Conference quark::human_relations-v1

    Is the average intelligent human being more likely to die from AIDS
    than any other danger of the modern world(i.e. industrial accidents,
    war, commuter traffic, violent crime, etc.)?  If so then I suggest
    Joe and Jane Average extend more of their intelligence in this area
    to balance the problem.  But either way it should be a personal
    decission and not one our government makes for us.  Unfortunately,
    the government controls most of the funding at this point but perhaps
    that too will change.
    
    -Max-
    

Abstinence from sex needn't be "repression".  My own experience has
been that as I realize the benefits of really getting to know someone before
becoming sexual (rather than both saying "let's go slow and be friends first"
and proceed to be sexual within a few weeks anyway), I find that the abstinence
starts to feel fulfilling and spiritual rather than "repressive".  However,
I must admit I couldn't have come to this conclusion on my own.  My 12-step
meetings have certainly helped.

/Eric

I think that some of us are celibate because the other options get
less and less attractive as we become more observant and less likely
to fall prey to our hormones immediatly upon seeing the object of
current desire.  I, for one, noticed that the men I knew were getting
more hostile to me and other women they worked with as we began to
gain more equity on the job - pay, promotions, attention to our ideas.
It became more and more difficult to meet men who were not angry all
the time - and I just wasn't interested in the thinly-veiled cutting
remarks.  As I cannot stand cigarette smoke, and I'm not religeous,
that ruled out bars and church as meeting places - so, I started
working at living my life to the fullest WITHOUT a man - I visit
with friends, have dinner parties and barbecues when I want to,
I go to the theatre and I go to dinner at nice restaurants.  I do
all the things I used to do with my SO, but I do it with other
women who have, like me, "retired" from the arena and decided to
have a life - regardless of how the men feel about us.  I don't
listen to insults about my looks, my dress, my work, my hair, or my
opinions - nor do I have some man treating me like I'm just a little
stupid, but with his help, I'll get on just fine.....and
when I do want the companionship of the other gender, I have friends
who are willing to join me for lunch and a few good laughs.  I love
them because they are my friends - and it is much easier to love
them when I don't know how they treat their SO's.....

Speaking with the expertise of one who knows nothing about celibacy,
it seems to me that it's much like throwing away the baby with the
washwater. 

In other words, if I suffered from tennis elbow, I wouldn't have my
arm amputated. If incidence of traffic accidents increased, I
wouldn't blow up my car. And, even though houses do catch fires, I 
haven't decided to become homeless.

-- Ron

	  It seems to me that .5 is coming at the question with a unique
     perspective.  I don't believe that anyone has advocated celibacy
     through amputation of any particular part of the body, or of otherwise
     destroying the ability to have sex.  Celibacy is a decision not to
     exercise one's capability of having sex, not discarding the capability
     itself.

	  I don't believe the decision to be celibate is like amputating
     one's arm because one suffers from tennis elbow.  I suspect it's more
     like deciding not to play tennis right now because one, for whatever
     reason, doesn't _want_ to play tennis right now.

	  It may be that someone whose life revolves around tennis would
     not understand one's not wanting to play tennis right now.  But I
     don't think that's a problem -- or, if it is, the person not wanting
     to play tennis right now doesn't own it.

				      Brian

    Hmmm actually Brian I think it's more a case of One doesn't want to 
    play tennis on accounta it HURTS to play tennis.
    
    However, .5 brings up some interesting points.  
    
    But the final outcome is simple... there is going to have to be 'safe
    sexual practices' if one is to remain sexually active.  
                                             
    Yup... not only will you have to wear the "ol' rubber rain coat" but 
    they are going to have to be made more effective, stronger, and perhaps 
    even more desensitising then they are now.  I mean, face it folks, the 
    biggest reason a man doesn't want to use the condum is not so much the 
    hassle of putting it on once in the middle of the sexual act/foreplay 
    so much as the fact that they cut down the sensitivity and feeling 
    generated by the act itself.  
    
    Yet, to date, it is the ONLY method other then celibacy that has any 
    chance of protecting a person from being infected with AIDS.
    
    So what do you do?  Double up on them is a possibility.  Two are safer 
    then one.  
    
