselves can have casual sex successfully (if that's what you're referring to rather than having sex with a good friend where there's an established friendship -I would want to think a bit more about that arrangement). The difference is confidence and self-honesty and that's a bit more unusual since often people (mostly women) lie to themselves and then settle for sexual scraps.

 

I don't judge women who have casual sex as long as they are single and honest with themselves and don't judge men as "jerks" for "using" them in a consensual sex arrangement. If they are settling for scraps I judge that choice as a poor one and if they do the "jerk" path I judge that as unfair to the guy.

[Silverbirch]

Oh, I can think of one friend of mine in particular who often had FWB. I knew her from uni, and she had an FWB with a guy in my class. She was really beautiful, smart and often upset people with her honesty. The guy got more than he bargained for - he had been the type To objectify women, but it turned out that he didn't like it when it was done to him. He bored her after a while so she ditched the "benefits" - she actually got sick of sleeping with him. I would say there were people both male and female who judged her negatively for that type of thing. Oh darn, I miss her but we lost touch years ago!

[Blue Spiral]

To me it's an in-transition, temporary state of play and ultimately I would want a LTR, I bet most emotionally healthy women who do FWB arrangements are the same, they will move on relatively quickly to find something better. It is more likely the emotionally unhealthy ones that are perpetually in this type of arrangements and can't seem to break the cycle (or don't want to), so you probably would notice more of them than emotionally healthy women in this situation.

 

That's been my experience, as well. Most women seem to want relationships, and while many types of women will do FWB for a while, the ones that do it long-term are either like me (not into monogamy) or they have limited options/self-esteem issues. Granted, I have low self-esteem, myself, so I tend to attract women that are like that...but I think that's a separate issue.

 

on reflection if these are women you're just interacting with sexually then it's not about skill at hiding anything -the limits of the interaction make it easy or easier (just like acting professionally and calm in an office setting when you have personal issues at home).

 

So, basically, there's no scenario in which you can admit I'm actually good at hiding this? That's kind of mean. Yeah, I put myself in a position to succeed by limiting my interaction with them, but still.

 

Oh, I can think of one friend of mine in particular who often had FWB. I knew her from uni, and she had an FWB with a guy in my class. She was really beautiful, smart and often upset people with her honesty. The guy got more than he bargained for - he had been the type To objectify women, but it turned out that he didn't like it when it was done to him. He bored her after a while so she ditched the "benefits" - she actually got sick of sleeping with him. I would say there were people both male and female who judged her negatively for that type of thing. Oh darn, I miss her but we lost touch years ago!

 

Yeah, a lot of men have double-standards when it comes to sex, and they haven't really thought them out. When the tables get turned, they don't know how to react. Those men tend to be more traditional; the "I like sex, and sex is good for men, and women should want to have sex with me...but sex is bad for women, except when they're having sex with me!" types. That's where I part ways from a lot of the manosphere people (manosphere = a whole bunch of male-centric blogs and websites). You're mad at women for not having sex with you, but you're also mad at women (as a whole, not just women they know) for having sex with a lot of guys in general? Consistency, you have it not. Most of them are anti-marriage/anti-monogamy because of traditional, frankly reactionary beliefs; I'm anti-marriage/anti-monogamy because of modern, secular, anti-traditional beliefs.

[Firiel]

I know this question wasn't directed at me, but I'll answer it anyway.

 

I do think that emotionally-healthy women can enjoy a FWB arrangement. While plenty of people use casual sex almost as self-medication for poor self-esteem, I definitely do not think that is always the case. However, I do think it is impossible for a FWB arrangement to be positive and edifying when one partner views the other partner as simply a sex object and not a person. I think that any relationship (romantic/sexual or otherwise) where a person is viewed only for what they offer in a clinical sense and not as a individual, subjective person is unhealthy.

[Lonewing]

As for the idea of having kids...life hasn't been all that fun, for me, and I don't see the point in inflicting it on someone else.

 

Life truly sucked for me when I was growing up, but I think that's what has given me a leg up on the last generation. I remember well those things that got me in trouble and I further know what the impact of the negative environment that I grew up in - it starts by not putting the vase where the kid can knock it down, for instance - and I know a number of behaviors I can insist on not following and life choices that I can make to avoid that outcome.

