Real meaning of “it means nothing to me”

[nmduipd]

I can't tell you how many times I heard:

• "I could sleep with a woman and it would mean nothing."
  
• "Going to the strip clubs means absolutely nothing."
  
• "For me it means nothing, but if she did the same thing, it would mean much more to her"

I would like to know

1. How many people feel this way?
   
2. Is it only men? Do girls think the same way?
   
3. And, if it means nothing, why people do it?

Any opinion is appreciated

[robowarrior]

They feel empty because there is no love. The only thing that makes you happy in the universe and is also the meaning of life , is to love and help other people.

 

If you just have sex without caring for that person (regardless wether you are woman or man) , it will be empty.

 

Many people have sex for all the wrong reasons, namely to forfill selfish desires and its not only sex, people will buy all sorts of stuff to try to fill the 'void' in their souls in vain. Only love can do that. Many people feel this way because they don't know the meaning of life which is as described above.

[reallydown]

1. "I could sleep with a woman and it would mean nothing."

 

- doesn't value women. looks at her like piece of meat.

 

2."Going to the strip clubs means absolutely nothing."

 

- i get off by looking at them. women are objects for my satisfaction.

 

3. "For me it means nothing, but if she did the same thing, it would mean much more to her"

 

- double standards to excuse own behavior but to condemn woman for same behavior.

[kadvati79]

I have alot of sex, and yes, i means nothing to me. But what does that really mean? It means this:

 

I cannot cope

 

Its that simple.

[nmduipd]

It means this:

 

I cannot cope

 

Its that simple.

Wow!

I must admit, I didn't expect this answer!

 

But then I read some of your other posts, and now I understand what you're saying.

In your situation this is a coping tool.

 

You opened a totally different way of looking at it for me.

Thanks for that.

 

Would you be able to do it and feel the same way if you were in a relationship though? Would you be able to have meaningless sex with someone else other than the person you love?

[kadvati79]

Would you be able to do it and feel the same way if you were in a relationship though? Would you be able to have meaningless sex with someone else other than the person you love?

 

It happened once in my last relationship, and its devistating. I cheated and travelled to my partners (now ex's) city and told him in person. It rocked us. Maybe we never fully recovered. But its only devistating because I had reached a point long ago where I didn't accept the behaviour and the previous excuses I had used for my behaviour. I had reached a point where I decided the behaviour was wrong, it was unacceptable, and I didn't want it in my life.

 

But in a sense, sex for me can literally mean nothing. Other than having sex with my two ex's, sex has entirely no meaning for me. I generally have no respect for the person, I can't relate to them, I don't hang around them - I can't - because they remind me of a side of me I don't like or value.

 

The humourious thing is, that this indifference and distracted way I can approach sex makes me a pretty good sex partner. And for some reason, highly desirable.

 

Peoples true feelings are rarely betrayed by their actions. I think some people learn to see sex as simply an act akin to shaking hands. It becomes so devalued, that it ceases to have emotional impact. But believe me, when you reach that point, you long for nothing more than a hug from someone you love...

[JustNormal]

I have a soul that I intend to have control over after I die, so everything means something to me. Every action in the multiverse has consequence. The only thing that means nothing is when somebody says, “I could sleep with a woman and it would mean nothing.”

 

What it means is that their soul is dying. See the poster above. Why sleep with someone if it means nothing. Why make a peanut butter and jelly sandwhich if you aren't hungry. Why go to work if you're just there so you don't have to work. What's the point in that?

 

If whatever it was meant nothing to me, then I wouldn't do it. Animals are guided by instinct alone. Not man.

[kadvati79]

I have a soul that I intend to have control over after I die, so everything means something to me. Every action in the multiverse has consequence. The only thing that means nothing is when somebody says, “I could sleep with a woman and it would mean nothing.”

 

What it means is that their soul is dying. See the poster above. Why sleep with someone if it means nothing. Why make a peanut butter and jelly sandwhich if you aren't hungry. Why go to work if you're just there so you don't have to work. What's the point in that?

 

If whatever it was meant nothing to me, then I wouldn't do it. Animals are guided by instinct alone. Not man.

 

OP can correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the question related to can sex mean nothing in a romantic sense.

 

Clearly, sex is an enjoyable activity. As is eating a peanut butter sandwhich. I think you are romanticising life a bit much there mate, and missing the point of my post at least.

 

My moral standpoint of sex is that it is much better in a relationship, and that I want a monogamous relationship. But I can empathise with the questions raised because, throughout my life, I have had a number of sexual encounters that literally... mean nothing to me. They are the equivallent of eating a peanut butter sandwhich or going to the movies emotionally for me. To a large extent, I was not there in an emotional sense. It was simply an activity.

 

Now, I have cast my own moral assessment for my behaviour, in that I don't like it. But I would caution wild and seemingly wise statements like: "If whatever it was meant nothing to me, then I wouldn't do it. Animals are guided by instinct alone. Not man."

 

I think thats boloney really, of course people think about things. Many people choose to have sex that is meaningless. The instinct to eat is not far different from the instinct to mate. Social conditioning, background, upbringing - these all have an effect on what choices we make. I don't think anyone here would disagree that people don't generally do things that are totally meaningless... everything has a reason even if it is escaping boredom.

 

Moral grandstanding has been a feature that has, throughout my life, consistently bothered me, I would recommend a great book - by a chap named link removed called link removed. I find it an excellent read that helps remove alot of the "americanism" from the use of the term liberty.

