
There is a sense of the pressured – the expected, by the industries that be – to give it up – to sleep with an individual because there is fooling around so it would be rude to take an assumed experience away from them.
Remove expectation.
The lack of the current system’s ability to live in the moment is ½ of the problem of expecting an individual to give it up.
In intimacy, there should be no further expectation than the reality of the present: which means: if two people aren’t actively having sex there should be no expectation of sex. There can be a hope, a want, a desire for sex, but there can never be an expectation.
The issue of an expectation of intercourse, the emotional domination of one person over the other, is a conscious and subconscious matter – it isn’t often explicit, however if, let’s say, two people are making out, things get to fondling each but then there’s a reach for the pants and the word, the intention of no is communicated and then advancer withdrawals completely, stating, “I don’t want you to be uncomfortable” – showing signs of immature behavior and repeating textbook lines without showing any signs of genuine emotion – while the non-advancer has stated, “No I’m not uncomfortable I want to keep doing what we’re doing” – well….that interaction isn’t Soy Repention, that is the maneuvering of power.
The total self withdrawal is a statement from the advancing party that intimacy is to only happen on their terms which is that intimacy is only to happen if the non-advancer gives the advancer sex because actual intimacy isn’t enough to satisfy the advancer wants.
It would be easy to pinpoint the major points of contention throughout the history of this issue in all societies since the beginning of mankind on any sort of graph or chart or whatever, but the present is the focal point.
The conscious and subconscious sexual expectations of certain parties have led to a major mass avoidance of any sort of casual intimacy; because with casual intimacy often comes the expectation of casual sex.
Notice how the word “man” or “men” hasn’t been mentioned – any type of person is able to leverage intimacy for sex.
There is 1. The affector and 2. The affected.
The outdated model which most regions see most often is 1. The affector being a man and 2. The affected being a woman agreeing to give it up because she has made the choice to be intimate with a man and has therefore accepted her fate of being fucked.
The objective is to present the correct model of 1. The affector and 2. The affected.
The Affector/Affected Model
- The affector: someone who is openly intimate with multiple partners on their terms – their terms being expressing intimacy without inherent expectation of sex
- The affected: someone who receives and engages with the intimacy without the inherent expectation of sex
~final notes~
- It’s no secret that some people are very sensitive to being turned down for sex. On a personal level, I have been negatively surprised multiple times over in the past to find that people who I thought I knew to have a solid character, who wanted to be intimate with me, who I thought were real, were so dejected by my choice to not fuck that they completely withdrawal from all intimacy entirely due to their perception of the expectation past the present.
- Refusing the advancement of intimacy to sex is a litmus test: if the individual responds negatively to the refusal, then the entire connection is null, it’s useless.
- Never should there be an apology or residual guilt from 1. the non-advancer about not wanting to have sex. Never should there be passiveness or aggression from 2. about the interaction not advancing to sex.
- Consider the sexual anthropology of the individual experience without engaging in emotional masturbation.
- What happened to 1900/1800 style sweetheart style relationships? What happened to casual intimacy (nonsexual and sexual) – what happened to real relationships?
- Open intimacy has its downfalls, leading to dynamics like – a single sided advantaged noncommittal relationship where there is intimacy between two parties but only one side of the party has multiple intimate relationships with others and the the second side of the party is only intimate with the one side of the party; leveraging of intimacy for connection, which is a manipulation. Open intimacy encouragement between party one and party two is essential.
- None of this is easily condensible.