 

So Far, so good.

 

Just out of curiosity, do you think that emotionally-healthy women can enjoy a FWB-type arrangement? Or only women with low self-esteem? I've found that there are certain preconceptions about people that do FWB...particularly women, for some reason. Women that do FWBs seem to be judged more harshly for it than men, especially by other women.

 

Women who engage in ANYTHING that involves using their body proactively are judged more harshly than the women who don't. And by this, I mean the women who freely pursue sex on their dime [aka, as THEY want it], the women who use their body to advance professionally, and the women who LIKE being in the skin industry.

 

These women are all judged VERY harshly by the average person - and by their peer women, even more so...

 

And with this being said, you'll find a ton of women who say they don't judge these other women more harshly, and yet, they do.

 

Silly games, so many of them...

[Blue Spiral]

However, I do think it is impossible for a FWB arrangement to be positive and edifying when one partner views the other partner as simply a sex object and not a person. I think that any relationship (romantic/sexual or otherwise) where a person is viewed only for what they offer in a clinical sense and not as a individual, subjective person is unhealthy.

 

What if both people are using each other, and they each know it, and are okay with it?

 

I don't think that my FWB situations were unhealthy. I thought of them mainly as sex objects, but I knew they were people.

 

Women who engage in ANYTHING that involves using their body proactively are judged more harshly than the women who don't. And by this, I mean the women who freely pursue sex on their dime [aka, as THEY want it], the women who use their body to advance professionally, and the women who LIKE being in the skin industry.

 

These women are all judged VERY harshly by the average person - and by their peer women, even more so...

 

And with this being said, you'll find a ton of women who say they don't judge these other women more harshly, and yet, they do.

 

Silly games, so many of them...

 

In my opinion, women are meaner to other women than men are to other men. There are definitely a lot of status/reputation games going on.

 

I'm sorry to hear about your struggles growing up, btw.

[Firiel]

What if both people are using each other, and they each know it, and are okay with it?

 

I don't think that my FWB situations were unhealthy. I thought of them mainly as sex objects, but I knew they were people.

 

I don't think that's healthy. But it's important, I think, that I use the words "seeing the other person as a sex object" instead of just the term "using them." "Using someone" is a more ubiquitous term that is a little dicier to define, I think. Seeing a person as an object in relation to the Self instead of a separate, distinct Self is more clearly defined in cultural theory/philosophy and a little less nebulous, in my opinion.

 

Relating to other people as objects instead of as subjects is bad for both people involved, IMO. So if two people are viewing each other as objects, it's still going to be unhealthy.

 

This means, by the way, that I do think it's possible (for some folks... it's not my thing) to have casual sex without a desire for a deeper romantic relationship and not view the other person as simply an object for sexual gratification.

[Lonewing]

As bad as it was, I know many have and had it worse. It helped me earn my way to college, through college, and beyond. And this knowledge will be useful for the rest of my life.

 

Tis true, tis true - they dress for each other, and they press each other...so silly it's pointless.

 

What I object to most it the way some of these people push at definitions of words and try to get the Language changed as if that will change the meaning of their actions or dress codes. I was reading something here the other day about people being up in arms about a high school's dress code banning yoga pants, and as I was thinking about this, I had a picture of two people on TV in front of me. On the left there was a woman anchor, and on the right, there was a male anchor. One was dressed professionally, and the other, quite frankly, was dressed somewhere between provocative and casual. How do I make these definitions?

 

I start with the man in the suit. A closed collar with a tie is 100% professional, establishing the upper data point. The display of cleavage - any part of the naked exposed breast - is provocative, the bottom data point. I don't care what women want to tell me what I'm SUPPOSED to see, when I see cleavage, I see Provocative. Casual is the middle 1/3 band accross the front of the chest between the closed collar line and the exposed breast line, the middle ground between the two worlds.

 

Now women get mad that they don't get taken seriously. Well, come on now, I'm seeing a whole lot of skin, not a person - and she wants me to see a whole lot of skin, or she would wear something! If we have a man in similar dress, it'd be a man in a white tank top, what we colloquially refer to as the wife beater. Is there ANY world where I'll see the man wearing the white tank top as presenting Professional or even Casual dress? NO! But I guess the exposure of skin is how women display to each other their vitality, their strength, and their pride...