    Have a sexual partner agree to testing... AND STAY with that person 
    provided they test out okay.  This is fine although it's still a 
    'taboo' subject when you have a sexual desire to be with someone.
    You don't say, "Oh by the way, have you been tested for aids lately 
    and have you had any sexual contact with someone since then? Used any 
    shared needles? Done any of the things that are capable of transmitting 
    AIDS?"
    
    So what's going to happen?  I can see 'social clubs' developing wherein
    you have to sign a contract agreeing to have sex ONLY with membeers in 
    that club.  Members must submit documented proof of being AIDS free.
    Charges of attempted murder to be brought up on anyone who 'fools
    around' outside the club.
    
    So you go to a bar, meet the woman of your wildest sexual fantasy and 
    have to have her fill out an application for memebership within your 
    club....
    
    "Wow, you're the perfect woman for me, sign here and bring in your 
    medical certificate and if everything goes right, we can have sex 
    in two weeks!"
    
    So much for the wildest... now, in truth, I think that the biggest 
    problem with 'sexual freedom' is that people have stopped getting 
    to know each other beyond capatability in bed.  Relationships fail
    on a regular basis anymore, including marriage simply because the 
    term 'love' has come to mean 'sexual desirablity' and nothing more,
    no one takes the time to learn about the other person anymore before 
    hoping off to bed.  Courtship is a thing of the past.  And I think 
    you're going to find that the values of 'sexual freedom' are going to 
    go the way of so many other 'great ideas' from the 60's and 70's.
    Not because we necessarily want or don't want them to change. But 
    because we are going to have to learn to trust the sexual partner
    before doing anything with them.  And THAT is going to mean that we 
    take a little time and actually get to know each other!!!!!
    
    Now THAT'S a noval concept isn't it?  But, I'll make a wager here 
    and now that has you see the moral changes that are going to happen
    in these areas, you will also find a significant change in the divorce
    rates, and the changes in relationships.  You won't be hearing the old
    line of 'Oh she/he is a good lay, but I wound't want to get invovled in 
    a relationship with them.'
    
    Commitment to a person which had become a thing of the past, is
    suddenly becomming more and more fashionable... not because of any 
    necessary moral desires in folks so much as a matter of life and death.
    After all the less you know about the person you take to bed, the more 
    chances you'll be taking on dying.
    
    Remember the old days when sex wasn't a matter of life and death?
    
    FWIW.
    
    Skip

Re: .7,

>    But the final outcome is simple... there is going to have to
>    be 'safe sexual practices' if one is to remain sexually active.

I agree. And the only safe (not 'safer', but 'safe') sex I can think
of, is with a truly faithful partner, in a truly monogamous
relationship. 

Due to other (non-sex related and entirely personal) preferences, 
some people would opt for this, anyway. 

I realize that for many others, this could be an unattainable goal.
After all, finding such a partner is no mean feat. To others, the
idea of monogamy may not be as attractive as all that. Nonetheless,
I find it difficult to accept that ANYONE would prefer celibacy to
monogamy. 

                                             
>    Remember the old days when sex wasn't a matter of life and death?

I thought the expression went like this: "Remember the good old days, 
when the air was clean and sex was dirty?"  :-).

-- Ron

re .7,.8

The expression is (I've seen it on a t-shirt)

"I remember when sex was safe and skydiving was dangerous."

    	I hear of folks talking about "safe sex", but in reality the only
    safe sex *is* celibacy.  Using protection or sticking with one partner
    is simply "safer sex" (protection sometimes breaks, partners are
    sometimes unfaithful).  As I've heard lately, "No one has ever died
    from NOT having it."


    	And as pointed out by .3, it has its advantages.  I've noted myself
    in the past that people I've seen when the hormones are raging become
    *much* less attractive when I got to know them better.  To those who
    say I can't understand why someone might choose celibacy, I say I can't
    understand why you wouldn't consider it in this day and age.


    	Also like .3, I'm enjoying my life to the fullest regardless of
    whether or not I'm seeing someone.  I'm a really happy person having a
    great time for as long as I'm on this ride, and the fact that I don't
    happen to be seeing someone does NOT make me unhappy.  Of course, I
    have a good circle of friends, some women among them, that I can do
    things with.  And I've gotten to the point where I can give/recieve
    hugs with those female friends freely, which is a nice substitute for
    the time being (naturally, I wouldn't stop this even if I started
    seeing someone though!).


