The Benefits of Selfless Sexuality

Saba7o/Namaste LOVEanese! Today's post is going to be a bit more theoretical than descriptive. I say that because I want to talk about a topic that's not necessarily been researched much, but is more in the philosophical/spiritual realm of relationships.

Today's post is all about sex. But before you get too excited (pun intended), it's not exactly what you think. As I've mentioned in this post about sexuality and sexual health resources, I don't really like to talk about it for multiple reasons. One is that there is no inherent connection between love and sex--only a socially constructed one. Second, is that there are a lot of great resources out there already that address it in a much better way than I could since it's not my field of expertise (see the link above for examples). And lastly, it's not the focus of this blog. However, when I identify overlapping concepts that I think are worth mentioning, then I am happy to discuss it.

First of all, I want to present an article that is semi-connected to this post's topic. It's a very robust, yet non-judgmental analysis about how delaying intimacy can benefit your relationship. I highly recommend the read, and encourage a lively discussion! You don't necessarily have to agree with the author or agree with their points, but I suggest to at least hear them out.

Now, the main concept I want to discuss is what is mentioned in the title: selfless sexuality. So, what exactly is this? Let's define some concepts first so you understand what I mean. It is basically the idea that you are putting your own desire for pleasure aside to maximize the pleasure experienced by your partner. This article gives a broad overview of the concept, and a writer and yoga teacher provides a wonderful overview of what exactly selfless sexuality is and why it's important in this article. Let me highlight a few really important paragraphs to contextualize the definition:

"Sex is a bonding and creative function that has become a big business with an emphasis on selfish pleasure. Our society is saturated with highly charged sexual images, the media exploits and dehumanizes sex, the medical industry has all kinds of pills for women not to be fertile and for men to be fertile longer. There are societal pressures on everything from how much sex you need to be happy, to what sexual preferences are culturally acceptable."

She continued:

"Habitually, the senses grab for pleasure and satisfaction without any thought of the other person or the consequences. When someone is concerned with fulfilling his or her own needs and doesn’t consider the other person, this affects us on a deep level because of our expectations of love. We have to understand what sex is and that it cannot fulfill all of the desires and expectations that are imagined. When there are so many mixed messages, we become disconnected from who we are and want to be."

I hope that now it's a little more clear as to what it is. This isn't just a topic relegated to providers of spiritual or holistic well-being. Even this article by Ask Men (which I would normally never quote) said this:

Be selfless: "For the time being, your pleasure will come solely from giving her pleasure. Don't worry about it being no fun for you, since you're both going to get equally worked up by the end of it. For starters, the more you turn her on, the better she's going to feel, and the more eager she'll be to return the favor. But more importantly, use this opportunity to think about the importance of your own gradual arousal to great sex. Anyone can get off quickly, but the sex you'll remember for a long time is the kind where your arousal builds. You can only get turned on like that by enjoying your woman's body in a variety of ways."

It actually makes sense though (and not just about "returning favors"). Think back to this post about Thomas Merton's philosophy on loving yourself and selfish vs. selfless love, and this post about body image and it's connections to relationship well-being. First, remember that a relationship is 100/100--not 50/50. So, just like it's important to love yourself, then share that love with the other person, selfless sexuality dictates that when you mutually put the other's pleasure before your own, not only do you both benefit, but it creates better sexual experiences as well as a closer relationship. Tied to this, the more comfortable you feel with yourself, with the other person, and especially about your body, the more enjoyable a sexual experience with be. Thus, another aspect of selfless sexuality is making the other person feel as comfortable, as beautiful, and as appreciated as possible.

This concept generally works best when it's applied to a committed relationship, however, it's not solely reserved for them. I often advise against having multiple partners, but everyone is at a different stage in their sexual education and experiences. I think that the concept outlined above, even when applied outside of a committed relationship, can still lead to better sexual experiences. Of course, it is a two-way street, and works best when it is being applied by both lovers.

