Robert (Bro. Pepper-spray of Reasoned Discussion) (montecristo) wrote,
Robert (Bro. Pepper-spray of Reasoned Discussion)

Y-O-U are makin' this hard

Lately, I've been running across a really interesting (or deviant, take your pick) idea that seems to be circulating through the zeitgeist: sex every day. Google that phrase and see what you get — 155 million hits... It's a topic that is apparently on a lot of minds. I've read some thoughts on the idea over the past couple of months when I happen to notice them. Apparently, some people have tried it and proceeded to write books about the experience. What I find funny about this concept is that outside of sports figures like Wilt Chamberlain or Tiger Woods it is almost never a guy whom you find promulgating this idea; it is women. While I have a much more modest experience in the sexual arena (where did Chamberlain find the time to have had 20,000 partners?) I personally know at least two women who would, at least at one time or other in their lives have desired or entertained the possibility of having sex every single day. One of those women was one with whom I actually made love on a semi-regular basis for a number of years.

Of course, for the most part, it isn't about variety and multiple partners. It's about sex with one person. Every day. Even with the qualification of it being the same person I think most guys would smile, at first, to contemplate the idea. The first thought to cross my mind when hearing of the idea was, outside of The Blue Lagoon, is this kind of carrying-on even logistically possible? Apparently, plenty of people, many of them women, think it is, or rather, wish it was. I know that former partner of mine thinks, or at least thought, at one point in her life, she could handle it. The funny thing in considering this is that, at least while we were together, she was as responsible for at least as many missed opportunities to live this philosophy as I was. The other woman, whom I know in a physically less intimate sense, probably thought or thinks so still that she could handle or desire sex every day as well. I definitely know one former partner who would not be up for it every day or who didn't think it was practical or desirable because she actually mentioned that she couldn't conceive of someone having sex that frequently on an extended, continuous basis. It makes me wonder how many women would really want sex every day, and I mean real sex, not fantasy sex, every day, with their partner. I wonder how many of my other partners in my admittedly statistically insignificant sample would have felt that it was or would be desirable. It is surprising sometimes, the things that somehow do not get discussed between people engaged in an intimate sexual relationship.

Despite the popularity of the idea, I don't think people actually put much serious thought into it. The fact that most partners don't engage in love-making every day is testament to the idea that most people don't consider the idea practical, at least beyond the initial stages of a relationship. The thing that occurs to me is that trying to have sex every day would be a real commitment beyond just "forsaking all others" and "not cheating." How many people can even imagine such a relationship mode? I think the first thing that crosses the mind when one tries to consider this is the act itself. You get the titillating mental porn video that goes through your head. You think about particularly good sex that you've had, especially with your partner and what it would be like to have that kind of experience every single day. The next level is trying to imagine your relationship remaining eternally in that first blush of passion, when you're still in the process of exploring each other and learning each other's tastes and style and marveling over the each other's psycho-spiritual and physical terrain as it were. I suspect that a lot of women who theoretically embrace the concept of sex every day get hung up on this level. They are imagining being in a relationship that remains in this initial phase indefinitely, eternally. Of course this doesn't happen, and anyone who has more than a little adult experience will realize that this is a truth of the universe — relationships, if engaged with commitment, evolve, grow and mature, whether we want them to do so or not, whether we work on them or not, for better or worse.

So, this leaves that "third level" about which people are supposedly writing books: a relationship which has matured past the initial rush of passion whose participants nevertheless still have intimate physical congress on a daily basis. Outside of the occasional internet article wherein the topic is brought up I haven't actually done any deep research into the topic. I haven't picked up any of the books and read. Even so, I would think that the topic is a lot more profound in its implications than people would think on first consideration. For the most part, I think sex drops in frequency from daily or near daily occurrence as a relationship matures, not because it has lost significance, but because the relationship has matured and a whole lot of other dimensions have been opened up in it. You become someone's partner in the enterprise of living day to day, you have jobs, have children, and a host of other claims on the time and energy of both partners develop. It isn't that there is "less love" but rather that love is a bit more than just sex every day. It is easy to say, and to grasp the idea that "love is more than just sex every day" but is that itself a copout for ducking occasions for physical intimacy?

