okay john, you and BH said its about love then. that once you make that connection between love and sex then they wont dirty sex.

i think thats bull. i equate sex as love. which is dangerous. is that not the same thing as what BH said? "IF a survivor can learn to have sex w/ real intimacy and love, as opposed to plain "dirty" sex, I wonder if he would then prefer the sex/intimacy/love, because he is missing that now" sex is not love. it might be a part of love, but it defintely not the whole thing. also, i think you all are under the assumption that the guy WANTS the love part. why can't he just be happy getting off? that is essentially the only function of sex on a basic level... to get off. humans bring in all the other bullshit meanings like love and feelings and labels.

so im gonna say, if you think that once he "finds love in sex" then i wouldn't think that he would automatically stop having "dirty sex." maybe the fucking guy just wants to get off without the hassle.

Jarrad, I didn't say that. Go back and read it again. I very specifically agreed with you that if a person is attracted to dirty sex he/she will probably always be attracted to it in some way.

I took it a step further and said I have found that to be true in my own life. Why would I want the dirty sex from the past when what I currently have with my wife is so very much better than the other? The sex we have is only a part of the greater companionship and commitment of our relationship, but it is a huge part of it for both of us. Further we couldn't have it without having the committed, caring intimacy and relationship first.

John

john, yeah i know what you said. and what i said, is that not all guys want the love thing attached to it because they just want to get off. not questions asked. so maybe the whole "relationship" thing worked for you and sex is better with your wife. but i dont think that is the case for all guys. some guys get bored of sex with the same person. over and over and over.

Jarrad,

Yeah, now we're understanding each other. I can accept and understand where you're coming from on that. Have definitely been there myself.

John

Hey guys, agree with both of you. I'm just tired of getting off, bored with it. I want some love attached to it.

Mike

This thread is so, so interesting. Jarrad you make some really good points. I actually agree that survivors shouldn't be doomed to a life of vanilla sex and thinking anything outside a loving intimate expression of the missionary position is necessarily pathologic. i've enjoyed a lot of casual sex that i feel just fine about. personally i think believing all sex has to be in committed, monogamous relationships would be letting the abuse win, but at the same time, please try to understand that straight men who were abused have many of the same, but many different issues too. having same-sex experiences forced on you is just simply confusing.

i actually agree that sexual orientation is largely predetermined, in the genes, etc. though in my experience, where i like or dont like to be touched and that sort of thing is largely based on experience.

and without pissing anyone off - it can be really fun for sex to feel dirty.

but my basic point remains -- if someone feels like sex is dirty and seeks out prostitutes to enact that, *and* feels uncomfortable about it, that seems pretty compulsive. like it might have less to do with arousal than it does with flawed thinking and ideas.

so my reaction to sexuality being "in the genes" was *not* about orientation -- we seem to agree on that. my reaction was to the idea that acts which are probably more about violence and power, etc rather than "sexual" in nature, ie pedophilia, are "in the genes".

thats all. peace, tw