This isn't a magic bullet, however. You also have to take the time to figure out your partner, what they like, what works for both of you--as well as yourself, your own wants, and your own desires and preferences. That's another reason why I don't necessarily support having multiple partners. Imagine it's like a meter (or something that fills up over time). And the more you are with someone physically, the more your meter "fills up"--with understanding, comfort, love, passion, intimacy, respect. But if you jump from person-to-person, your meter just restarts. That doesn't mean that you aren't filling it (with pleasure and passion, for instance), but basically, the more you're with one person, the more you'll understand them as a lover and as a person. Now, this also depends if 1. you're both committed to making the other person feel better, and 2. if you're interested in more than just the physical pleasure (for instance, the emotional fulfillment that comes from being with someone you really love/care about).

This U.S. carnival game is how I visualize what I discussed above. In this game, you shoot water at a target, and it makes the car move up towards the top. Whoever gets the car to the top first is the winner. Imagine when you're constantly exploring your sexuality with one person, you're car is always moving up. But when you go from partner-to-partner, you're always restarting the game in certain ways--specifically when it comes to understanding yourself and your wants, but more importantly, your partner and their wants/desires/needs/preferences.

Anyways, I'll stop there. I realize that--especially given the intended audience of this post--many people aren't having sex. That's fine! And, in fact, the authors of this blog (similar to mine in that they use references and research) provide a lengthy and detailed description of why delaying intimacy can actually benefit your relationship. It's definitely worth the read, and I'd love to hear your thoughts about it.

But regardless if you are sexually active or if you aren't, or if you make out with people, engage in oral sex, but not intercourse, or a host of other sexual activities, remember that sexuality is a very natural part of life, and is biologically no different in its importance to life as is the need to eat food and drink water. But with that said, I think it's important to recognize that, without making sex into this overly sacred occurrence, there are ways to practice intimacy and sexuality that are more considerate and appreciative of the other person.

There are many reasons why is this important as well, aside from the already-stated fact that it has the potential to improve your experience with your partner and create stronger intimacy. One of these is that, according to this article citing a research study gathering data from American adults, women have about one orgasm for every three a man enjoys. According to the article, the gap between men’s and women’s frequency of orgasm is impacted by social forces that privilege male pleasure. Thus, the idea of selfless sexuality here has feminist undertones as well in that it encourages equality in the bedroom, and an emphasis on the other--especially since the desire for sex is not inherently more of a masculine trait than feminine one.

So, what are your thoughts and comments? Do you agree with this concept? It is a workable framework for an intimate relationship? Do you think it overly endorses monogamy or another concept some find problematic? Let me know! I'm eager to see your thoughts!

Spread the love,

-Ogie, MA

P.S. Be on the lookout for an exciting announcement regarding LOVEanon to come next week!

P.P.S. I saw this infographic about the female orgasm and felt compared to share it, specifically because it actually touches on some of the aforementioned points:

Why Are We So Afraid Of Intimacy?

I have a problem. A problem with us, with our generation.

Last night, a friend showed it to me, and I harmlessly posted it on LOVEanon's Facebook page. It garnered a lot of Likes, and even a share:

I didn't think much of it until this morning, after I'd had a weird dream critiquing this idea. I began thinking about it more, and every second spent analyzing that dream, the more I realized this isn't ok -- the misunderstanding of romance. The angrier I became, the more frustrated. The more I realized that it isn't right, it isn't right that our generation has done a complete "180" in terms of relationships. Words I used in my head to describe how I feel about this included: awful, disappointing, concerning, disgusting. What happened to us!? Why is it that, now, it's easier to sleep with someone than go on a date? Why is it that now, you're more likely to sleep with someone than go on a date? Why is it that our generation is facing the end of courtship? In the past, you took the time to get to know someone. You took the time to care, to love. It wasn't always just about me, me, me. It wasn't always just about sex, or instant self-gratification. Conquering another's trust or simply using them period, just to tick another mark into our collective black book of unfulfillment and emptiness.

What happened? What happened to us that made us so... selfish? So disregarding of others? So shallow? Why have we become emotionally impotent? Am I being harsh? Am I being judgmental? Am I just merely being unrealistically or ridiculously, foolishly nostalgic?

No.

I don't think so. Just as the title says, I think it's our problem. I think it's a very serious problem, I think that problem is that we are afraid of intimacy, and I'm not the only person who thinks this. We're afraid of getting close. We're afraid of trusting. We're afraid that we're just going to get hurt again, hurt -- that thing that we can't seem to shake. That terrible ghost that just keeps haunting us, hanging over our heads, never going away, just recycling in our lives, one person after another.