It would certainly take a lot of logistical determination to re-orient all of those "other dimensions" to allow sex on a daily basis. It makes one think. The planning alone would take work. Imagine anticipating working late at the office and knowing that one's partner is also going to be exhausted by a particularly arduous task list for the day. That means you both have to wake up early, to make room for the sex, or else arrange to be available sometime during the busy day, if you're really committed to having sex every day. We moderns treat sex as if it were THE most important aspect of human existence. We will sell almost any and all other supposedly inalienable rights and liberties to a corrupt government for mere assurances of safety and security but our sexual rights cannot be infringed in any way, oh no, sir. They are the true political third rail, at least in the Western democracies. Regulate our speech, curtail our liberties, confiscate our property, reduce the freedom of travel to a revocable privilege, tell us what we cannot or must put in our bodies, jail us on false pretenses for pretend crimes after a mockery of due process ridiculously, and after a pornographically militarized "law enforcement" has abused us, and that is all merely another day in the glorious life of our empire to the average citizen, but should any pol muster the hubris to tell us when, where, or with whom or how many we can have sex and there will be political hell to pay for such a scoundrel. Nevertheless, do we really believe sex is as paramount as we appear to claim in all but act? One thing a commitment to having it every day with our partners would definitely be putting our money where our mouthes are. Such a commitment inherently forces consideration, planning, and reorganization of priorities in our lives. It would be treating sex as if it were actually important.

Another thing a commitment to daily sex with one's partner would cause is the elimination of emotional "slack" in our relationships. How many times is it easier not to muster up the inspiration and admiration for our partner and just take a pass on sex for the day than to actually make the effort to shift our focus and pay attention to the person who shares our life enough to gin up the kind of appreciation necessary for getting aroused and in the mood. There wouldn't be anymore mutual cop-outs in front of the television, no more trivial headaches and trivial complaints (although one would assume that sickness which constituted being in danger of coughing up a lung in response to any physical exertion would get one a pass). Of course, the idea goes beyond even this. Consider how much emotional "slack" happens in the average relationship. Just being "out of the mood" covers a whole host of interpersonal and communication sins which get a pass and are "overlooked" by one or both partners, sometimes until they pile up to the breaking point — as the Eagles song, "Life in the Fast Lane" puts it: "...out every evening until it was light; he was too tired to make it, she was too tired to fight about it..." Daily sex gives neither partner any kind of cover for that sort of "emotional lack of diligence." Imagine people rolling out of bed in the morning knowing for certain that they were going to be having sex with their partner sometime before turning in that evening. I'm thinking that the potential would be there for a subtle but significant shift of emotional perspective. I suspect that such an arrangement might motivate people to be more considerate of their partners throughout the day. Can you imagine having sex with someone angry or hurt? I'm sure it happens...and there does seem to be something kinky in the prospect...I wonder how likely it would be to stay angry at someone while having sex with them. My brother and I used to play a game as children. It involved staring at one another and making the most seriously angry or furious face we could muster. The object was too look the angrier and not crack-up. Whoever smiled or laughed first lost the game. I imagine that angry sex might possibly work that way. I could see starting out angry but how can you experience the kind of pleasure that an orgasm brings with someone and retain a negative emotional perspective on them? I think it would be difficult, at best, assuming some sort of gross tipping point had not been crossed, whereupon everything would be breaking down and all bets would be off anyway. At any rate, how could one retain a negative perspective across consecutive days of sex? I just don't see how that would be possible. Ultimately though, I suspect that there is a kind of chicken-and-egg thing at work here: daily sex may have the potential to improve our assessments of our partners, but conversely, I think only a couple with a relatively healthy relationship foundation would even have a chance of making such a commitment work. It wouldn't be for the faint of heart.

Is it possible? Some people must think so because I have certainly heard at least a few people I know claim that they ideally want and could handle such a thing. As for myself, I've only managed about three weeks or so of continuous daily sex with someone and that hasn't been recent. My highway and city mileages vary. Of course, I never gave a serious thought to the possibility that anyone in a longer-term relationship could manage such a thing or would seriously desire to undertake it.

Okay, vacation is officially over. I've got to get up early for work tomorrow. I'm off to bed — unfortunately, by myself for the time being. Heh.
Tags: love, philosophy, ponderings and curiosity, sex, women

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.