 

This is why I really like my current job, whereas we have a uniform dress code enforced my military law that ensures every member of my team exhibits PROFESSIONAL dress while on duty, 24-7. And it's an ugly uniform, completely hiding the physical assets of both genders under a blank faceless base of equality. It's a beautiful thing... Yes, we're still fighting a sexual harassment issue, but that happens because people insist on pushing their mental levels down from professional to casual with hopes it'll go provocative.

 

It's still an interesting observation, I dare say, this amount of skin woman anchors have exposed versus their male counterparts. There's one group who don't have much skin showing on even terms, it's the judges on the judge shows...

 

Anyhow, sorry about that tangent.

[Blue Spiral]

I don't think that's healthy. But it's important, I think, that I use the words "seeing the other person as a sex object" instead of just the term "using them." "Using someone" is a more ubiquitous term that is a little dicier to define, I think. Seeing a person as an object in relation to the Self instead of a separate, distinct Self is more clearly defined in cultural theory/philosophy and a little less nebulous, in my opinion.

 

Relating to other people as objects instead of as subjects is bad for both people involved, IMO. So if two people are viewing each other as objects, it's still going to be unhealthy.

 

I personally think that different things are healthy for different people. Attempting to be monogamous ate me alive, frankly. And, for the record: it's not that I viewed them as objects, it's that I only thought of them in a sexual capacity. I don't think that's any worse than only thinking of someone in a platonic capacity.

 

What I object to most it the way some of these people push at definitions of words and try to get the Language changed as if that will change the meaning of their actions or dress codes. I was reading something here the other day about people being up in arms about a high school's dress code banning yoga pants, and as I was thinking about this, I had a picture of two people on TV in front of me. On the left there was a woman anchor, and on the right, there was a male anchor. One was dressed professionally, and the other, quite frankly, was dressed somewhere between provocative and casual.

 

Ehh. Either her producers told her to be sexy, or she decided to be sexy "on her own", in the sense that she knows it's the only way to keep her job. That said, I don't see how sexuality and seriousness are mutually-exclusive. America is way too puritanical for my tastes. Keep in mind, you're talking to someone who's basically a hedonist, and who hasn't owned a tie in over fifteen years. If I weren't so busy Clark Kenting my way through life--the fewer people that know the real me, the better--I'd go around in pajama pants and a t-shirt that said "**** the Haters".

[Silverbirch]

Oh yah! A woman who is sexy AND intelligent . . . That would be scarey for a lot of people . . . She might have WAY too much power

[Firiel]

I personally think that different things are healthy for different people. Attempting to be monogamous ate me alive, frankly. And, for the record: it's not that I viewed them as objects, it's that I only thought of them in a sexual capacity. I don't think that's any worse than only thinking of someone in a platonic capacity.

 

Well, to be fair, I didn't say being non-monogamous is unhealthy. It would be for me and my personality, but I'm not about to make that distinction for everyone. About the "viewing them as objects" thing, I guess I just took you for your word when you literally said you view women as sex objects and not people:

 

Most of my thoughts about women are extremely positive...and, being honest, extremely sexual. Over the course of my average day, I look at Kate Upton gifs, I look at pictures of Kelly Brook in a bikini, I watch my favorite cam-women, I look at self-shot pics (the Chive, etc.), and so on. I get so enthusiastic about women that I forget all the stuff that I've gone through. "Wow, they're really hot!" "Look at how casual they are about taking it off, that's awesome!" "I should totally get a girlfriend again!"

 

But then I come to ENA, and I only see women's words, as opposed to their images. I'm forced to view them as people, and not just sex objects. I read conversations about what women want, what they don't like, and what they think about guys like me. Calling it a cold shower doesn't do it justice; it's more like a glacially-frigid tidal wave.

 

Perhaps you meant something different. But if understanding and viewing a woman as a person with emotions and feelings and opinions and not as a sex object is literally the biggest turn-off you can imagine, it sounds like you view women simply as objects for sexual fulfillment with any other aspect of their existence being a negative one. I don't think viewing someone in a platonic capacity is the same as viewing someone simply as an object for sexual gratification. I, for instance, have absolutely no desire to sleep with any of my family members (male or female) or any of my female friends. It is completely platonic. Yet there is still a give and take and respect in those relationships that I value. I think something similar CAN (and probably does) happen with a FWB situation where there is give and take and respect, despite being a purely physical relationship, just like I can care about my co-workers (professional relationship) without necessarily wanting to hang out with them outside of work. But I believe the people involved in such FWB situations must see each other as people and not objects for it to be healthy.