What is wrong with us? Do you feel it?

How many of you feel like this is strangely reflective of your experiences?

Surely it's a problem, a social problem at that. Hell, a world problem, a global problem. I saw it in Lebanon just as often as I see it in the United States. I see it with friends in Europe, in Australia. In fact, a March 2007 article in Time Magazine highlighted how, after a 12-week period, "fear of intimacy" was the second-most searched fear on Google. The only thing that beat it was flying, however, "fear of intimacy" beat out the fear of the dark, death, spiders, even God. Moreover, intimacy was second, but love was seventh, and "being alone" was tenth. Isn't it just a bit troubling that love in today's world has become something feared!? In an attempt to explain it, the author provides suggestions:

"Sifting through over 1,500 "fear of" searches in the last 12 weeks, there are two opposites that play out repeatedly: we're afraid of being isolated ("fear of being alone") almost as much as we are of making a connection ("fear of intimacy"). Maybe this disconnect is fueled by our "fear of rejection" or a "fear of losing a loved one," or "fear of being dumped." Or maybe we've succumbed to the overwhelming volume of sexual dysfunction spam that's driven our "fear of not performing." Or maybe the discrepancy between these two most common fears is the concern we have about discussing our weaknesses with others. As email, text, and instant messaging replace our face-to-face communication, perhaps it's become easier to disconnect. [Maybe] we're more comfortable talking with a non-judgmental search engine about our problems, or maybe we're simply afraid of what our fears reveal about ourselves..."

I think he's right about a lot of things. I sincerely think that when it comes to love, we have lost our direction. Whether it is because of conspicuous consumption, materialism, globalization, urbanization, hyper-individualism, technology and the breakdown of face-to-face communication and small social networks, economic disparity and wealth inequality, generational gaps/distance, or worse, because of personal torment: abuse, hurt, pain, cynicism, pessimism, disdain, and even hate, we as human race seem to have lost the will to love. But in losing this, we have also lost so much more including our connectivity, our empathy, and our compassion.

As someone who has spent time researching this, it's not difficult to figure out where this is coming from either. Without trying to get into feminist perspectives on sexuality and love, and without trying to critique the sexual revolution, I just want to point out that some take a more positive approach to the changing nature of intimacy. This includes British sociologist Anthony Giddens (1992) who purported there's been a "Transformation of Intimacy" that is intrinsically linked to modernity and the various revolutions -- industrial, urban, technological, sexual -- which are causing historic changes in the way our sexuality functions (and is separate from reproduction). He thinks it's a good thing for society, for freedom, and for women especially. However, what is really obvious isn't just the macro-social change, but the actors and the context in our lives: our family, our parents, our peers, our culture, the mass media, and our own experiences. These were the pillars that contextualized my thesis, but really, they establish the foundation for romantic relationship development among adolescents and young adults period.

So, why are we so afraid of intimacy? Simple: it comes down to fear.

Look at the following illustration (original link from TruthSeekerDaily). Does it resonate with you?

"To love is to be vulnerable" - C. S. Lewis. How applicable is this to your life?

When I conducted interviews for my thesis in 2011, parents/family, peers, personal experiences, the media, and culture were all mentioned either directly or indirectly as influencing the participant's perceptions of romantic love. For instance, both positive and negative experiences helped shape their perspective, whether it was learning through positive relational behavior of their parents, or through the negative behaviors or consequences that befell their parents such as a divorce, or the heartbreak of a friend or other family member. Moreover, the interviewees were aware of these consequences, and often communicated that they took conscious measures to protect themselves from the experiences of these individuals, especially their parents.

