Unable To Hook
Thu, 2006-09-07 22:43 — heartcrossings
Unhooked Generation by Jillian Straus is a must-read for singles in their 30s who wonder why they are finding it nearly impossible to get (and stay) married and have a family like humans have done for time immemorial. Her analysis of all that ails Gen-X is spot on. I particularly liked what she has to say on the subject of casual sex.
Many women used the phrase : "I failed at it" - meaning that they had felt they failed at casual sex because they felt attachment afterward. To become attached after sex is to be human - but both men and women of this generation considered this a human failing. I thought to myself, if fucking a stranger and enjoying it is now a sign of success, things have certainly changed: beating yourself up because you can’t use your body without involving your soul is quite the twenty first century dilemma.
It became obvious that beneath all the erotic aerobic activity, for many people, casual sex served as a substitution for real emotional intimacy. Having sex is easy for this generation, but connection and commitment are hard.
Often, Gen-Xers have sex quickly and then wait for the emotions to catch up with the physical sensations.
Casual sex has become an inalienable right, a freedom of the young and single that requires no commitments beyond the sex itself. Today, sexual flings, seemingly fun but fleeting, are now dime a dozen. I couldn’t help but wonder whether casual sex wasn’t losing its appeal due to its sheer availability.
from - Chapter 7 of Unhooked Generation by Jillian Straus.
The book is culled from interviews with 100 Gen-X heterosexuals (yes, there is a token desi, a Purnima who talks about how people of her generation don’t just want casual sex but exotic sex as well. They can’t decide if they want it with a girl or a guy so they go have threesomes).
At the end of the book there is the Unhooked Dictionary, a handy thesaurus that summarizes the state of Gen-X relationships with such nuggets as : Bling Ultimatum, Disposable Love, DTR Talk (Defining The Relationship), Marriage Heavy, Marriage Lite, Marriage Sabbatical, Multiple Choice Culture and finally the Wilma Flinstone Effect defined thusly: The modern woman’s longing for a symbol of a traditional female role. An example would be when a woman, even a feminist, desires a big diamond engagement ring or flowers as a proof that she, as a woman, is adored.
- heartcrossings's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Comments
What people want
Nah, nobody knows jack about what they want. If they did, they’d be fulfilled when they got it.
Hasn’t happened now, hadn’t happend with yayati enjoying youth for a thousand years to fulfill his desires.
And pray tell me - since when has youth not felt that it knows exactly what it wants? it is the nature of youth to believe that they know it all - today’s youth have no monopoly on such attitudes.
my two pence
That is quite an interesting take… It probably is already mentioned in the book, but I cant help but point out that rather than casual sex being a substitute for emotional intimacy, one can argue that in the absence of emotional intimacy, Gen-X does not feel it necessary to abstain from sexual activities, as opposed to the previous generation which was inhibited by social norms.
People from this generation know exactly what they want which carries over to their stance on relationships as well. They are not blurred by their sexual needs to drag their casual sexual encounters and try and make a long term relationship out of it. Its just that in their interim period of getting into a long term relationship, they see nothing wrong in casual sex. Of course, there would always be some percentage of cases where mere physical relationships leads to emotional attachments, halleluiah if its mutual, and boo-hoo if its one sided.
In the previous generation, a significant amount ‘hooked up’ because mommy-daddy told them to… a small percent were those who were lucky enough to chose whom they would want to be with.. the rest fell into the catagory who had to either had to compromise or go the mommy-daddy way, in order to for them to have which is licensed by society or to get a cure for their loneliness.
The Gen-X lot no longer seeks societal approval. Sex is not a morality issue, which I feel is healthy and that is how it should be.
want and need ...
“People from this generation know exactly what they want” I seriously doubt that !!! At every stage in history .. the “this” generation felt that they know exactly what they want compared to the previous one !!! This might be true in a relative way .. but more often than not when ppl get exactly what they wanted, they wonder if thats what they really wanted !!! …
Whoa interesting !
Casual Sex!
External Parameters: Single, Married, Married with spouse out of town, Married with “extremely” understanding spouse!
Internal Parameters: Level of Horniness, Level of hotness of the person you are checking out(mainly for Women..men..wud take anything if the score on first parameter is high), Availability, Opportunity, Level of Morality(Guilt,internal qualms..blah..blah..mostly for women).
Depending on the values in various parameters,you end up getting laid or not getting laid.
Depending on the level of satisfaction after the lay,you put it in casual or you end up in relationship!
Guess “Unhooked generation” is all about hooking oneself up!
Enjoyable read and the discussion here!
The Gen-X Construct
I think what maria is trying to say is that the Gen-X is an artificial construct and that an attempt treat their foibles as different from those of other humans is misplaced.
And also, I think there is some communication gap here - did I actually hear you say that the Charvak-panthis and tantrics precribe a life of sexual hedonism??? I’m not gonna really react to that till I am sure I heard you right.
