addressalign-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcameraccwcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-checkcircle-with-crosscircle-with-pluscrossdots-three-verticaleditemptyheartexporteye-with-lineeyefacebookfolderfullheartglobegmailgooglegroupshelp-with-circleimageimagesinstagramlinklocation-pinm-swarmSearchmailmessagesminusmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1ShapeoutlookpersonJoin Group on CardStartprice-ribbonShapeShapeShapeShapeImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartickettrashtriangle-downtriangle-uptwitteruserwarningyahoo

"New York Philosophy" Message Board › Sex Brainstorming

Sex Brainstorming

A former member
Post #: 1,861
2. How many of you (be honest now...if not with each other, at least with yourself) are interested/attracted to this topic merely as a process of stimulation? Is this something you're "truly" interested in from a philosophical standpoint...or are you just looking for a bit of fantasy? Somewhat a sexual encounter without the mess?! Are you looking to "hook up" at this live event? Make that rare, alluring connection with a possible mate, "Mr./Ms. Right" (or perhaps "Mr./Ms. Right-Now")? If so, is it anyone's right to criticize you for it?

Excellent, excellent question! I'm so glad someone brought this up because it's exactly why I'm on the fence about attending.

I think if people attend hoping to meet someone for a casual encounter at this event, then that's their right. It's nobody's business what each person's intentions are AS LONG AS those intentions don't interfere with the overall intention of this event. But then, what is the intention and purpose of this event? To be frank, it's not clear to me. The sexy graphic, the heavy focus on the bar/venue in the description. Is it to have a meaningful, stimulating structured discussion OR is it just to get as many people in a room as possible and make the bar money?

When we do these types of discussion groups with similar themes, we keep it to 25-30 people (Steve above has attended many of them) and the discussion is moderated appropriately to make sure we don't veer off topic or get sidetracked. It's very easy to have a room full of 30 women who've had a couple drinks become carried away when we're talking about how to give a great blow job. Things get rowdy. There's a certain level of management involved and I'm unsure if that is going to be implemented in this situation.

The Organizers first have to determine what their main intention is - is this a discussion group or party - and then proceed to make sure that they state that clearly in the description. When we hold classes of a sexual nature (especially the co-ed ones) , we state very clearly in the event description that we intend to have a structured, mature, insightful discussion and that, after the discussion has ended, mingling and socializing occur.
New York, NY
Post #: 184
These posts are fantastic, and several of us will be rolling up our sleeves this weekend and going through each of them. Keep them coming!

The point to our group has never been to "get as many people in a room as possible." We have an unusual format that has proven quite effective - been doing this for 2.5 years now (here and in my previous philosophy group in NC). People love engaging others in interesting debate and discussion, beyond the usual bar-talk.

Sure, if we took one extreme, we'd be having our meetings in a quiet conference room somewhere, with assigned pre-readings and strong moderators. If we took the other extreme, we would just go to a club and tell people to just talk about some subject. We have always taken the middle road - reasonably structured discussions at fun locations. Some events are smaller (limit 12, limit 30), most are medium (70-100), a couple are larger. Some events are more adademic (game theory, genetic basis for morality), others are more light-hearted (philosophy of Christmas, immortality, and of course this one).

I am always amazed at the feedback - almost always positive (thanks everyone!), with some saying they are happy that an academic subject was selected, other times some saying they are happy a 'fun' topic was picked. We try to balance between these.

I must admit that some (many?) of the events are a risk in some way, which is why this group is my favorite of those that I organize. Any variation on a venue, a format, or even a topic introduces risk of some sort, and this event is certainly no exception. That is one reason we have such a large AO team - our AOs have helped smooth things out countless times. Plus, I really believe that NY Phi members realize that we are always trying out new things, and are appreciative of the effort (and forgiving of the occasional hiccup). The feedback encourages us to keep on with what we are doing, including taking new risks. My primary internal rule is to design an event that I myself would like to attend, the rest flows from there.

And, I love designing our sexy graphics! Try making a graphic for immortality, or game theory... :-) Granted, a sexy graphic about sex seems easy, but I really like how this one turned out, and I think it carries some submliminal themes. Course, some may just see a seductive figure :-).

One way of combating discussion groups from losing focus is mixing them up more often - if a discussion round lasts an hour, odds are the group loses focus unless strongly moderated. However, we will take all the comments in this thread to heart.

Thanks for the suggestions so far!

A former member
Post #: 2
When all is said and done, and Mars and Jupiter are aligned...we are looking for a positive (pleasureable connection).
We tend to repeat actions or thoughts that make us feel good. Hence, you meet a person they make you feel good, because you feel good you want more, the more you get the more you look for and the more you want in that person. Eventually that leads to the ultimate pleasure:) sex. It doesn't always turn out that way but as pleasure seekers we (men & women) all look for pleasure one way or another.
A former member
Post #: 1
Some points on my mind related to it all:

I'm kind of surprised that the guilt issue has not been brought up yet. How does our upbringing and it's relationship to sexuality (open and accepting vs. prudish, inhibited and restrictive - and everything in between those extremes) factor into our current views about sex, our own sexuality, and our sexual experiences?

Virginity - What does it mean? Does it matter? Is it a virtue? Contemporary culture thinks of the word virgin as synonymous with purity, innocence, uncorrupted, etc. Doesn't that reflect a negative view of sex? That if we are no longer virgins then we have somehow sullied ourselves (through sex)? Doesn't it also reflect the idea that sex is somehow inherently damaging? Should we discard this notion of virginity being somewhat of an ideal or does it have some merit? Is the idea that children should be sexually innocent admirable or objectionable? If virginity is a virtuous ideal, then it would seem consistent that children remain pure of sexual ideas. But if virginity is not an ideal, maybe even a deficiency, why do we try to keep our young so sexually innocent? Put another way, if being sexually active is a healthy and good activity in and of itself (in the proper context) why is virginity a virtue?

Society and its standards:
We live in a super sexually-saturated society, yet almost paradoxically, we seem, as a society to have a fear of the sex act, and a fear of those things connected to real sexuality. When Janet Jackson's breast was let loose, the country went nuts, but no one seemed to mind at all the incredibly provocative bump-and-grind number they were performing prior to the debacle. Isn't this absurdly inconsistent? How does it make any sense that it's socially acceptable for women to be portrayed in skimpy lingerie but then claim it objectionable when full nudity is displayed? What is this contradiction rooted in? Does this contradiction manifest itself in our behaviors and expectations? How are other societies views on sexuality reflected in their social interactions and sexual expectations?

I'd also love to explore the interplay between sex, arousal, and emotions. How important is it to be turned on for a person to enjoy sex? How important is feeling emotionally close for a satisfying sexual experience? Can feeling emotional affection for someone get in the way of feeling sexual to them (and vice versa)? In a famous Seinfeld episode ("Spongeworthy"), Jerry makes the observation, "I admire the hell out of her. You can't have sex with someone you admire!" How can we resolve these tensions?

The documentary "This Film Is Not Yet Rated" highlights the way that there seems to be certain taboo against the display of female sexual pleasure in film. Does this reflect some misogynistic truth about our society?

Also, related to this topic, has anyone been watching the new Showtime series "Tell Me You Love Me"? It explores a lot of fascinating sexual and relationship issues that are touched on in this thread.
New York, NY
Post #: 185
thanks, everyone, the input on here has been great. the handouts are printed for this evening, and the ideas here have definitely been very helpful. I think you will recognize that I have incorporated many of the ideas here, in one form or another. especially the very first questions for the evening :-).
Powered by mvnForum

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy