Personality Cafe banner

41 - 60 of 60 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,684 Posts
@PeterTheGreater

Not seeing each other for a long time could be a bigger problem than any chemicals.

Just because the largest amount of oxytocin is released during childbirth doesn't mean the smaller amount from sex doesn't affect them. Or at least the woman since from what I understand, men only get the effects when they see their child. So I see your point, but at the same time two mature people in a relationship can make it work without the chemical influx.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
@PeterTheGreater

Not seeing each other for a long time could be a bigger problem than any chemicals.
Having experienced long distance love so many times, through my own and my friends' stories, I feel that those who "need sex" the most are the ones to fall first.

Just because the largest amount of oxytocin is released during childbirth doesn't mean the smaller amount from sex doesn't affect them. Or at least the woman since from what I understand, men only get the effects when they see their child.
From what I remember, it isn't only a question of amount but a question of the cycle, the series of successive events that form human procreation as a whole.

Analogy: It is a bit like training a lot for a tournament by playing smaller games. You don't win the Cup if you stop playing after the drills :)


So I see your point, but at the same time two mature people in a relationship can make it work without the chemical influx.
I doubt I would have ever survived a long distance relationship if I hadn't known in advance about the dynamics it can be victim of.

Unfortunately, knowledge is not a common good, or we wouldn't have so many people perishing in the war against STDs, or even loosing love when besieged by multiple sources of stimulation...

(Often, especially at the beginning I felt more "connected" when talking to a woman here and now. It was only through training and self-focus that I learned to, say, keep my spiritual pecker in my spiritual pants :) i.e. ignore other women)
 
  • Like
Reactions: cue5c

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,684 Posts
Analogy: It is a bit like training a lot for a tournament by playing smaller games. You don't win the Cup if you stop playing after the drills
I think this could be because a difference in our enneagram type and just life experiences, but I don't think you always need to play for the cup. In fact, I've noticed the most successful relationships are the ones that don't even have the cup on their mind. They just live and then things progress naturally. It's like how @MuChApArAdOx and her husband started out as just having fun, but that turned into a 15 (?) year marriage that's still continuing. When you place expectations on something forces come to prey on your fears. It's just that when something is on your mind you notice things you normally wouldn't and that leads to painting false pictures of the situation.

Of course, everyone has their own way that works best for them. I'm glad you've discovered what you need to do because a lot of people don't ever find out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MuChApArAdOx

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts

·
MOTM Nov 2010
Joined
·
10,402 Posts
Yes, only one, although he's not literally mine. Why?

Which information sounded wrong?
You realize that many bonds break once the child is born? Couples stop being intimate, etc. Very common. Don't ever expect a child to bring you closer together. You may be obligated to each other for the rest of the child's life, but it has nothing to do with oxytocin and bonding.

Many relationships don't make it after a child is born. And even the strongest relationships will go through a major shift with the birth of a child. Couples often have to work very hard at rediscovering each other again after a child, if they make it at all. You have to work twice as hard to make your relationship with your spouse a priority after the children are born.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
I think this could be because a difference in our enneagram type and just life experiences, but I don't think you always need to play for the cup. In fact, I've noticed the most successful relationships are the ones that don't even have the cup on their mind. They just live and then things progress naturally.
Maybe the "Cup analogy" was too much of a tournament in this situation :) I didn't mean literally having "the cup" on our mind (as in having a child).

However, do consider how many aspects of all sciences describing human behavior and nature are based on competition.

I mean, do we (or any other species!) fall in love and have sex with the knowledge and conscious intention to contribute to natural selection and evolution of our species (or more specifically, of our own genes?)? Do chimpanzees meet every day and say "Hey, let's shag and in a few million years our descendants will look like those bloody humans!"?

No, they all just live and then things progress naturally :)

However, there is a pattern in human nature of wanting to outsmart nature. We built planes to travel across continents (or I wouldn't have a long distance relationship...) and we built the internet to communicate at high speed even when being thousands of miles apart (eh, again, without which I wouldn't have a long distance relationship!).

What I am trying to say is that there is also something attractive about the challenge of getting ahead of the curve even when it comes to love :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
You realize that many bonds break once the child is born? Couples stop being intimate, etc. Very common. Don't ever expect a child to bring you closer together. You may be obligated to each other for the rest of the child's life, but it has nothing to do with oxytocin and bonding.

