Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply US-PHARMACIES UGL OZ
Raptor Labs UGFREAK OxygenPharm
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplyUS-PHARMACIES UGL OZUGFREAKRaptor LabsOxygenPharm

Does ‘hooking up’ really hurt anyone?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Spartacus
  • Start date Start date
S

Spartacus

Guest
New book draws fire for claiming casual sex encounters damage women
Image: Laura Sessions Stepp
NEW YORK - During a class discussion on adolescence, a high school teacher recently asked her students whether they go on dates. We don’t “date,” the 12th graders reported. We “hook up.”

If you’re in your 40s, “hooking up” might mean catching a friend downtown for lunch. But to people in their teens or 20s, the phrase often means a casual sexual encounter — anything from kissing onwards — with no strings attached.

Now a new book on this not-so-new subject is drawing fire in some quarters for its conclusion: That hookups can be damaging to young women, denying their emotional needs, putting them at risk of depression and even sexually transmitted disease, and making them ill-equipped for real relationships later on.

For that, Laura Sessions Stepp, author of “Unhooked,” and a writer for The Washington Post, has been criticized as a throwback to an earlier, restrictive moral climate, an anti-feminist and a tut-tutting mother telling girls not to give the milk away when nobody’s bought the cow.

The author “imagines the female body as a thing that can be tarnished by too much use,” wrote reviewer Kathy Dobie in Stepp’s own paper, the Post, and suggested that Stepp was, in one part, trying to “instill sexual shame.” For Meghan O’Rourke, literary editor at Slate.com, Stepp is “buying into alarmism about women,” and making sex “a bigger, scarier, and more dangerous thing than it already is.”

Stepp argues these critics have misconstrued her ideas.

True, she regrets that “dating has gone completely by the boards,” replaced by group outings that lead to casual encounters. True, she regrets that oral sex “isn’t even considered sex anymore.” But she isn’t saying girls should not have sex; just that they should have it in the context of a meaningful connection: “I am saying that girls should have choices.”

Too often, Stepp argues, girls and young women say proudly that they like the control “hookups” give them — control over their emotions, their schedules, and freedom to focus on things like schoolwork and career (the students she profiles in her book are high achievers).

Being as bad as the boys
But she says they frequently mistake that freedom for empowerment. “I often hear girls say things like, ’We can be as bad as guys now,”’ she says. “But I don’t think that’s what liberation is all about.”

Stepp says her book stems from an experience she had almost 10 years ago. She and other parents were summoned to her son’s middle school. The principal informed them that all year long, a dozen girls — ages 13 or 14 — had been performing oral sex on several boys in the class. (Her own son was not involved.) Stepp wrote about the sex ring in a front-page article for the Post, which led to further research.

She’s had her share of positive feedback, including from educators and from young women like those in her book.

One 18-year-old student, who calls herself a feminist, e-mailed her to say she had approached the book warily, but came to believe it “will change the way my generation views sex.”

Contacted later by telephone, the student, Liz Funk, said she agreed with Stepp’s contention that “real relationships among college students don’t really exist anymore.”

'Thanksgiving for guys'

“If I or my friends had the opportunity for real relationships, we’d take it,” says Funk, who attends school in New York City. “But my generation hasn’t really been conditioned for it.” Hookups, she adds, which she rejected for herself long ago but some of her friends still embrace, “are like Thanksgiving for guys. They don’t have to do anything to get sex!” And she bemoans the amount of time fellow students can spend on hookups: “It can be like a full-time job.”

Another student, at a small women’s college in South Carolina, says the “hookup culture” is not all that pervasive, in her experience.

“I’m aware of it,” said Grace Bagwell, 22, a senior at Converse College in Spartanburg, S.C.. “But it’s untrue to say women aren’t having meaningful relationships at this point. I’ve been in one for three years, and I have a lot of friends who are getting married or are engaged.”

continued...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17540879/
 
it hurts them worse when i have stubble on my boobs

also, people who write shit like this need to live more and think about living less, or even better, play with a powerpoint and a butterknife
 
my mom always says "hook up" instead of "meet up."

"are you gonna try and hook up with your grandma later?"

makes me wanna fuckin kill myself
 
wootool said:
Don't sweat it chief, the chicks most likely to hook up don't read books


-
:lmao: that was funny



I think the one student is right. If women were honest with themselves they would admit that they would like some intimacy and not just hook ups, but I am sure that some women can just take the sex.
 