A connected recurring theme was an expression of insecurity or fear related to either losing someone they love or getting emotionally hurt. While there is much literature related to uncertainty and insecurity within a relationship (e.g., Afifi and Burgoon, 1998; Knobloch and Solomon, 2003, 2005), Polish sociologist/social theorist Zygmunt Bauman (2003, 2006, 2007) proposed a theoretical conceptualization for understanding the fear of emotional hurt. In his 2003 book Liquid Love, he discussed "Liquid Modernity," the current state of human society where there's a lack of permanent, lasting social bonds. Due to this "liquidity," individuals have frail social bonds, which, in turn, generates insecurity; through this insecurity, individuals face the conflicting paradox of desiring to tighten their social bonds, yet simultaneously keep them loose (Bauman, 2003). In a beautiful passage, Bauman (2003) articulates the importance of love in modern times:

"In every love, there are at least two beings, each of them the great unknown in the equations of the other. This is what makes love feel like a caprice of fate -- that eerie and mysterious future...to love means opening up to that fate, that most sublime of all human conditions, one in which fear blends with joy into an alloy that no longer allows its ingredients to separate. Opening up to that fate means...admission of freedom into being: that freedom which is embodied in the Other, the companion of love" (P. 7).

He also sheds light, however, on the idea that lasting human bonds/commitments have become "analogous to stocks people have to constantly manage, but can also [be] acquire[d], and let go of" (Bauman, 2003: 14). He continues by stating: "If you invest in a relationship, the profit you expect is first and foremost security [i.e., support and companionship]...but be warned: promises of commitment to the relationship, once it is entered, are "meaningless in the long-term" [because]...relationships are investments like any other, but would it ever occur to you to take an oath of loyalty to the stocks you just bought from the broker? To swear you'd remain...through thick and thin, for richer and poorer, "'till death do us part?"" (Bauman, 2003: 14).

His perspective includes the breakdown of permanent social bonds and the reinforcement of the idea that social -- in this case, romantic -- relationships are not necessarily meant to last forever or always lead to sustained happiness. Moreover, it leads to uncertainty and severe insecurity which permeates almost every aspect of our lives. Many of the participants in my thesis reflected this through their parents’ relationships as well as many of the romantic relationships experienced by their peers.

I think it's time for some comic relief.

Intense, right? Well, we're surrounded by negativity. Call me nostalgic or romantic, but I wish we could emphasize a model like this instead:

"Love gives naught but itself and takes naught but from itself. Love possesses not nor would it be possessed; for love is sufficient unto love. When you love you should not say, "God is in my heart," but rather, "I am in the heart of God." And think not you can direct the course of love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course. Love has no other desire but to fulfill itself. But if you love and must needs have desires, let these be your desires: To melt and be like a running brook that sings its melody to the night; to know the pain of too much tenderness; to be wounded by your own understanding of love; and to bleed willingly and joyfully. To wake at dawn with a winged heart and give thanks for another day of loving; to rest at the noon hour and meditate love's ecstasy; to return home at eventide with gratitude; And then to sleep with a prayer for the beloved in your heart and a song of praise upon your lips." -- Khalil Gibran, "On Love," The Prophet.

When did we forget this? Did we ever really know it?

I remember when I was in college, I was lonely, but it wasn't just me. It seemed like almost everyone was in the same boat. In addition to them being lonely, I felt surrounded by their hurt from the burn of past experiences and their perceptions. And even with the guise of masculinity or sarcasm, that pain never seemed to heal. So, caught in-between loneliness and the complacency of non–commitment coupled with rejection, I personally lost faith in myself, in part, because I didn't love who I was and I wanted something from someone else; some kind of "completion."

What happened there?

I didn't really love myself, and I lost the courage to try and date. I lost the courage to just ask someone, "Hey, would you like to get dinner Friday night?" Call me a romantic at best, old–fashioned at worst, but when study after study validates how, at least certain Western societies, have become a "hook-up culture" (e.g., Manning, Giordano, and Longmore, 2006), it makes me wonder what happened to dating culture. What ever happened to taking someone out because you were interested in getting to know them? Because they made you laugh? Or you always smiled when you were with them? Because they understood you, or can identify with you? Are we so hurt, we don't let anyone in? Are we so jaded by the lack of romantic commitment in our lives and the lives of others that it's simply not worth it? Whatever happened to respect, and wanting to be with someone for what you could potentially share with someone, and not what they could give you?