    	Until I meet the type of person I'm looking for, I'd rather be
    single and happy than "involved" and unhappy.


    Brian

    re .10, how do you know no one has ever died from not having it? 
    Not having it has probably never been the sole reason for someone's
    death, but I bet it's played a part in some.  People have committed
    suicide from loneliness and being heartbroken, and I think "having it"
    is part of that, certainly not all, but part.
    
    As far as choosing celibacy out of fear of AIDS, I guess I can't really
    understand it.  I think that the chances of a condom breaking, and that
    person having AIDS, to be very slim, and when I weigh these chances
    against a lifetime of celibacy, the risk seems worth it.  I'm talking
    only about the risk of sex with men using condoms, NOT the risk of sex
    with men not using condoms. That doesn't seem worth it.
    
    Lorna
    

    re .10, you say that people you've met "when the hormones are raging"
    seem much less attractive when you get to know them better.  I'll go
    further than that and say that I think everyone becomes less attractive
    when I get to know them better, regardless of how soon or if or when we
    have sex!  :-)  Ha!  It may take 12 hrs. or 12 yrs., but sooner or
    later, everyone becomes less attractive.  :-)
    
    Lorna
    

re: the possibility of people dying if they don't "get it"

in the first place, I think our societies have become slaves to the media
image of what human relationships must be, or can be.  There are many
very comfortable, and comforting levels of love which may exist between
humans....and ALMOST ALL of them do not encompass sexual behavior.  Sadly,
we seem to have evolved into creatures who have little to do with one another
BUT have sex - and that, in my opinion, leaves a barren and lonely space
in one's soul.  I know that I can, and do, love several people very much.
They brighten my day when I see them...they lighten my stress when I hear
their voice on the phone.  I just don't have sex with them.  

I believe that a human being who cannot, or is not allowed to, love will
soon die from the pain of isolation...however, I know that someone who
feels love for others can have a full and varied life, regardless of his/her
sexual activity or lack thereof.  Love doesn't have anything to do with
sex.  On the other hand, sex CAN be a natural response to love between
two individuals - but it certainly isn't necessary ..... nor is love
a prerequisite for sex, as we all know.

    re .14, I'm aware that we can love people we don't have, or even want
    to have sex with.  I love my daughter more than I love anyone else, and
    I certainly don't want to have sex with her.  But, I think that there
    is a need in most humans for romantic love, and, I think to most people
    sex is an important part of romantic love.  
    
    Lorna
    

    I don't know about sex being a part of romantic love, however, touching 
    is.  And touching can and often does lead on to sex.  Further there is 
    a lot to be siad for sex when it's done with someone you love.  It
    becomes more then just 'sex' it becomes a part of and expression for 
    the love you share.  There are varied types of love, and becuase you 
    have one type (i.e. the people you talk with that brighten your day)
    doesn't mean that another type (the type were you are intiment and
    share a sexual experience with someone you care about) is wrong, or
    should be forgotten because of AIDS.  
    
    Personnally from my view point.  People in general seem to be taking 
    one of two extremes with AIDS anymore... 
    
    1) Celibacy is the only solution.
    
    2) I'm gonna die one day anyhow so why worry about it at all?
    
    
    Lorna brought up some good points about men and condoms.  The odds of 
    a condom breaking and allow infection with a person who has aids is so 
    slight, that if you were to make a study of the people who have
    actually gotten AIDS that way, I think you'd be surprised to find that 
    at MOST there would only be one or two.  
    
    Now if it's a real fear, you CAN double up a condom.  Will do even MORE 
    then cut the chances in half.  Because even if one does break, even if 
    BOTH break, the odds of the infection working through the two breaks 
    are also slight.
    
    THere ARE things that can be done.  And it;s just a matter of
    practicing them.  BUT there's something else.  We should all be 
    concerned about aids.  Yes, it's a dreadful dieseas and yes it's a
    killer.  But, when you start taking one or the other extreme... you're
    not worried about the dieseas so much as you are obsessed with it.
    
    And Obession is not healthy.
    