Many relationships don't make it after a child is born. And even the strongest relationships will go through a major shift with the birth of a child. Couples often have to work very hard at rediscovering each other again after a child, if they make it at all. You have to work twice as hard to make your relationship with your spouse a priority after the children are born.
I must say that I have experienced quite the opposite and witness the opposite all around me.

This probably depends a lot also on culture and geography. I am aware that in many Western countries there is a huge attachment to pleasure and everything physical. The lack of it is perceived as lack of love and lack of everything, which leads people to looking for greener grass (or at least CRAVING for it!).

I understand that with many of the self-centric ideas (not egoistic, but all ideas of putting one's own well-being before others') which have come into being, it can be perceived as hard work indeed.

Honestly, though, I have rarely seen what you talk about with my own eyes, except on TV shows and in celebrity news, perhaps.

I also think there is a fine line between what you call obligation and what I view as love earned the hard way, through dedication, commitment and discipline. For me, that is a greater love than that which "comes naturally".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,684 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,060 Posts
And what is the reason for this?

If I'm understanding your question correctly, the reason birth rates aren't 100% is (and I'll go more into in your next bit) because we don't know when a female is fertile. If we're having sex all the time and the woman's only fertile for 1/3rd of the month, that means there's approximately a 30% birth rate per time having sex--if it's that high, even.

Not sure what exactly you mean by suggesting that we don't have any signals...

The bonobo example is a good and entertaining one. A particular species of bonobo signals its fertility when the female's vagina swells to epic proportions. When the male is ready to mate, he puts on a mating display where his penis enlarges and turns bright red. We don't have anything like that whatsoever.

Well, is that is the only reason, biologically speaking?

Not nearly. We're K-selected, meaning we don't have many young at one time. Our kids are absolutely stupid for the first few years of their lives. It's difficult to reliably reproduce. We were hunter-gatherers. The list goes on.

What about the evolution of cultural transmission and more complex education in our species (i.e. greater neural conformity)?
And all that makes part of our transition from survival of the fittest to survival of the smartest?

In this case, "smartest" and "fittest" are the same exact thing. We are "fit" to survive because our intelligence has allowed us to gather food and survive to reproduce. Your last point, it seems, is irrelevant as it's a misunderstanding and misapplication of Darwin's unfortunately-phrased term.
Bold.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,174 Posts
For a woman, sex is letting someone enter her. It's a very intimidating concept, but with the right person it's a beautiful showcase of trust and compassion. I'm not saying that women are the only people who get nervous, just a thought on why you weren't.
no i understand and appreciate that. i was speaking more in terms of the pedestal in which i would watch my friends regard it, boys will be boys. i'm not going to pretend i didn't think about it from time to time, but i knew when i'd be ready and it was never more than that for me.

nice sentiment
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,998 Posts
Lol at most of the beginning answers in 2012.

Some people gotta get off their high horses cause that was an irritating read.

To answer the question, I haven't biologically lost my virginity in that I've never had a successful penetration. Everything else was fair game though.
I lost everything else by experimenting with random guys I've "dated" out of curiosity. It was pretty bad and it sucks because my sexual drive is high yet unfulfilled.

I've learned many things through it though. I've realized I cannot do casual hookups because I literally cannot be turned on by anyone unless I'm emotionally and mentally connected to that person.
They have to physically attract me and turn me on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,190 Posts
I believe it was in the moment for me I was a month shy from turning 20 - I was with my husband ( bf at the time ) for about 8 months , he was the first person that I felt sexually attracted to - we connected mentally and I was really turned on by him- however at the same moment , I felt safe around him - it’s definitely body impulses and chemistry on my part more so than love itself when i retrace my thought back to the day that I lost my virginity to my partner
 
  • Like
Reactions: NaughyChimp

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,567 Posts
I'm kinda surprised so many people back in the 2012 PerC were "no sex until marriage" on here. Feels like that culture here has changed? Strange to remember how particular a circle of ENFPs you find on here is.

Sex wasn't a big deal to me, just a natural extension of intimacy. As someone who didn't have a "heterosexual" teenage experience people would assume I didn't lose it till I was 19. But I consider it happened when I was 14, with a 14-year-old fortunately... Sad to see so many predatory first times in this thread too. And yeah... I waited till love... I just found it fast. :p
 
41 - 60 of 60 Posts
Top