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

[solidgoldbrass]

Actually, casual sex in many ways is better for women than committed sex. Just like a lot of other stuff surrounding sex and relationships, the recieved wisdom is not necessarily true and might actually be another tool of the patriarchy.
Because women who are encouraged to 'save' sex for relationships are women who are going to have to wash the bloke's shitty pants and cook his dinner and stroke his ego as well as having sex with him. And prioritising The Relationship often means having sex you don't really want, with a bloke who isn't very good at it, because you 'love' him and therefore it's all about keeping him happy.
Whereas if you have sex with a bloke you just met, or only see from time to time, you don't have to do his housework or listen to long rambles about how his day at work went, and if he isn't any fun you can just bin him and move on.

Hmm. See, I think that we get the thin end of both wedges, actually.

Yes, back in the day women got told casual sex was bad, and that was the end of it. But now it's more 'all women must be up for casual sex or you're frigid, but not too up for it because that's slutty'.

I suspect I'm coming at this from a different angle from others because at the moment I'm hearing a lot about pressure on women (esp young women) to have casual sex and it's pissing me off.

If you look at clubs, and promotions, especially for student nights, there's a lot of emphasis on casual sex - and the implication women should be up for it. If you walk around a university campus, same thing. I live in a fairly studenty area and I teach undergrads so I see a lot of it from a slightly distanced perspective and, honestly, the extent to which that sort of emphasis is used to pressurize, bully and abuse women is horrible.

I'm not cheerleading monogamy or traditional marriage, btw, just think that the view of casual sex as outlined in the OP is a bit rosy-tinted. I can believe it works if you're sure of yourself and, well, a bit more mature. But a lot of the damage seems to get done to women who're quite young.

And don't get me started on the truly horrible blokes I know who prey on younger women, tell them open relationships and casual sex are the best thing since sliced bread, then end up with a free live-in fuckbuddy/domestic help while they continue sleeping around.

I honestly don't think there is any kind of relationship set-up that isn't open to abuse. That's because some people are nasty, abusive fuckers. You don't suddenly step out of the patriarchial framework by having casual sex.

I read a theory once that male-female relationships were based on men 'selling' provision and protection, and women 'selling' sex/procreation. (This theory was used to explain that feminists disliked prostitution because it deflated the value of other women's 'goods', so take it with a generous pinch of salt).

Using that model, women should avoid commitment-free sex, since they would be giving up their 'wares' for nothing in return. Which completely ignores that women might actually enjoy and want sex, or that they are capable of protecting and providing for themselves, etc. But I thought it was interesting nonetheless.

Eccles: That's how it's been set up to work, because that way of looking at it is advantageous to men. It isn't 'natural' in the least.

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)

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

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.

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.

Minipie: I agree with you completely. I'm just sick of seeing stuff which says that women who have casual FWB-type sex are being Taken Advantage Of by men even if the women have no interest in commitment. A good relationship is a nice thing, sure but what we need to lose is the myth that any relationship is better than no relationship when the reverse is closer to the truth.

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

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.

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.

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.

Oh, that too. I am honestly not sure who gets the most shit from well-meaning friends/acquaitances/society in general: the woman who enjoys casual sex with a variety of partners or the woman who has no interest in sex or dating at all.

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

TSSS: Sex should be about mutual enjoyment, end of, whether that's in a casual situation or a longterm relationship. (Will leave conscious TTC sex out of the discussion for the moment because that's a category of its own). But it isn't, always a straightforward exchange of pleasure. For some women in long term relationships it's about putting up with it because the bloke will sulk for the next week if she doesn't open her legs. Time after time after time. For other women it's about being miserably frustrated because he isn't interested any more and every suggestion she makes about improving the situation gets fobbed off. Casual sex with someone you don't know very well can be unsatisfactory too, but at least you can just bin the bloke and move on.

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 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.

that should say "advantage for men" obviously

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.

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.

CailinDana: But this is what the big problem is, the idea that casual sex is different for men and women and that men are somehow 'winning' by having sex without commitment regardless of what the woman in question wants.

Margery: sex is not always about PIV, either.

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 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.

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?