As a long-time fan of his, Thomas Merton, evoking John Donne, once wrote a book called No Man is an Island, discussing how we can never experience true love, unselfishly, until we first love ourselves (I covered it extensively in this blog post). I realize this is a two-way street. Maybe you tried, and they rejected you. Maybe you put a lot of effort in, only to be tossed aside for someone else. Maybe they wanted something you couldn't offer. Maybe emotional fulfillment, emotional (and physical) support, and self-love manifest as a complex game of chicken and the egg. The fact is, the equation for attraction is so complex and is determined by such an infinite number of factors; it is the most advanced equation that makes quantum physics seem pale in comparison. Add to that the fact that being single is hard. As I've discussed previously in my post on monogamy and jealousy, if the added value vs. cost of pairing up were lower, we wouldn't have evolved, both biologically as well as socio-culturally, to favor it so strongly. In other words, the grass is always greener, but when it comes to the benefits of being in a loving relationship, the science speaks loud and clear (especially if you're male).

Unfortunately, this is -- or at least seems to be -- the nature of human relationships. But, in the future, what can you do differently? How about ask if true sincerity exists? Exists in such a way to look past our desire for instant gratification? How about instead, we reinvent the "date," that little event where two individuals can negotiate their attraction and chemistry, and see if things would work out? Take some time, get to know someone better. Remember that vulnerability is a powerful and beautiful thing that can lead to happiness as well. For who they are, not what they can offer. Away from social media, instant messaging, texting, college parties, university classrooms, work... somewhere special, romantic, personal. Something where you can show emotional investment, not merely exchanging time and a meal for a later reward. Dating doesn't exist so you can get something in return, it exists to understand someone better. By no means am I trying to generalize or be presumptuous, nor am I unintentionally trying to reinforce outdated gender and sexual stereotypes. But, my challenge is to have the courage to do what I often did not do enough: take the time to love yourself, so that you can love someone else. Take the time to overcome reservation with commitment and your insecurities; believe in love, trust once again, and always strive for emotional fulfillment.

I know this is contentious, and that's usually something I try to avoid. But we can't avoid this anymore. I WANT to talk about it. And if you don't, you should. We can't go on not talking about it anymore. It's your problem, it's my problem, is our problem -- we can't keep sweeping it under the rug, and pretending like it isn't happening. Don't think these problems will just go away or be fixed by either a relationship or an engagement ring. And even if you don't want to talk to me or comment on this post, that's beyond fine. But talk to yourself, be honest with yourself. Talk to a friend, a counselor, someone. We can't keep compounding our emotional hurt and relationship fears/insecurities, and burying them. They are only going to lead to more unhappiness. I refuse to back down, I will be aggressive about this! Whether you're in Lebanon, Jordan, the UAE, Europe, Japan, America, wherever, we NEED to talk about this! So, whether you start with yourself, or work on loving yourself more, just do something! Stop hiding behind your fear if you are! Stop hiding behind serial monogamy if you are!

If you think you may be afraid of intimacy, it's ok, there's nothing you can't overcome. A counseling website offers this quick test/assessment to help you if you're interested, and I suggest also reading this article that I linked to above with an interview with a sexual therapist.

I want to conclude by re-posting the transcript of what I attempted to write on Facebook after I had my 4 wisdom teeth extracted last Friday (and edited for grammar). I don't really remember writing it, but I think I was just voicing my -- otherwise, diplomatic -- opinion about people who don't care about anyone other than themselves. It seems like I just wasn't afraid to speak my mind (in my opinion, quite a vindicating feeling):

"In lieu of the wisdom teeth surgery (which was a great success), I just want to candidly state my disdain for selfish assholes who really don't care about how their actions ultimately lead to greater insecurity in both themselves, but more importantly, their relationship partners -- and fuck up people. Just love each other because they are a gift, not because of your own personal insecurities. It's not fair. And it not right. Treat people how they deserve to be treated: with dignity and respect."

I sincerely think we have a problem, and we NEED to fix it. Do you think I'm being too harsh? Am I being presumptuous or judgmental? What DO YOU think? I'm eager to hear. In the meantime, listen to this impassioned plea for why intimacy isn't just important, but it is ingrained into humanity's existence -- both historically and currently:

Have courage, love yourself, do not fear intimacy, face your insecurities, and spread the love,

-Ogie, MA

Update: Please see the comments section below for some updates/clarification, and some great additional points by others.