    Skip

Please do not print, forward, or otherwise extract this note without my
permission.  Thanks.  /Eric

For me, the choice of celibacy is certainly not a permanent choice.
It's a year committment that started in Feb. (1992).

The motivation to "take a year off" was prompted by my involvement in the
12-step program called "Sex and Love Addicts Anonymous (SLAA)".  Many people
in there take time off from sex and romantic involvements for a variety of
reasons.  My reasons are something like this:

o	I've had 20 years of relationships that didn't work, usually because
	when we started to get "serious" or "steady", I started feeling
	disinterested, or scared, or more attracted to someone else.

o	I often had a fear of my eventual death (never being here ever again,
	yikes!) and I suspected I was using sex, romance, and masturbation to
	escape this fear.

o	It started to seem like perhaps I was using sex and romance as an
	escape from my feelings, and an escape from my fears and memories
	of my childhood.  So it was sort of like I was using sex as a drug.

So, my purpose in taking a year of celibacy is to explore:

o	What feelings or fears can I become aware of that I used to think were
	merely "horniness" but were actually a craving for sex or romance
	to cover up the feelings or fears ?

In SLAA, we talk about "bottom line" behavior.  That's whatever behavior we
each personally commit to not engaging in.  For some people, it's behavior
they have decided they *never* want to return to because they acknowledge it's
not what they ever really want.  For those people, these behaviors might
include:  anonymous sex in rest areas, voyeurism, exhibitionism, violence,
pornography, prostitution.

For others, the behaviors are more temporary things that we personally give up
for now, but we may choose to resume them later when we feel spiritually
and emotionally ready, such as sex, masturbation, romance, dating.  Personally,
my bottom line is simply no romantic involvements, no sex, no masturbation.
When Feb. 1993 comes around, I'll reconsider.  The SLAA meetings are a place
where we get support in making and keeping our committments.  The meetings
are also a place where we can safely talk about our fears, experiences and hopes
and find out "we're not alone".  It's been a wonderful resource for me.  Feel
free to write if you want more info (is there an SLAA topic in this conference
yet ?).

/Eric

p.s.	Again, please do not print, forward, or otherwise extract this
	note without my permission.  Thanks.

although a reasonable respect and reasonable precautions are needed when
dealing with any STD, especially AIDS and other incurable STD's, I did not
opt for celibacy because of fear of disease.

Each person must choose what is important to himself/herself, and what
price we are willing to pay to get it.  In my case, the assessment of
what was happening in the relationships I had was that they were not
good for ME...I come from a seriously disfunctional family - one where
physical violence and fear are the parameters which define my childhood...
although, I've had many years of counseling, there was significant
damage - and some of it may never be completely healed.  I am tired of
trying to establish relationships in which my partner understands what
has happened and can DEAL with it...when, in my experience, that is not
true.  In my experience, the person who has been exposed to severe 
physical abuse which did NOT include sexual assault has a very hard time
getting through to people that there is lasting damage from THIS too.
I just stopped trying - and, while I don't have romantic love, I also
don't have lots of the OTHER aspects of man/woman relationships in this
day and age which I don't find attractive....and I am not, at this point,
sorry that I'm not in any relationships.  If I ever get sorry, maybe I'll
look to change it - but, at 45, the window of any significant opportunity
is much smaller than for the younger folks in the world...so, the odds are
I WON'T have another relationship in which sex is an active issue.  So be
it.  I have a surprisingly satisfying life going here...I didn't plan it
this way, consciously, but I have it - and it ain't that bad.

In conclusion, there are as many reasons to not have a sexual relationship
as there are people who aren't having one...however, I seriously doubt
many are not having sex due to fear of AIDS.  If they are, they should
seek some counseling to bring their fears into perspective....you can
protect yourself from STD's by simply practicing adult, sane, responsible
sexual behavior.  If you choose celibacy for awhile in order to get your
head together about yourself or your relationships to others, don't let
anyone push you into what you aren't ready for....

	there are no hard and fast rules about this stuff, you know....
		we are all winging it out here..

    	And now for something completely different....


    	Re:  .11


>    re .10, how do you know no one has ever died from not having it? 
>    Not having it has probably never been the sole reason for someone's
>    death, but I bet it's played a part in some.  People have committed
>    suicide from loneliness and being heartbroken, and I think "having it"
>    is part of that, certainly not all, but part.