[Lonewing]

Ehh. Either her producers told her to be sexy, or she decided to be sexy "on her own", in the sense that she knows it's the only way to keep her job. That said, I don't see how sexuality and seriousness are mutually-exclusive. America is way too puritanical for my tastes. Keep in mind, you're talking to someone who's basically a hedonist, and who hasn't owned a tie in over fifteen years. If I weren't so busy Clark Kenting my way through life--the fewer people that know the real me, the better--I'd go around in pajama pants and a t-shirt that said "**** the Haters".

 

True enough - competition being what it is. I'll be honest though, I was watching some things lately and now that I have noticed this, I have also realized I listen more to the women who are professionally dressed and think more of the women who are more provocatively dressed. I really dare say, there really is a time and place for either get up - I very rarely wear ties myself - but wearing the wrong get up in the wrong place is not necessarily the best strategy to be seen as you wish to be seen.

[Blue Spiral]

Oh yah! A woman who is sexy AND intelligent . . . That would be scarey for a lot of people . . . She might have WAY too much power

 

I personally think that issue is overrated. Some of the more traditional men are probably threatened by non-submissive women, but for the most part, men just don't care about a woman's intelligence-level or career.

 

Perhaps you meant something different. But if understanding and viewing a woman as a person with emotions and feelings and opinions and not as a sex object is literally the biggest turn-off you can imagine, it sounds like you view women simply as objects for sexual fulfillment with any other aspect of their existence being a negative one.

 

...yeah, I was trying to find a more polite way to say it, but that's accurate. It's nothing personal: I like sex, but I don't like being social.

 

True enough - competition being what it is. I'll be honest though, I was watching some things lately and now that I have noticed this, I have also realized I listen more to the women who are professionally dressed

 

I'm the opposite...it's hard for me to keep my attention on mostly-clothed women. My mind keeps wandering. My girlfriends found that, if they wanted to make sure that I was listening to them when they said something important, they'd wear low-cut tops. And, of course, the longest conversations I've ever had have been with (nude) cam women. I've never been very interested in the whole "talking" thing, but it seemed a lot more interesting, that way.

 

I really dare say, there really is a time and place for either get up - I very rarely wear ties myself - but wearing the wrong get up in the wrong place is not necessarily the best strategy to be seen as you wish to be seen.

 

I don't care about how people see me...actually, I don't want to be seen at all, for that matter.

[notalady]

This comment is not meant to be offensive, but..what a strange man you are!

[Silverbirch]

Blue Spiral, I disagree with you about intelligence- SOME men most definitely do. In my experience, they are men who are intelligent, educated and achieved. My ex had a colleague who was all of those things and very handsome to go with it. He had a lot of supermodel-type girlfriends, but he couldn't stay interested in them for that reason. He did end up finding a woman he considered his soulmate. In looks, she was average, but she equalled him in all other ways, and who he considered his equal.

[Blue Spiral]

This comment is not meant to be offensive, but..what a strange man you are!

 

Yeah, I admit, my asocial nature is unusual...but I don't think that my superficial/overly-sexual nature is. I recently posted survey results regarding how few men care about a woman having a good career. I've literally never heard a man compliment a woman by saying "Yeah, she's got a really great career" or "Yeah, she's really smart." When men tell me about women that they're interested in/involved with, it's always looks first, everything else second.

 

People don't need to worry about being offensive to me, btw. That's because my thread is a shame-proof zone. Obviously, just to avoid drama, I'd prefer for it to remain a shame-free zone, but I can't control what others say. Let me be as clear as possible:

 

My journal is a shame-proof zone. If you attempt to shame me in any way, shape, or form, it'll be like bullets bouncing off of Superman. Life isn't a democracy--as long as I'm within the law, I don't need anyone's approval for anything that I do. I do what I want, how I want, when I want, where I want, etc. There's a 99% chance that I don't subscribe to your religion, philosophy, or belief-system, so please don't bother trying to use it to convince me. I'm not part of any community or other social group: I don't care about being liked or accepted, and you can't use the threat of casting me out, because I already left of my own accord.