P.S. This video may shed more light on why we're afraid of intimacy:

References:

Afifi, Walid A., and Judee K. Burgoon. 1998. ""We Never Talk About That:" A Comparison of Cross-sex Friendships and Dating Relationships on Uncertainty and Topic Avoidance." Personal Relationships, 5: 255-272.

Bauman, Zygmunt. 2007. Liquid Times: Living in an Age of Uncertainty. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.

----. 2006. Liquid Fear. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. 

----. 2003. Liquid Love: On the Frailty of Human Bonds. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.

Giddens, Anthony. 1992. The Transformation of Intimacy: Sexuality, Love, and Eroticism in Modern Societies. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.

Knobloch, Leanne K., and Denise Haunani Solomon. 2005. "Relational Uncertainty and  Relational Information Processing: Questions Without Answers?". Communication Research, 32(3): 349-388.

----. 2003. "Responses to Changes in Relational Uncertainty Within Dating Relationships:  Emotions and Communication Strategies." Communication Studies, 54(3): 282-305.

Manning, Wendy D., Peggy C. Giordano, and Monica A. Longmore. 2006. "Hooking Up: The Relationship Contexts of "Nonrelationship" Sex." Journal of Adolescent Research, 21(5): 459-483.

Can Men and Women JUST Be Friends?

Good afternoon LOVEanese! Before I get into my topic, I just wanted to share two things. The first is a picture that I took in downtown Beirut:

Even the Beiruti sidewalks are catching on to the message!

The second is a really cool article that I saw in the AUB Main Gate magazine today:

It says "One day somebody will write a book about all the wonderful love stories that started on campus..." I sent them an e-mail telling them about my thesis and said, "I'm already way ahead of you!" :)

Just thought I'd share...

So, now, on to what I wanted to blog today about something I've seen going around Facebook and Twitter, and I figured now's a good time to talk about it since it's fresh in everyone's minds. There was a really cool video posted recently about whether men and women can be friends or not (the general rule being that they can't be friends). Basically, these two independent filmmakers went around and asked male and female students at Utah State University in America if they can be just platonic friends with someone from the opposite sex. You can check it out here:

Pretty powerful huh? More recently, this study (as reported in Scientific American) affirmed the validity of the pseudo-experiment conducted above. Well, in case you don't know, however, they weren't exactly the first to point this out. Hollywood has long purported this as "fact," and the person who is best known for making this idea famous was Harry from When Harry Met Sally (one of my favorite movies), and Oscar Wilde touched on it before as well in Lady Wildermere's Fan. Here's the famous scene from When Harry Met Sally:

So, that's what got it all started, and frankly, he may have a point. A lot has been written on the topic since as well. Before I get into whether or not men and women can enjoy platonic friendship, let's think about what's going on when two people want to be friends. As this author argues, basic platonic attraction comes out of sharing similar activities, values, communication styles, etc. that allow them to spend time together. So as individuals do things together that they both like, they often become friends. The article also has some great advice from relationship authors and scholars who have more to say about it (this podcast has a lot of great information too).

Some other really good articles and resources that talk about this are this one, this one (provides some examples/anecdotes), this one, and this one. In fact many people have tried to comment on this such as Chris Rock who has some wisdom and insight to share.

Even she has something to say about this! (RIP)

So, CAN men and women just be friends? The majority of the research so far actually says yes, they can be, but with conditions and rules. This author writing for Psychology Today (which has some really great resources) sums it up well:

"The point is that the majority of people believe friendships between the sexes is possible. The majority of people, I suspect, also know what their own parameters are and when those friendships are safe as friendships and when boundaries might be crossed. In that case, the friendship is at risk, and a marriage or partnership (if one of the friends is in one) may be in jeopardy.  I return to the need for transparency.  Know enough about yourself to understand when a friendship is possible and when you are being friendly with the hope of developing a love relationship -- the latter happens when you are physically as well as emotionally attracted to someone. There is no right or wrong way to do this but being honest with yourself (I admit I am being nice to this person in the hopes of getting them to like me) may prevent confusion and hurt feelings down the road."