 

In particular, JSM talks about liberty (when exercised in private) as made up of several components one of which is:

 

The freedom to pursue tastes and pursuits, even if they are deemed "immoral," as long as they do not cause harm

 

And by harm, he means physical harm. Or harm inflicted against those who cannot defend themselves, such as the sick, the invalid, children, animals etc...

 

As a former military man, with very conservative views, reading this book during my legal studies was the starting point for a massive change in outlook. Its really quite a compelling read, especially when combined with link removed work, although I find some of his threads a bit hard to swallow.

[JustNormal]

If you think that man is guided by instinct alone then you really aren't getting it. Read what I wrote- If you "THINK" that man is guided by "INSTINCT" alone- then you really aren't getting it.

 

You "THINK". There is no instinct involved. You have choice. No instinct involved. Don't claim poverty when it suits you.

 

As you said, you don't like it and you have your own moral compass. So we in fact, agree. But don't piss on both of us and tell me it's raining. It ain't. And we both know it.

 

You are beyond instinct because your thoughts/choice can always invalidate your instincts. It may not be fun and happy all the time, but it is there- and not accidentally. The 10 commandments and the golden rule weren't given to earthworms for a reason.

 

Moral grandstanding.. OK, let's consider where morals come from.

 

What is a thing in and of itself? What is Physical and Natural law? Civil Law? There are rules to every game that cannot be broken. Not because I say so or I'll protest on Capital Hill with a neon sign saying "I'm with Stupid". No, it's because it kills you. It takes you out of the game.

 

You don't need to justify yourself to anyone, but don't BS me. Screwing random people does hurt- and you already know the physical reasons why. But that doesn't last anyway does it. There are rules for your soul as well. And you already know this, as you've stated. You can call it morals if you wish. If you base morals on physical principles alone though, you will be in err.

 

Your list of literature is what I would expect. But we aren't talking about the body here. All of those people you quote know nothing beyond it. You should find better books if you want to know why you have 'morals' to begin with. I suggest you go to the beginning of recorded history and start there. And no, I'm not kidding. This disaffected relativistic 60's crap will only get you killed. I wish you the best.

[AntiLove_SuperStar]

I could indeed sleep with someone and they wouldn't mean anything to me.

 

I can also, and I do now, sleep with someone and they mean more to me than I can describe.

 

Humans possess an infinite range of responses to infinite situations, and what I may have done for life as a habit up until now, I could change tomorrow.

[kadvati79]

If you think that man is guided by instinct alone then you really aren't getting it. Read what I wrote- If you "THINK" that man is guided by "INSTINCT" alone- then you really aren't getting it.

 

Certainly agree with you there, as I said, people think about everything. I just read the original posters words as being that they mean could someone sleep with someone and it mean nothing in a romantic sense. As I said, totally concurr with your words. People don't go out and do that purely on instinct! Some of the reasons are more noble than others... lonely, bored, obliged, horny... list goes on. But yes, people think about these. And as I said, they make choices based on a variety of reasons.

 

As you said, you don't like it and you have your own moral compass. So we in fact, agree. But don't piss on both of us and tell me it's raining. It ain't. And we both know it.

...

The 10 commandments and the golden rule weren't given to earthworms for a reason.

 

Absolutely, I do agree. But I get unnerved at pushing my morality onto others, as I feel you are suggesting with your posts. Myself - I enjoy a good argument. But thrusting the 10 commandments in peoples face as a fact doesn't make friends, it starts wars. Who am I (or you) to force my beliefs, my values, or judgement on anothers actions? Who am I to say that "sex for sex" sake is wrong or cast judgement on them? Indeed, as I understand, the bible is pretty specific that God is the one who casts judgement, not mankind.

 

No, it's because it kills you. It takes you out of the game. Screwing random people does hurt- and you already know the physical reasons why. But that doesn't last anyway does it. There are rules for your soul as well. And you already know this, as you've stated. You can call it morals if you wish. If you base morals on physical principles alone though, you will be in err.

 

I got the impression, from the OP statement, that we were discussing whether you can have sex and it mean nothing in a romantic sense (I added the red bits for the sake of clarification). While I would consider this to possibly include "random sex", it could simply be sex between friends, or sex between ex's, and so on.

 

Are we stating here that sex must have meaning for it to be moral? If so -what is this meaning? Who decides what this meaning is?

 

My point here, the only one I have tried to make, is that people should make up their own minds regarding what they consider is acceptable sexual behaviour and what is not. Obviously, this forms the boundaries of what is "moral" and what isn't. In my case, I believe my sexual behaviour is immoral - but that is a personal judgement and not one I would apply to other people.

 

Your list of literature is what I would expect. But we aren't talking about the body here. All of those people you quote know nothing beyond it. You should find better books if you want to know why you have 'morals' to begin with. I suggest you go to the beginning of recorded history and start there. And no, I'm not kidding. This disaffected relativistic 60's crap will only get you killed. I wish you the best.

 

If I have to die for something, I'd be very happy to die for the princples outlined in "On Liberty" (which, coincidentally, was first published in 1859 - which is possibly a little early for "disaffected relativistic 60's crap"?):

 

"If mankind minus one were of one opinion, then mankind is no more justified in silencing the one than the one - if he had the power - would be justified in silencing mankind."

[Momene]

It can mean nothing for some people but not for me.