    	No, I can't see that actually.  If someone doesn't have sex, they
    will NOT experience physical symptoms of some sort which will
    eventually kill them.  If someone kills themself or gives up living
    because of that lack, that is a *conscious* choice on their part and
    has nothing to do with the physical lack of sex.  It show they have
    mental/emotional issues which need addressing.

        
>    As far as choosing celibacy out of fear of AIDS, I guess I can't really
>    understand it.  I think that the chances of a condom breaking, and that
>    person having AIDS, to be very slim, and when I weigh these chances
>    against a lifetime of celibacy, the risk seems worth it.  I'm talking
>    only about the risk of sex with men using condoms, NOT the risk of sex
>    with men not using condoms. That doesn't seem worth it.
    

    	I wasn't very specific when I used that term, and that's my fault.
    I never said I was in training to be a monk!  I never used any length
    of time at all.  I'm not talking about never getting married, and never
    having sex again.  I'm talking about choosing to not have sex until
    such time as I meet someone I really like and have spent a fair amount
    of time (and that time period seems to be growing all the time) getting
    to know her.


    	One thing that might be helpful is to define celibacy.  I have
    always taken it, and have seen it used, as referring to someone who
    chooses not to have sex.  The actual dictionary term says nothing about
    sex but instead refers to someone who chooses not to get married,
    especially due to religious vows.  Of course, when the term was
    originally coined the two were pretty much synonymous.


    	One final thing:  I still stand beside my statement that the ONLY
    SAFE SEX *is* to not have it at all.


    	Re:  .12


>    re .10, you say that people you've met "when the hormones are raging"
>    seem much less attractive when you get to know them better.  I'll go
>    further than that and say that I think everyone becomes less attractive
>    when I get to know them better, regardless of how soon or if or when we
>    have sex!  :-)  Ha!  It may take 12 hrs. or 12 yrs., but sooner or
>    later, everyone becomes less attractive.  :-)
    


    	Actually, I have had the opposite happen:  I've met someone, and as
    I've gotten to know them they've become more and more attractive.
    True, eventually you'll find something about them which is less than
    ideal (most likely more than one thing!), but that doesn't necessarily
    need to detract from their overall beauty.

    
	Re:  .14


>in the first place, I think our societies have become slaves to the media
>image of what human relationships must be, or can be.  There are many
>very comfortable, and comforting levels of love which may exist between
>humans....and ALMOST ALL of them do not encompass sexual behavior.  Sadly,
>we seem to have evolved into creatures who have little to do with one another
>BUT have sex - and that, in my opinion, leaves a barren and lonely space
>in one's soul.  I know that I can, and do, love several people very much.
>They brighten my day when I see them...they lighten my stress when I hear
>their voice on the phone.  I just don't have sex with them.  


    	Exactly; well said.


    	Re:  .15


>    re .14, I'm aware that we can love people we don't have, or even want
>    to have sex with.  I love my daughter more than I love anyone else, and
>    I certainly don't want to have sex with her.  But, I think that there
>    is a need in most humans for romantic love, and, I think to most people
>    sex is an important part of romantic love.  
    

    	Loving one's daughter is a totally different animal.  It is
    possible to love a friend in a very special way without ever needing or
    wanting sex.


    	Re:  .16


>    1) Celibacy is the only solution.


    	I don't think I ever said it's the *only* solution, merely the
    *safest*.


>    Lorna brought up some good points about men and condoms.  The odds of 
>    a condom breaking and allow infection with a person who has aids is so 
>    slight, that if you were to make a study of the people who have
>    actually gotten AIDS that way, I think you'd be surprised to find that 
>    at MOST there would only be one or two.  


    	This is naught but wild conjecture, and dangerous at that.

    
>    THere ARE things that can be done.  And it;s just a matter of
>    practicing them.  BUT there's something else.  We should all be 
>    concerned about aids.  Yes, it's a dreadful dieseas and yes it's a
>    killer.  But, when you start taking one or the other extreme... you're
>    not worried about the dieseas so much as you are obsessed with it.
    
>    And Obession is not healthy.
    

    	I'm not obsessed with AIDS, I'm scared of it.  And fear *is*
    healthy, it's one of the things that's kept us alive for all these
    centuries (the other main thing is our brain and ability to reason and
    control that fear to be used constructively).