" Hookups, she adds, which she rejected for herself long ago but some of her friends still embrace, “are like Thanksgiving for guys. They don’t have to do anything to get sex!” "


this is the worst attitude ever, i can't believe this bitch thinks she is special and that sex with her is worth anything. And what the hell kind of fucked up thanksgivings does her family have
 
Even tho a girl is just hooking up with a guy for the night or maybe just being F friends there is still an emotional connection there.
After a while the boy will move on to bigger or better things and the girl will end up with some type of emotional scar.
 
Spartacus said:
Now a new book on this not-so-new subject is drawing fire in some quarters for its conclusion: That hookups can be damaging to young women, denying their emotional needs, putting them at risk of depression and even sexually transmitted disease, and making them ill-equipped for real relationships later on.
I agree with that. Been seeing it a lot lately. I think it also erodes their self-esteem.
 
there are some great relationships i never would've had if it weren't for "hooking up" in the beginning
 
mrplunkey said:
I agree with that. Been seeing it a lot lately. I think it also erodes their self-esteem.
fully agreed.They will eventually feel as tho they will never be capable of having a normal relationship, and they will begin to think that the only relationship one can have is sexual
 
Angel said:
fully agreed.They will eventually feel as tho they will never be capable of having a normal relationship, and they will begin to think that the only relationship one can have is sexual
I think it's part of the lie of feminism. The feminist movement should be about women having choices -- not about seeing how closely women can act like men.

Sexually, men are wired a specific way. It's not a "get out of jail free" card for bad behavior, but our wiring drives us far more than many of us are willing to admit. Women trying to emulate that behavior because it's "empowering" or somehow makes them "equals" is a mistake. We should be celebrating the differences between men and women but unfortunately we live in a society where its considered "progressive" to deny them instead.

/rant off
 
mrplunkey said:
I think it's part of the lie of feminism. The feminist movement should be about women having choices -- not about seeing how closely women can act like men.

Sexually, men are wired a specific way. It's not a "get out of jail free" card for bad behavior, but our wiring drives us far more than many of us are willing to admit. Women trying to emulate that behavior because it's "empowering" or somehow makes them "equals" is a mistake. We should be celebrating the differences between men and women but unfortunately we live in a society where its considered "progressive" to deny them instead.

/rant off

Very true. The feminist movement as it stands does more harm than it could be doing good. The competition factor is erroneous and irresponsible. Ask your grandmas/older female relatives what they think of current trends. I doubt there'd be many that reply with jealousy saying Oh how I wish I could've been doing that. Instead you'd get reactions of shame and disgust. These are the same women who've probably had their shit together (especially emotionally) far moreso than their current descendants, and are happier in their old age as well. Soon they'll be the last of their kind if things keep going like they are.

Also, self help books and relationship "experts" have destroyed more relationships than they've ever created/saved. So many people don't know how to think for themselves anymore. Looking for the fast and easy solution ends up bringing them more pain and despair and they wonder why. Grandmas everywhere are left shaking their heads.
 
Experiment:

One guy, one girl. Each hooks up (has sex with) with 20 different people of the opposite sex in the span of a month. At the end of the month, interview both and tell me how the guy is feeling and how the girl is feeling. Case closed.

Actually, in truth, I don't think "hooking up" is necessarily as damaging as the author implies. But any woman who thinks she can "be as bad as the boys" with no emotional consequences is PROBABLY deluding herself (with a few exceptions here and there).
 
nimbus said:
there are some great relationships i never would've had if it weren't for "hooking up" in the beginning
yeah it's kinda a roulette thing
odds suck at roulette though
 
ever be fucking a girl for the first time and be in her place for the first time too
be checking out shit in her room during intercourse
I'm a "lights on" kinda guy
 
"Hook up" is just new-age slang for "one night stand". I've never had interest in either. I thing people just disillusion themselves with semantics. Girl, you're wearing bellbottoms and having a one night stand. It doesn't matter what you chose to call them, they're still the same damn thing.



:cow:
 
The author “imagines the female body as a thing that can be tarnished by too much use,”
 
Spartacus said:
The author “imagines the female body as a thing that can be tarnished by too much use,”

Sounds like the book was written in the 16th century, lol.

