Hacker News Search

volkk 6y ago

> I don't disagree with that statement at all. But I stand by my assertion that no one is obligated to sexually satisfy anyone else. i would argue that no one is obligated to do anything at all thanks to free will. culturally, societally, or otherwise, well--that's a different story

rapferreira 6y ago
>i would argue that no one is obligated to do anything at all thanks to free will. Ah, sure they are. By the nature of events which preceded you and produced both your DNA and all entirely external circumstances, you are obligated to carry out your free agency in exactly the way you do.
loco5niner 6y ago
Yes, but free will gives you the right to enter into agreements/contracts, which if you later refuse to honor, you are then forsaking an obligation.

dTal 6y ago

It doesn't sound as if you recognize the concept of an obligation at all. Yes, we all have agency. Locking someone in a room without their consent is illegal. Taking someone's money without their consent is illegal as well. But I am nevertheless obliged to remain at work until 5:30, and my boss is obliged to pay me. When we enter into relationships of any type with other people, we willingly sacrifice our agency in myriad ways. Sometimes you have to meet people halfway on things. And sex isn't some super special thing that sits untouchably above all the rest of social interaction - it's just one more thing that, invariably and in many ways, you will have to compromise on. >going on about how your spouse is obliged to pleasure you certainly isn't going to improve things. Going on about consent isn't either.

Thorentis 6y ago
Yeah, the parent seems to think that expecting sex after entering a monogamous relationship is almost rape. People are so concerned with infringing on other people's "rights" and obtaining conscent for everything under the sun, that they just can't understand the idea of obligations or responsibilities anymore. Marriage is a huge responsibility. Entering into it means you agree to the responsibilities it carries. Each person should be well aware of these responsibilities before entering into one. If your partner is in the mood for sex but you aren't on a regular basis, maybe a little bit of self sacrifice is needed. I'm sure the other person has helped them out doing their chores when they weren't feeling like it, or going out of their way for them in some way. Marriage is all about each person trying to give more to it than the other. I don't know why sex I suddenly a taboo topic when it comes to rights and responsibilities.
- mennis16 6y ago
  I've seen plenty of cleaning-averse husbands hire a maid to solve chore-related relationship problems. Hell, the maid does a better job, so everyone is happier. This is not really an option for a mismatched libido, so the situation is trickier. Especially as libidos can change differently with age, a couple can't entirely know what they are getting into. Put another way, both withholding sex and insisting on monogamy simultaneously is a shitty thing to do IMO, so I sort of agree with you. But it is also tough for me to judge someone too much for doing so in a culture where anything but strict monogamy is taboo. For a concrete example, let's say a woman feels nauseous from the smell of cooking while she is pregnant. I do not think it is the duty of that woman to soldier through it and continue to cook. But in this situation the partner can obtain food from anywhere else that is willing to serve. If the partner instead was only able to eat food that one of them had cooked, it would be tougher on the relationship for the woman to not cook at all for 9 months straight. So yeah compromise and sacrifice are part of a relationship, and I don't think sex should be excluded from that. But at the same time it is unrealistic to reach a good solution with mismatched libidos, because even a perfect compromise can leave both parties dissatisfied/uncomfortable. Is the solution to just end the relationship? If it is otherwise a good one I don't think so, but strict monogamy makes this a harder call. More generally I think people are looking for too much in a single package. To find someone that would be compatible with you over nearly your entire lifetime as a housemate, a co-parent, a friend, a financial partner, etc. all rolled into one is hard enough. When you start prioritizing sexual compatibility in this choice, good luck not having to compromise on other features. But if sex wasn't seen as exclusive it wouldn't need to be considered to the same extent in choosing a life partner.
  - Thorentis 6y ago
    You're basically arguing against monogamy though. My comment assumes a monogamous relationship, and that both people went into it knowing it was monogamous and being okay with that. Seeking sex elsewhere in a monogamous relationship... Isn't monogamous.
nobody9999 6y ago
You misunderstand my point. I've explained myself several times and yet you still don't seem to get it. I suppose that may be poor communication on my part. If so, you have my apologies. However, I'm not going to continue repeating myself. Good day, sir.
nobody9999 6y ago
>It doesn't sound as if you recognize the concept of an obligation at all. Oh, I understand obligation very well. I also understand relationships and communication too. Despite the obligation you have to your employer/job, it's inappropriate for your boss to have you lick the dog shit he just stepped in off his shoes (okay, I guess if that's your job it may not be -- but that's pretty unlikely). And it's just as inappropriate for you to demand that your partner, presumably someone you love and cherish, engage in acts they don't wish to engage in. Especially if you force the issue. I'll go even farther and say that, for me, as a Dominant[0] who is both sadistic and cruel, I never engage in non-consensual activities with my partner (of seven years). What's more, I don't guilt her or make her feel bad or so she'll do what I want. Quite the contrary. I support and uplift her, so she can be the best person she can be. Even in a relationship with an unequal power dynamic, consent is not optional. And yes, sometimes she does things she wouldn't choose to do in order to please me. That said, even though I (through mutual consent) quite literally control her sexual life, I would never violate her limits or engage in anything non-consensual -- because I care about her and won't put her in a position where she feels she has no choice or is obligated to do anything. In fact, if I thought that she felt that way, I'd immediately back off because her trust in, and respect for, me is way too important to our relationship. And so this idea of "well, we're in an exclusive relationship, so you have to have sex with me even if you don't want to" rings really hollow. Besides, if you're having sex with someone who really isn't into it, that's more masturbatory and selfish than it is an act of love. And in that case, I'd rather go and stroke one out than make the person I'm supposed to be in love with do things she's not up for doing. [0] https://www.kinkly.com/definition/19/dominant-dom https://www.kinkly.com/definition/19/dominant-dom