    	I've seen some shows recently on the subject where doctors say that
    having sex in this day and age is like roullette.  Using condoms is
    simply taking a few of the bullets out of the chamber -- you've
    increased your chances of surviving, but risk is still there.  It takes
    more than condoms to survive long-term.


    Brian

    re .19, Brian, I also realize that it is possible to love very special
    friends, and have no desire to have sex with them.  Some of my closest
    friends have been men that I love but have no desire to have sex with,
    but the problem is that *they* always want to have sex with me!
    
    One of the things that I think is strange, because I see it
    differently, I guess, is that there are people who have all sorts of
    reasons for not wanting to have sex with other people.  To me, the only
    real reason to not have sex with someone, would be because the person
    was too creepy looking to want to have sex with.  Of course, I should
    add to this that I consider well over 50%, maybe even 75%, of all men
    to be too creepy looking to have sex with, so that, in itself, limits
    it.  But, I've just never been able to relate to people saying they
    choose to be celibate to get their head together, or for this, that, or
    the other reason, because I've never experienced feeling that way.  I
    do, of course, respect that others do have these feelings, and am
    interested in reading about them.  I just find them sort of strange from
    my viewpoint. 
    
    Also, Brian, I really think that suicide is rarely a "conscious"
    choice.  I think that by the time someone reaches that point, they're
    so screwed up they're no longer making conscious choices.  I don't
    think mentally ill people always make conscious choices.  I, also,
    think that sometimes it can be the lack of a very simple human need
    that can push a person over the edge.  For example, if a person feels
    very lonely because they don't have enough love in their life, just
    having sex once a week with a friend, might be enough human contact 
    for that person to feel enough warmth and affection to stay sane. 
    Little things can mean a lot.
    
    Lorna
    

Hi Lorna.  Thanks for your messages. I wanted to respond to:

>    But, I've just never been able to relate to people saying they
>    choose to be celibate to get their head together, or for this, that, or
>    the other reason, because I've never experienced feeling that way.  I
>    do, of course, respect that others do have these feelings, and am
>    interested in reading about them.  I just find them sort of strange from
>    my viewpoint. 


I found it strange too, until I got into a 12-step program.  For over 20
years, I'd never consider celibacy an option for recovery.  And now I'm
trying it...

/Eric

I think that many of us could benefit from adjusting our self-definition
to human-being FIRST...and then add on the other descriptions such as
'sexual being', etc.  Sex is a wonderful experience when it is surrounded
by the best aspects of human interaction: love and trust.  I believe that
is what anyone out there is looking to achieve when they have sex with
someone...however, and for whatever reason, we have become a society
in which "the ideal" may not be available so we'll take what we can get.
This leads to a great deal of unhappiness for both parties.  I know that
women friends all seem to feel slightly "used" by their sexual encounters
without really knowing why - and without having any real complaint against
their partners that they can identify.  I know many of my men friends have
become absolutely paranoid that the women they bed only want their money,
or whatever the current paranoia is...I think the real problem they are
experiencing is a discontent with themselves for having this most intimate
experience with virtual strangers.  It doesn't work.  It hurts BOTH
players.  I don't believe for a minute that even 10 dates with someone can
begin to let you really KNOW this person and assure yourself that you can
really trust him/her....yet, if a woman goes out with a man 10 times and
doesn't "put out", she is just using him - or she is playing him along
while she looks for someone "better" - or...fill in the blanks.  The end
result is that two people who really don't know one another end up in bed
together because they are attracted to each other...BUT, they have no
real connection yet.  Sadly, once they have leaped over the "getting to
know one another" step, it never seems to really happen...and, after a
few months or even a year or so - they drift off still looking for that
"ideal".  The saddest part of this is that they haven't really been
intimate enough to know how good sex can be...they may never get it.

I am capable of a sexual relationship.  I am just not capable of the
type of relationship that is available out there, so I choose to NOT
try and adapt to what I see making so many friends unhappy...I will
simply get on with other things that do make me and my friends happy.
I am, first and foremost, human...and that is the part of me that I
choose to stress at this time.

If you are happy with your sexual life, then I celebrate with you...it is
a grand and delightful experience.