People need to live by their own morals and values... not let other people define them for them.



:cow:
 
nefertiti said:
Experiment:

One guy, one girl. Each hooks up (has sex with) with 20 different people of the opposite sex in the span of a month. At the end of the month, interview both and tell me how the guy is feeling and how the girl is feeling. Case closed.

Actually, in truth, I don't think "hooking up" is necessarily as damaging as the author implies. But any woman who thinks she can "be as bad as the boys" with no emotional consequences is PROBABLY deluding herself (with a few exceptions here and there).
true. very few exceptions.
 
nefertiti said:
Experiment:

One guy, one girl. Each hooks up (has sex with) with 20 different people of the opposite sex in the span of a month. At the end of the month, interview both and tell me how the guy is feeling and how the girl is feeling. Case closed.

Actually, in truth, I don't think "hooking up" is necessarily as damaging as the author implies. But any woman who thinks she can "be as bad as the boys" with no emotional consequences is PROBABLY deluding herself (with a few exceptions here and there).
consider this:

your experiment conducted in

a) the middle east
b) the USA
c) the netherlands or some other nordic type sexually disinhibited country

in the middle east, the men will be acclaimed and the women ostracised. in the USA, the reaction will probably be mixed, and in the netherlands, everyone will probably talk about who has the prettiest dick

men and women have different mental/social wiring. they are tied in to genetically predetermined pattern of behaviour. cool. but ultimately, imo, the root causes of the main difference are going to be societal, not physiological

personally i love hanging out with my emotionally balanced, sexually disinhibited girlfriends :) we have lots of fun :)
 
GD...Your point carries a certain amount of weight because I do have a few friends from other countries who have entirely different attitudes on sex, and I could see multiple hookups being less damaging to them. But it's been shown that women get a surge of the "love/bonding" chemical, oxytocin (the same chemical in breast milk thought he give that bonding sensation between mother and child) when she has sex, and where for men the oxytocin dissipates quickly, for women it hangs around a little longer. No matter what country your in, a woman will still have that physiological reaction and for most of them, it will screw with their heads at least a little bit. The varying degrees of how they deal with it is where the societal factors play in.

Also, I don't see someone who doesn't take multiple partners as being inhibited sexually. If the choice is, "I don't want to do that," rather than, "I don't think I should do that," then it's simply a matter of choosing what you want for yourself and what you dont, instead of having hesitations because of inhibition.
 
Fact is: girls/guys don't think alike so many guys will not understand what exactly, goes through these girls' heads. I agree with many points that she makes in this article. In research I have done, many girls "hook up," with multiple guys because of self esteem deprivation. It's blatantly obvious that they feel a sense of reinforcement (positive) for a short period of time while they are sleeping around. In other words, for a brief moment they feel "wanted," which increases their self esteem (in the SHORT RUN). And I believe it does harm girls down the road if this behavior is continued. No doubt (but that's an entire new topic in itself). I'm not saying every single girl out there is effected this way, but definitely a good amount.

“I often hear girls say things like, ’We can be as bad as guys now,”’ she says. “But I don’t think that’s what liberation is all about.”

This reminds me of the topic I covered awhile ago for a research paper about mate selection, gender, and evoluntion. Interesting..
 
mrplunkey said:
I agree with that. Been seeing it a lot lately. I think it also erodes their self-esteem.
Hell has officially frozen over.


I agree with Mr. Plunkey.
 
GoldenDelicious said:
consider this:

your experiment conducted in

a) the middle east
b) the USA
c) the netherlands or some other nordic type sexually disinhibited country

in the middle east, the men will be acclaimed and the women ostracised. in the USA, the reaction will probably be mixed, and in the netherlands, everyone will probably talk about who has the prettiest dick

men and women have different mental/social wiring. they are tied in to genetically predetermined pattern of behaviour. cool. but ultimately, imo, the root causes of the main difference are going to be societal, not physiological

personally i love hanging out with my emotionally balanced, sexually disinhibited girlfriends :) we have lots of fun :)
Well, I agree here, too. I don't think that it is so much that women are all that different than men, we have just been taught that to have one night stands makes us whores and less worthy of love and affection. Men are taught that it makes them studs, sexy and desirable to the opposite sex. It is pretty easy to see why a woman's self esteem suffers from too many one nighters.
 
Top Bottom