Would a guy still sleep with a girl though, even if they were "just friends?" Research also suggest that yes, they would. In a study conducted by Bleske and Buss (2000: 131) found that "men perceived sex with their opposite-sex friends as more beneficial than did women. Women reported receiving protection from their opposite-sex friends more often than did men, and they perceived the protection as highly beneficial. Both men and women reported receiving information from opposite-sex friends about how to attract mates, and they perceived this information as beneficial." So, this reflects the video that I mentioned was going around. Men are perceived as being "protectors," whereas men tend to value the sex they can/do get from their opposite-sex friends. The authors relate this to evolutionary functioning.

What I would want to know is if this question of male-female platonic friendship can be achieved in the Arab world. As all of the above research/resources/articles all are framed within a non-Arab context, it just makes me wonder how these relationships are here. Moreover, it makes me wonder how these narratives are interacting with the local, pre-existing ones.

What do you think? Can they just be friends? Let me know if there's anything else I can expand further (I don't mind editing this (or any) post(s)).

Enjoy your friendships; spread the love,
-Ogie

References:

Bleske, April L., and David M. Buss. 2000. "Can Men and Women Be Just Friends?" Personal Relationships, 7: 131-151.

SEXtarianism: From Politics to the Bedroom

Happy Wednesday LOVEanese, and for all those in the States: happy Thanksgiving! Just a quick reminder. If you haven't "liked" LOVEanon on Facebook, go check it out. I post a lot of cool and quick links to articles/resources there because I use LOVEanon to post substantial information.

Now that the weekly housekeeping is out of the way... what's up with the title? Well, I think it's pretty clever, and it by no means is a demand for Lebanese institutions to stop discriminating based on sect and begin discriminating based on sex and gender (oh wait, they already do that). No, no... on the contrary, it just means let's educate ourselves and talk a bit about sex and sexual health.

For a long time I wanted to avoid this topic. This is a blog about love and relationships, not sex. But sex/physical acts are still a big part of many people's relationships. While they aren't necessarily connected, some Western scholars have noted a connection between romantic love and sex (C. Hendrick and S. Hendrick, 1989; Aron and Aron, 1991; Hatfield and Rapson, 1993; Sprecher and Regan, 1998; Kaestle and Halpern, 2007).

Although they may (or may not) be related, something I think we could all use a little more sexual education. Where can you get this information though? Let me introduce you to some of the best websites I've found that have real, quality sexual health resources and information:

1. The first is the best in my opinion: Kinsey Confidential. It has a lot of resources and articles that are written by scholars and professionals from the Kinsey Institute of Indiana University in the U.S. It's named after Alfred Kinsey, THE pioneer of sexual research. In addition, this site has really great links to sexual health resources.

2. Another highly-recommend sexual health and relationship resource is a blog authored by Dr. Justin Lehmiller called "The Psychology of Human Sexuality." It has a lot of great topics on it. I suggest you check it out as well, and follow him/the blog on Facebook and Twitter. He also often writes for the Science of Relationships, which is a premier relationship resource (including for topics related to sexuality!).

3. The third is Good in Bed. Like Kinsey Confidential, they use a lot of the existing and new research about sexuality to engage the readers. They also have cool links to new books, articles, and information regarding sex, romance, and sexual health.

3. The fourth is a blogger for the Huffington Post: Cara Santa Maria. You can check her blog posts out here. Regardless of what you think of the publication, she has some really cool links about love, romance, and sex. I really like this interactive infographic she posted about our brain when we fall in love.

4. The last one is called She Knows Love. It's a little more "Cosmo-esk," but of what I have read, I like it. By the way, on that note let me remind you to never, EVER believe anything you read in Cosmo.

Now if any of you are thinking "but these are things made for Americans and American audiences," you're right. They do have a lot of great, general information. But what's available for individuals in Lebanon or the Arab world regarding sexual resources?

One of them is the Marsa Sexual Health Center (Marsa means "anchor" in Arabic) which NOW Lebanon did a spotlight on as well. The first link also includes their location and contact information. It's in Beirut near Haigazian University in Clemenceau, and is also on Facebook via a group and a page (which also provides location contact info, and more). They "provide social, psychological, and medical services to all sexually active individuals in Lebanon regardless of gender, age, and sexual orientation in complete confidentiality."

