The article is too hard to analyze in terms of actionable advice, so to speak---too many factors that confound analysis of the author's position---but these com

The article is too hard to analyze in terms of actionable advice, so to speak---too many factors that confound analysis of the author's position---but these comments are fascinating. It seems that to many people, sex is just a way to pleasure themselves, or just a status symbol. And if their partners are fine with that, then by all means they should indulge. Some other people, though, don't want to use other people just to pleasure themselves without intending to commit to anything greater. And if their partners are fine with that, then by all means they should refrain. This view of, indeed fixation with, sex---as a "coming of age," as a way to preen socially, as a tool for pleasure---relegates to a position at most secondary the value of a genuine and meaningful relationship. Ultimately, though, it's a matter of priorities: people should choose what they value. Logically and from experience, many people who have casual sex with people who are fine with having casual sex end up in casual relationships. And in a similar vein, I happen to know a lot of women---and men---who would be extremely reluctant to enter into a relationship with anyone who slept around casually, and would much rather be with someone who waited until they already had a meaningful relationship. As someone mentioned, after all, if a meaningful relationship founded on more than desire for pleasure (which focuses on the self) or even lust (which does include the other person) exists, surprise surprise: a natural desire for sex will probably follow. And probably the sex will be longer and better.