[zentoCC]

Since you don't care about insults. I'm sure you also won't care that you ally interest me. I love hearing alternative views on things, especially in an environment that they don't try and influence my own, I hate having to defend my views.

 

The reason I'm actually writing on here is that I love your first post in this journal, best one I've ever read. Not that you care of course.

[Fudgie]

Sadly, I believe the survey results. I know it's common but that's always been a little bit of a peeve of mine: how everyone is hyper focused on looks. I'm not really striving to change that though, I just look for people more like me, and I've had success. It's just more comical to me now. If you're looking for a short term fling, then yes, by all means, focus on looks. If you're looking for something very long term, you need to focus more on other things if you want it to last. Of course, I like how people throw it back at me "Well women want good looks too!" Well, yeah, but I'm one of those weird people that is truly very open when it comes to looks. I've dated all types, underweight to morbidly obese...if I really, truly like someone on the inside, I overlook a TON on the outside. Of course, I find many people to be decent looking but I don't like the "inside" that much at all. For me, finding someone I could be physically attracted to isn't the issue, it's everything else.

[Firiel]

Yeah, I admit, my asocial nature is unusual...but I don't think that my superficial/overly-sexual nature is. I recently posted survey results regarding how few men care about a woman having a good career. I've literally never heard a man compliment a woman by saying "Yeah, she's got a really great career" or "Yeah, she's really smart." When men tell me about women that they're interested in/involved with, it's always looks first, everything else second.

 

While I don't think your superficial/overly-sexual nature is unusual, I don't think that men with non-superficial/overly-sexual natures are unusual either. I do think there is something to be said about the survey you posted. It doesn't surprise me. Women have been socially conditioned to care about a good career/being a hard worker. And it's not a bad thing to care about-- certainly, a good career and financial stability implies a someone has a positive work ethic, is thinking about the future, and is good at what they do. In the same way, even though a man may not look for a career, he may look for other non-sexual characteristics that are more stereotypically feminine-- if she dresses well, if she is nurturing, etc. In other words, a man not caring about a woman's career doesn't necessarily indicate an overly-sexual nature, though I do think it implies an adherence to stereotypical gender roles.

 

Anyway, it is really interesting to read your perspectives considering we seem to approach life and relationships in a fundamentally different way. I do want to add, props for being honest with the women you sleep with about what you are looking for.

[notalady]

Lol, I'm glad you are not offended, I like the idea of a shame-free zone

 

I agree that most men probably don't care if their date has a career, but that is not to be confused with intelligence. Intelligence shows through everyday situation and conversations way more than just relating to one's job. And most men I know or dated are interested in women who are smart, can carry on a decent conversation and discuss current events and complex issues and topics. That's partly what distinguishes them from women they want to sleep with and women they want to spent their life with. Most people need mental stimulation, and talking to/living with someone with the intelligence of a teenager or a pot plant is unbearable to most. maybe the people I know are different to the people you know, which is not surprising as we choose the types of people we associate with that satisfy our needs whether it's sexual or intellectual. Ie I'm attracted to intelligent and humorous men and would only associate with men who can appreciate my intelligence and humour. I would be left feeling utterly dissatisfied if a man I'm dating appreciates only my looks and not my brain, I would not continue seeing him if that's the case. luckily I haven't had problems finding such men, so I guess they do exist

 

Btw just noticed your signature is a quote from Walter White - love it! Best TV character ever.

[Silverbirch]

Hi Notalady, I have a son only a couple of years younger than BS. has always had young women interested in him. I have a feeling he is going to ask this current young woman to marry him at some point. She has the whole lot. His previous girlfriend was beautiful in the looks department too - my ex used to rave about how beautiful she was. she was also intelligent and educated, but did not have a career - because she didn't have the drive to even want to get a job. She was planning on enrolling to do ANOTHER degree. My son came to see that a woman like her needed someone to "keep her". She needs a man with lots of money as her parents do. One of the things he had told her he likes so much about current girlfriend is that she has drive and determination. I think she is a lot like him. I think that with men who really can take their pick of women, that whilst looks might come into the equation, there is more than that required to sustain their interest.