Also, for an academic overview of sexuality in the Arab world see: Khalaf and Gagnon (Eds.) (2006). Some other interesting scholastic books and articles include: Mernissi (1971; 2001), Allen, Kilpatrick, and de Moor (Eds.) (1995), Brooks (1995), Abu-Lughod (1999) [1986], Hopwood (1999), Joseph (2005), Massad (2007), Khalaf and Saad Khalaf (Eds.) (2009).

So, now you have a few resources about sex... but that's not all I want to do with this post. If you notice, I didn't include any pictures making jokes and trying to entertain because it's not a joke. This is a very serious issue. I know I'm not the first to try and talk about it either. But today it really upset me today when a girl friend of mine called herself out for being different because she is open about her sexuality. Ladies and gentlemen, you don't need to be ashamed of it: embrace your sexuality, no matter if you're straight, gay, bi, somewhere in the middle, or no matter how public or private you wish it to be! It was at that moment impassioned words began to spew from my mouth that she shouldn't be bad, guilty, or dirty because she has a healthy outlook regarding sex. In fact, perhaps if more people were getting laid, people would be just a little bit happier and stop fighting like a bunch of spoiled rotten little kids so much.

Of course, your sexuality can include a wide range of practices. So, no matter how discrete or private you are about it, just stay educated. In a country where it's embarrassing to buy condoms from the neighborhood pharmacy, we have to be diligent about staying informed. I invite anyone to share their comments on how a lack of sexual education and sexual resources puts any kind of strain on romantic relationships, and also inform me of any other good sexual resources.

Feel free to disagree. Or agree. Just talk about it! This is your forum!

Spread the love (and make some if it floats your boat),

-Ogie

P.S. Seriously, stop reading Cosmo. Not kidding.

References:

Abu-Lughod, Lila. 1999 [1986]. Veiled Sentiments: Honor and Poetry in a Bedouin Society.  Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Allen, Roger, Hilary Kilpatrick, and Ed de Moor (Eds.). 1995. Love and Sexuality in Modern Arabic Literature. London, UK: Saqi.

Aron, Arthur, and Elaine N. Aron. 1991. "Love and Sexuality." Pp. 25-48 in Sexuality in Close Relationships, edited by Kathleen McKinney and Susan Sprecher. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Brooks, Geraldine. 1995. Nine Parts of Desire: The Hidden World of Islamic Women. Harpswell, ME: Anchor Publishing.

Hatfield, Elaine, and Richard L. Rapson. 1993. Love, Sex, and Intimacy: Their Psychology, Biology, and History. New York, NY: Harper Collins.

Hendrick, Clyde, and Susan S. Hendrick. 1989. "Research on Love: Does It Measure Up?"  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56: 784-794.

Hopwood, Derek. 1999. Sexual Encounters in the Middle East: The British, The French and The Arabs. Ithaca Press.

Joseph, Suad. 2005. "Learning Desire: Relational Pedagogies and the Desiring Female Subject in Lebanon." Journal of Middle East Women’s Studies, 1(1): 79-109.

Kaestle, Christine Elizabeth, and Carolyn Tucker Halpern. 2007. "What’s Love Got to Do With It? Sexual Behaviors of Opposite-Sex Couples Through Emerging Adulthood." Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 39(3): 134-140.

Khalaf, Samir, and John H. Gangon (Eds.). 2006. Sexuality in the Arab World. London, UK:  Saqi.

Khalaf, Samir, and Roseanne Saad Khalaf (Eds.). 2009. Arab Society and Culture: An Essential Reader. London, UK: Saqi.

Massad, Joseph A. 2007. Desiring Arabs. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Mernissi, Fatima. 2001. Scheherazade Goes West. New York, NY: Washington Square Press.

----. 1975. Beyond the Veil: Male-Female Dynamics in a Modern Muslim Society. New York, NY: Schenkman.

Sprecher, Susan, and Pamela C. Regan. 1998. "Passionate and Companionate Love in Courting  and Young Married Couples." Sociological Inquiry, 68(2): 163-185.