3 ms·

> from a social perspective, to dismantle the idea that one's worth is determined by having sexual partners Ah, let's just go ahead and "dismantle" one of the

> from a social perspective, to dismantle the idea that one's worth is determined by having sexual partners Ah, let's just go ahead and "dismantle" one of the most basic psychological needs, that's a great solution.

krapp 6y ago
>> from a social perspective, to dismantle the idea that one's worth is determined by having sexual partners >Ah, let's just go ahead and "dismantle" one of the most basic psychological needs, that's a great solution. Sex itself may be a basic psychological and physiological need (for most people, not for everyone,) but "the idea that one's worth is determined by having sexual partners" is not. The latter is entirely a cultural and social construct. Why would you literally quote one fragment of one sentence from claudiawerner's comment just to misconstrue it entirely in rebuttal?
- philwelch 6y ago
  > Sex itself may be a basic psychological and physiological need I was referring to companionship rather than sex. > "the idea that one's worth is determined by having sexual partners" is not. The latter is entirely a cultural and social construct I think claudiawerner is making an extremely uncharitable assumption in the first place that the primary complaint is about ego rather than loneliness. But, even granting that point: it does not seem, to me, like a "cultural and social construct" that one's self-esteem would be affected by this type of loneliness. I find that claim self-evidently absurd, to be honest. > Why would you literally quote one fragment of one sentence from claudiawerner's comment Because that's the point that I wanted to reply to. > just to misconstrue it entirely in rebuttal? I think you are the one misconstruing my argument.
  - claudiawerner 6y ago
    >I think claudiawerner is making an extremely uncharitable assumption in the first place that the primary complaint is about ego rather than loneliness. That wasn't my assumption at all. Ego is irrelevant to feelings of self-worth, which is a basic psychological need, as is togetherness. It's not self-serving the ego to want to feel like one has some worth. My point was only that the idea of a man's worth being in the number of sexual partners he has had is harmful to men overall, and places undue pressure and causes doubts about self-worth.
    - philwelch 6y ago
      > My point was only that the idea of a man's worth being in the number of sexual partners he has had is harmful to men overall.... I think you’re equivocating between two extremely different things. I would actually agree it’s not necessary or good for men to derive any self-worth from the difference between, say, 5 or 15. But it’s probably unavoidable for men to derive some degree of self-worth or self-esteem from the difference between zero and non-zero, which is the situation under discussion.
      - claudiawerner 6y ago
        >But it’s probably unavoidable for men to derive some degree of self-worth or self-esteem from the difference between zero and non-zero, which is the situation under discussion. I don't see why that's unavoidable. Humans have shown tremendous development in overcoming their (what was assumed to be insurmountable) biology and associated reponses, and of course the cultural factors which influence responses through upbringing. Perhaps we should feel empathy for those people, but I think it's a mistake to think it is immutable. Most Buddhist monks, for example, do not consider being or not being a virgin, much less having an active partner recently, to be worth of much status.

krapp 6y ago

>> from a social perspective, to dismantle the idea that one's worth is determined by having sexual partners >Ah, let's just go ahead and "dismantle" one of the most basic psychological needs, that's a great solution. Sex itself may be a basic psychological and physiological need (for most people, not for everyone,) but "the idea that one's worth is determined by having sexual partners" is not. The latter is entirely a cultural and social construct. Why would you literally quote one fragment of one sentence from claudiawerner's comment just to misconstrue it entirely in rebuttal?

philwelch 6y ago
> Sex itself may be a basic psychological and physiological need I was referring to companionship rather than sex. > "the idea that one's worth is determined by having sexual partners" is not. The latter is entirely a cultural and social construct I think claudiawerner is making an extremely uncharitable assumption in the first place that the primary complaint is about ego rather than loneliness. But, even granting that point: it does not seem, to me, like a "cultural and social construct" that one's self-esteem would be affected by this type of loneliness. I find that claim self-evidently absurd, to be honest. > Why would you literally quote one fragment of one sentence from claudiawerner's comment Because that's the point that I wanted to reply to. > just to misconstrue it entirely in rebuttal? I think you are the one misconstruing my argument.
- claudiawerner 6y ago
  >I think claudiawerner is making an extremely uncharitable assumption in the first place that the primary complaint is about ego rather than loneliness. That wasn't my assumption at all. Ego is irrelevant to feelings of self-worth, which is a basic psychological need, as is togetherness. It's not self-serving the ego to want to feel like one has some worth. My point was only that the idea of a man's worth being in the number of sexual partners he has had is harmful to men overall, and places undue pressure and causes doubts about self-worth.
  - philwelch 6y ago
    > My point was only that the idea of a man's worth being in the number of sexual partners he has had is harmful to men overall.... I think you’re equivocating between two extremely different things. I would actually agree it’s not necessary or good for men to derive any self-worth from the difference between, say, 5 or 15. But it’s probably unavoidable for men to derive some degree of self-worth or self-esteem from the difference between zero and non-zero, which is the situation under discussion.
    - claudiawerner 6y ago
      >But it’s probably unavoidable for men to derive some degree of self-worth or self-esteem from the difference between zero and non-zero, which is the situation under discussion. I don't see why that's unavoidable. Humans have shown tremendous development in overcoming their (what was assumed to be insurmountable) biology and associated reponses, and of course the cultural factors which influence responses through upbringing. Perhaps we should feel empathy for those people, but I think it's a mistake to think it is immutable. Most Buddhist monks, for example, do not consider being or not being a virgin, much less having an active partner recently, to be worth of much status.