Also, you might note that just as valentine’s day is targeted to making the card and gifts industry boom, the author of this Gen-x book is also going to similarly set herself up as “an authority on a difficult to understand generational phenomenon called Gen-x”. Brings them perks - gets them retainers for being lifestyle consultants to big corporates, not to mention the direct benefits from the book.
The art of the expert is to merely make seem things seem unfathomable that you need the expert to make sense of them.
Such priests of lifestyle only manage to create further conditionings and tell people how they are supposed to feel and behave and if they don’t then they are really retro, not really with it.
Mankind would be happier if it didn’t pay much attention to experts/priests telling them how they are.
for Atra and Maria
Maria - I should have chosen a word more positive than promiscuity
What I had in mind was a sybarite and licentious life where sex is solely for pleasure - like the Charvaks and Tantrics prescribe (though for different reasons). Their case is compelling but not everyone is suitable material for such a life/philosophy. I agree about the increasing pressure Gen-Xers face to preserve the front of a perfect family despite all odds. But Gen-Xers also have more choices than their parents and grandparents. It no longer takes a village and there are no authority figures actively engaged in laying down the rules and demanding conformance. We have unprecedented freedom and make some very questionable choices in using it.
Atra - True if people are able to take generations of conditioning about sex out of their system, they will be able to see it in clearer light for what it is. The industry of broken hearts and profound loves imo is more 18th century than 21st - the Valentine’s Day consumerism is just another business opportunity and has little to do with either love or romance. An Omar Khayyam’s Rubaiyat will likely not find a literary agent today. Its too mushy, too unreal - when does the show get on the road - i.e the steamy make-out session. Romantic love is not alive and well - sex comes into play way too soon. There is also a thriving porn industry, opportunities abound for those who are “married and looking”. In all Gen-X is not set up for success to enjoy sex in the pure.
Lord Krishna rules!
Oh yeah, we should all take a leaf from the life of the coolest dude - Lord Krishna! If one man can do it, then so can absolutely anyone.
Jokes apart, I would beg to disagree to the contention that a balanced approach to sexuality is out of the reach of Gen-x.
I think not - I believe that their confusion is more due to social conditioning, peer pressures and that it is absolutely and entirely possible for literally anyone to step out of the rat race of sexuality.
The only reason people do not step out is because it has been imprinted in their heads that a bipolar sexuality is the only way of existence, and that to step out of it will traumatize them irrevocably for life.
Thats all a pack of poetic illusions, perpetrated and maintained by a society that has entire industries running on these images of broken hearts v/s profound loves.
Agree
There is indeed a “golden mean”. Supposedly, every woman that Lord Krishna consorted with felt like she was the only true love of his life. He had the ability to gratify their individual and distinct emotional and physical needs completely. Most regular people don’t have that kind of capacity and in as such are unsuited to taking on the burdens of having multiple partners. When they overextend themselves (as they often do),the results are telling. They are left wondering why casual sex does not remain as “casual” as they would want it to or why the heart acquires a thick scar tissue at the end of multiple hook-ups. Promiscuity can be fun and even fulfilling but not everyone has the capacity for it - unfortunately Gen-Xers don’t recognize that.
Generalizing- Xers
“Promiscuity can be fun and even fulfilling but not everyone has the capacity for it - unfortunately Gen-Xers don’t recognize that.”
HC,
From the excerpts I read…and from what I know and have observed, think the book tends to ‘generalize’ too much (sampling of 100 couples- is inadequate/misleading for any valid study and to come to any conclusion imo).
While the divorce rates/women who choose to be single may be higher in the 30+ generation..(I attribute that to the ability of women- to be economically independent and having more choices)…the ‘psychological mindset’ of Gen-Xers is really not so different from any other generation…in fact, I would say- they are less promiscuous, more frustrated/unhappy- trying to push “pseudo-family values” on everyone else.
In the meantime, while they “put on this perfect family front” I also see- more and more “open swingers” (married and having sex as couples with other couples) in Gen-X (one can hardly guess, who they are, they may be your neightbors!) Some seem to be perfectly happy with it (they say “we don’t cheat”)…while others would never consider doing it!
Couples who are married may also have plenty of “emotional/non-physical affairs” (common- with on-line relationships/work place relationships, thanks to technology)…where, one shares ‘intimacy’(intimate parts of their lives/themselves, emotionally speaking)- in every sense of the word..with someone else other than the spouse..and simply may have the physical/economic relationship with spouses.
I guess..my point…is human relationships are complex (have always been since the beginning of time and will be to the end of time), and the book…seems to make “attitudes about casual sex” look like it is an uniquely Gen Xers phenomenon.
Maria
Precisely
HC,
Thats kind of what I am trying to say. My point is that this specific urge of not wanting to get “all caught up in the emotional aftermath” is what causes the emotional closing up.
And because one tries to fend off emotionality, one gets even more hung on it.