Thorentis 6y ago

> However she, as a sentient being, has agency. As such, she (not me) gets to decide what happens with her body. You're confusing the idea of removing the other person's free will and the obligations that being in a sexual monogamous relationship carry. In a monogamous sexual relationship, if one person refuses to have sex much more frequently than the other, then that can very quickly destroy the relationship. Humans are sexual beings, and being in a monogamous relationship means you have only one outlet for that sexuality available to you. Instead of sex, consider conversation. How long would a relationship last of one person started refusing to talk to the other person, at moments seemingly for no reason to the other person? How long would that last? If I said that being in a relationship obligates you to communicate with the other person, would you object on the basis of removing the other person's agency by placing such an obligatiom on them? Sex should never be forced. But entering into any relationship carries with it rights and responsibilities. If you are refusing sex for no good reason, then it is a sign that you no longer wish to meet the obligations of a monogamous relationship. The two people can either break up, or try to work through things. But such an arrangement can't be endured forever.

nobody9999 6y ago
>You're confusing the idea of removing the other person's free will and the obligations that being in a sexual monogamous relationship carry. I don't believe that I am. I agree with just about everything you wrote. Where we diverge is that I do not agree that anyone, regardless of relationship status is obliged or required to engage in sexual activity to which they do not consent. >In a monogamous sexual relationship, if one person refuses to have sex much more frequently than the other, then that can very quickly destroy the relationship. Humans are sexual beings, and being in a monogamous relationship means you have only one outlet for that sexuality available to you. That is absolutely correct. That said, just because two people are in a monogamous sexual relationship, that does not mean consent for sexual activity isn't required. If one partner is unwilling or unable to consent, whether at the frequency the other partner desires or at all, that's going cause stress in the relationship. And if that continues, it's likely that the relationship will fail. The question then is why doesn't this person wish to consent, given that they are in a romantic/sexual relationship? In order to avoid that eventuality, the people involved need to communicate and work out how to maintain the relationship together. If that's not possible, then the relationship should probably end, as you correctly point out. My points are simple and two-fold: 1. Consent for sexual activity, regardless of the nature of a relationship is never optional; 2. No one is, or should be, obligated or required to engage in sexual activity if they don't wish to do so. Sure, there are times when folks may not be feeling particularly frisky, but in a healthy relationship that shouldn't be a big deal. What's more, in a healthy relationship, the partners desire each other. In fact, there are few things in this world that are hotter than being desired. And if there is a genuine disconnect in the level of desire, that needs to be worked out through strong, open communication, honesty and the hard work that's required to maintain any relationship. However, in an unhealthy relationship (there can be many reasons for those, as Tolstoy opined[0]), it may not be possible to work these things out. This may cause discomfort, hurt and pain for those involved. It may be possible to make such a relationship healthy, but expecting that someone who, for whatever reason, is unwilling to consent to sexual activity should engage in such activity because they are obliged to do so due to the nature of the relationship is being abusive. To be clear: Yes, people in romantic/sexual relationships, including monogamous/exclusive relationships generally do engage in sexual activity. In fact, that's one of the wonderful things about such relationships and I'm all for it! And when there is an issue surrounding sexual activity (or anything else for that matter), it's important to communicate clearly and honestly with each other and make the effort to work through such issue(s). I'm all for that too! IMHO, clear, honest communication is the most important thing to maintaining a healthy, happy relationship. All that said, please review these points one more time: 1. Consent for sexual activity, regardless of the nature of a relationship is never optional; 2. No one is, or should be, obligated or required to engage in sexual activity if they don't wish to do so. And explain to me how they are inappropriate in the context of any relationship, including exclusive, monogamous ones. I'd be very interested to read your thoughts. [0] https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/7142-all-happy-families-are-alike-each-unhappy-family-is-unhappy https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/7142-all-happy-families-are...

I get it - the act of staying away from your phone is taking up cognitive capacity. And if you're addicted, the constant reminder to check also takes cognitive

I get it - the act of staying away from your phone is taking up cognitive capacity. And if you're addicted, the constant reminder to check also takes cognitive