Casual sex is no more 'bad for women' than sex-with-commitment.

Well I waited I was 18 to do the deed, but had plenty of 'sex' between then IYSWIM. I have had great sex in my life, just fabulous. Though no man has given me multiple O's. Just simultaneous O's. I got bored with them after a couple of years (with both partners). I guess I'm in love with me and my forefinger.

That does rather presume that one has not been reading Nancy Friday and such like from the age of twelve
Seriously though, I think that could have been a good thing had I had someone older and wiser that I respected to talk about what I read and put it into the context of healthy sexuality, in actual fact, the book(s) left me with a very screwed up idea of boundaries. Did not stop the sex from being good though.

I think that's a good question, Frida, and I think part of it is that people aren't honest with secondary school students about peer pressure. We got a lot of pressure from school, sex ed, PSHE etc to "wait till it feels right" and "don't be rushed", and even "Wait until Uni/you're older" - which makes sense apart from the fact that everyone in my school was at it from year 10,ish, (some outliers at year 9 and not until after school, but I think it averaged around years 10 or 11) and of course they were too young but at the same time they weren't really.

I suppose what I'm saying is that now I am a wizened in-my-30s-crone I've realised that the clumsy, awkward, thrilling/hurtful/boring sex I was having at any given point in my life was just... the right response to whatever situation I was in. I've had awesome sex in and out of relationships and pretty blah sex in and out of relationships too. I'd like to tell young people that 'being in a relationship' is no guarantee that your sexual partner won't be a totally horrible selfish nob, but knowing someone reasonably well is quite a good indicator in helping you work out whether or not you should have sex with them. Of course you can know someone well and still have sex with them on a casual basis - indeed, some of the best sex I've ever had has been 'casual but meaningful' - and it took me a good while to get rid of the virgin/whore dichotomy I was raised with, before I could start working out what I wanted, and then asserting it with partners.

Certainly, our young women and girls are raised to be pornified prudes, poor things, it's harder for them now than it was in the nineties. But how on earth can we discuss healthy sexuality with them, including peer pressure, enthusiastic consent, the whole shebang, while the rest of the world is so so so messed up about sex? I've seen "What you really really want" by Jaclyn Friedman, which seems to start from the right premise, which is that you should explore your body and feelings to work out what YOU life, before you begin a lifetime of pleasing others and being miserable.

I've had mind blowing sex with people who I am in love with, mind blowing sex with people I've never seen again and mind blowing orgasms through self-pleasuring.
All three things are possible, it is just that most people will have a preference towards how they want it to happen but socioetal messages can get in the way of people figuring out what it is that they want.
My sister, who is quite a bit younger than me, has had a fair number of sexual encounters on a casual basis, half of which have not really done much for her. That makes me feel sad because the sex I was having when I was her age was eighty five percent of the time fabulous. But I think a lot of that was due to the fact that I had a hair trigger g-spot (sadly no longer the case, childbirth seems to have shifted things around down there).
There is far too much pressure on girls and women to be one thing or the other. We discuss peer pressure in regards to smoking, drinking and drugs in secondary schools, why not in regards to sex as well?

I deeply regret having casual sex, and felt very used and empty afterwards.I would, never ever encourage it. I wish i could turn back the time. I thought i was so empowered, but infact i was just a body getting used.

Sex with genuine love is mind blowing, im glad i know better now.

Surely women have a variety of attitudes towards sex: sometimes casual, sometimes serious and a whole mixture of reasons somewhere in between. If a woman is having/not having sex because she wants to, then there is no problem.

The problem comes when society decides for women what their motives are and frames how they should be regarded:

A woman who has enjoyed casual sex is called a slut.

A woman who wants to delay sex is made to feel a prude, uncool, or that she is using her "sexual power" to manipulate the man.
We're told by books that as women we can't possibly separate love from sex and that to "give it up" it to let men take advantage of us.
If we want to know where the relationship is going, we are accused of bunny boilerism.

Girls-into-women are not given the space to explore their own sexuality because the vultures are too busy circling around telling women what they should or shouldn't be doing. The whole challenge is to separate from all that shit what it is that you really feel.

By the time you've figured it all out, it's probably time to hang up your lacy undies and take up quilting anyway!

I don't think sexual desire is socially constructed margery, but that's only a personal opinion as I don't feel it applies to me. I was abused as a child and have every reason to hate sex but I don't. I definitely feel sexual desire as a physical thing, separate from my mental processes and I orgasm easily during sex. I definitely feel a need for it, and have battled through some difficult shit to be able to have sex comfortably. If I didn't really want it I wouldn't have bothered I don't think.

Most sex is probably quite damaging to women whether in a relationship or not. It carries many physical and psychological risk factors and can even be fatal.

I really don't know why women have as much sex as they do when most don't even orgasm during intercourse. It's all for nothing (obv unless ttc) which I think is bizarre. The more I think about it the more I think sexual desire is socially constructed.

that should say "advantage for men" obviously

I agree with you to a certain extent except I that like another poster (can't find who) I think the attitude to casual sex isn't really like how you describe for younger people. My younger sister is very much sent the message by her peers that she should be having casual sex, and that if she doesn't then she's a freak. That's no better than the pressure to be monogamous because again it has an advantage for me - you get "legitimate" no-strings sex with not even the pretence of commitment.

Having being with someone for 16 years and now single. But dating. A lot. I agree with SGB and we must be sold this lifestyle with more vigour.

I feel sorry for you. Sex is about love, not a chore for women. Go get a loving relationship. >:(

Yes indeed BelleCurve. I am going through a bit of a militant celibate phase and it really freaks some people out. There are just so many subtle (and less subtle) pressures in society to be with someone, and the idea of being happily single is baffling to many.

I think it is interesting how much pressure there is to be in a relationship or being having casual sex whereas for some women at some times in their life abstinence is a perfectly practical and happy solution.

Having just come out of a difficult marriage, my friends were urging me to "find someone new", "don't worry, there will be someone else out there" etc and really the pressure to be "with" someone is immense.

I don't think casual sex is inherently bad. I have had it before I was with Dh. It was fun. However many women seem to accept a FWB relationship when actually they are in love with the man but that is all he is prepared to offer. That isn't good for them.

Oh agree. Load of rubbish, this "taken advantage of" assumption.

Huh?

Committed relationships and casual sex can both be either good or bad for women (or indeed for men). Usually they are good when both parties want the same thing and treat each other well, and bad when they want different things and don't treat each other well.

I don't think it's possible to say that one or the other is inherently better for women.

Yes, it's true that women are encouraged to seek commitment in a way that men are not. Which may lead to some women making compromises about the way they are treated, in order to stay in a relationship. However, that doesn't mean that relationships are bad per se, or that we should tell women relationships are bad for them. It means we should focus on ensuring that women don't put up with poor treatment, whether in order to stay in a relationship, or for any other reason.

I agree with SGB and basil about that theory, too.

In addition to what they say, it also annoys me because of the implication that women who have commitment-free sex are mainly failing on economic terms, as if they really should better at managing themselves as goods in an economy. It's why terms like 'profligate' can be applied to women to mean both extravagant with money and with their bodies. Horrible. And it infantalises women - as if they're too young and silly to understand how the world works. Bleugh.

and it ignores the fact that control of all resources by men is not natural, it's a construction of patriarchy

it's an absolute load of bollocks. it's based on the premise of women as gatekeepers of sex and ignores the fact that in.s non patriarchal society, women have no need of " protection" (love that word in this context, sounds just like the mafia's form of protection)