I am trying to say - there is a golden mean, a third approach which lives independent of the two poles (of either being emotionally dead, or falling in love), which involves caring for anyone you have a relationship with (whether physical or platonic), without getting clingy or using the person.
Staying bipolar in sex is only going to cause problems, (as are being already caused, the world over).
The malady is not caused by sex, but by the limited social stereotype of sexual relations. Take social conditioning and peer pressure out of the equation, and one can approach it much much better. Sexuality is the path of love and pleasure - if the path is becoming traumatic, then the answer is in the way one approaches it.
Isolatory sex
There is something wrong here -
Why does the opposite of real total heartfelt intimate sex have to be soul-less dead sex? It is exactly this bipolarity in contemporary sexuality that gives us the clue to real nature of the problem.
This bipolarity is primarily created because today people don’t give a shit for each other - a wholistic sense has gone out of their lives.
Hence, they conjure up this ideal of the ultimate full-of-depth intimate sex, which they feel is the reason why “casual” sex is not giving them such a kick.
And thats gonna be illusive, since the mind is now hung up on that ideal. And one is always bouncing between these two poles.
The definition “casual sex” itself is misleading - the phrase itself is conditioning.
Sex is sex - you go with it as much as you can - you do not hold yourself back, whereas this paradigm of ‘casual’ sex involves an emotional closing of the self while doing it.
Can one not have sex while caring for the other person?
Does the person being a stranger (or a booty-call friend, or whoever) mean that you have a blind eye to the person - ie. you are closed off?
See, herein lies the paradox.
If, during casual sex, you shut yourself off from the other person, then you might as well be masturbating. Why is one doing it, then?
And that is why people feel used - because there is no caring.
And the unfortunate other extreme of this paradigm is that the moment one feels any sort of emotional connection to the other person, one wants to marry or do whatever is implied by that hackneyed phrase “fall in love”.
People are not able to distinguish between having a good emotional connection with someone and being in love with the person - they are so utterly starved of love that anything that hints towards it is grabbed at.
Then, in such a situation, sex becomes merely a pathetic pavlovian conditioning - since you have a pleasurable experience while having tactile contact with that person, one tends to bond with the person. Which is again misconstrued as emotional attachement.
I tell you - there is a right way to have sex, and this americanism - “casual sex”, really is a dumbass way of doing it. If you sleep with someone why does it have to be either out of “love” (which is 99.99% something else masquerading as love), or unemotional sex?
Everybody is a human - sleep with someone you like, and don’t get into this duality of either closing yourself off, or later start grabbing the other person because of the pavlovian attachment that develops.
There is no problem with sex - whether “casual” or emotional, legal or illegal. The problem is only doing it without caring for people, or by using them. Its the alienation of the individual, the self-isolation that is the problem - sexuality is merely the manifestation of the problem.
So long as one does not use people, sex will always be something lovely and fulfilling.
Hence, this entire analysis of gen-X sex misses out the core of the issue.
Atra..
The point Strauss makes in her book (which is a true reflection of the present day) is that people do not want to get all caught up in the emotional aftermath that having sex in the context of a loving relationship (no matter what its longevity) involves. They find that to be a burden, a drag on the heart that must be avoided at all costs. The contract between a couple engaging in casual sex is clear - there is no hope held out by either, there is no heartache to deal with the morning after (at least in theory).
People want the thrill of variety and partners who have been around enough to have sophisticated styles and techniques. Faithfulness does not enjoy the cachet it once did just like virginity is no longer a big deal. Players are useful in their ability to build mood and atmosphere that can elevate a one night stand to a memorable incident.
Girlfriends talk about what a great lay some guy was and miss him only for his body. You don’t get to hear a thing about him except his prowess in bed. When in a “relationship” the same women can bore you to death dissecting and analyzing every last word the man said to them. Grown women turn to blathering idiots asking themselves “He loves me, he loves me not” ad-infinitum.
I guess a lot of that translates to men as well. Comes a point when both men and women want only physical gratification without the trappings of a full blown relationship. Humans will also on occasion skip the appetizer and entree and head straight for the tiramisu. Its not a sensible diet but it can be fun and different - break the monotony of doing the regular thing.
As long as it is possible and permissible to have several sexual partners, people will seek the path of least resistance as far as coming out of intimate encounters with the least number of battle scars. Casual sex is notionally one way to do it - obviously flawed but the other options are not any better either.
My my, the kind of stuff
My my,
the kind of stuff you both are teaching us, (wait me atleast) is like mental masturbation with no strings attached. While at times confusing, its good to be reading up on such closed topics which are seldom discussed.
Just caught up on a thread which went along nudity vs art vs culture specific values against nudity. After this i begin to wonder, how open should an open mind be? To what lengths can we test this without crossing moral boundaries?
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/444399#3838062
spot on !!
Really !!!??? hmmmmm !