Ask Your Question today
Do you think that people have sexual needs? Or is the term "needs" too strong to be used with regard to sex and we should speak only about sexual "wants", "likes" or "dislikes"?
| I am a man and I think people have sexual needs. | 163 | |
| I am a man and I think the word "needs" is too strong | 30 | |
| I am a woman and I think people have sexual needs | 111 | |
| I am a woman and I think the word "needs" is too strong | 30 |
It's not even human nature, it's instinctive for any animal that has sexual reproduction.
Lol. That's what I meant. But humans, some species of other primate, and dolphins are the few that have sex to fill urges and enjoyment as well. Yes, it is a means of reproduction, but it also gets annoying and sometimes painful, in the case of men, if one does not "blow their load" when heavily aroused. Not only that, but everytime you have sex with your significant other, it relaxes your body and releases a chemical that makes you feel like you really bonded. This is the same chemical that causes us to subconsciously select our mate in the first place. Therefore, I justify it as a need. :)
Oxygen is a need. Water is a need. Food is a need. I think sexual desires falls just a little bit under "need."
We were made to eat ,sleep and procreate it's as simple as that. That's just how we're wired. At least I am.
According to Maslow, it's one of our most basic needs. (note that he makes a distinction between sex and intimacy)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c3/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs.png
No. You don't die if you don't have sex, in fact it's in no way detrimental to your heath. Therefore it's not a need.
You could argue that some level of intimacy or companionship is a need for your emotional health, but that's not quite the same thing as sex.
If you don't need sex for your emotional health as well, it just mean you are frigid.
Never have a relationship with someone who HAS sexual needs when you don't understand what it is to be sexually frustrated.
Sex is a need - both physical and psychological for a person whose sexuality is not deficient in a way.
"There must be something wrong with you if you don't think like me".
Idiot.
It is not a problem to have an opinion which is different from mine. However, I don't think that what I wrote in my previous comment is only a matter of my own opinion.
Having sexual needs is manifested as sexual desire which is considered to be a part of a healthy sexual functioning. Hypoactive sexual desire disorder is an officially recognized sexual dysfunction - both the DSM-IV and the ICD-10 see this condition as problematic. A person with healthy sex drive needs sexual release - otherwise they experience sexual frustration which is detrimental to one's psychological health. A person who is sexually rejected by their partner on a regular basis takes it personally which influences their emotional well-being and impacts the quality of their relationship.
You can call me an idiot when I advice someone not to start relationship with a person who experiences sexuality completely differently but I still think that avoiding serious sexual incompatibility in a relationship is not a sign of mental retardation. Doing otherwise is at least an expression of total ignorance to sexual frustration experienced by people all around the world (BTW - it is not my case as I am lucky to have a great sex life with my partner).
Masturbation can be sexual relief. You don't need sex to have sexual relief.
"You can call me an idiot when I advice someone not to start relationship with a person who experiences sexuality completely differently but I still think that avoiding serious sexual incompatibility in a relationship is not a sign of mental retardation."
That bit of advice does not make you an idiot, that was sound advice you gave. There were other parts of your post I objected to. I objected to being labelled as "deficient". It is reductionist to presume that just because someone is different to you they must be deficient; there are possibilities that you had not considered.
You misunderstood my usage of the word "deficient". I didn't use it to indicate that someone is "deficient" because they are different from me. I meant it as a reference to sexual dysfunctions. Like it or not, but they are officially recognized as sexual health problems both in the DSM-IV and the ICD-10. We can discuss if the DSM-IV and the ICD-10 are reductionist but that would be a different thing.
My posts are based on what I have already stated - i.e. "Having sexual needs is manifested as sexual desire which is considered to be a part of a healthy sexual functioning. Hypoactive sexual desire disorder is an officially recognized sexual dysfunction - both the DSM-IV and the ICD-10 see this condition as problematic. A person with healthy sex drive needs sexual release - otherwise they experience sexual frustration which is detrimental to one's psychological health." Of course, one can masturbate to have sexual relief. But there is still the frustration stemming from the problem to get a partner or being sexually rejected by a partner on a regular basis and this frustration goes hand in hand with unfulfilled sexual needs. In addition, the need for sexual relief is still sexual need regardless of the way how you achieve the relief.
"If I do not like your opinions or if I cannot understand them because I am asexual, then I will call you an idiot."
Deprived Of Manhood, d.o.m.
"I don't understand that there is a middle ground between asexuality and my own sexuality, because I see the world in black and white" - You.
Saying that someone is "deficient" simply because they are different to you is enormously offensive AND illogical. I don't see why you can't see that.
I called that person an "idiot" because they said that someone who does not need sex is deficient, which is by all counts an idiotic thing to say. It's not that I dislike those opinions, it's that they are so obviously wrong.
By your logic, if my doctor finds that I have a tumour and he diagnoses me with cancer, then the doctor is an idiot and he is offensive and illogical. If I am blind and my doctor tells me that I am disabled, I should be offended because he does not respect my unique way of being a human being. If my sexologist finds out that I have no sexual needs, he can diagnose me with a diagnosis. That´s all. Think about it - your opinions might be so obviously wrong and I will not call you an idiot. Maybe you lack two things - sexual needs and education about biology/physiology/psychology etc.
It is not a problem to have an opinion which is different from mine. However, I don't think that what I wrote in my previous comment is only a matter of my own opinion.
Having sexual needs is manifested as sexual desire which is considered to be a part of a healthy sexual functioning. Hypoactive sexual desire disorder is an officially recognized sexual dysfunction - both the DSM-IV and the ICD-10 see this condition as problematic. A person with healthy sex drive needs sexual release - otherwise they experience sexual frustration which is detrimental to one's psychological health. A person who is sexually rejected by their partner on a regular basis takes it personally which influences their emotional well-being and impacts the quality of their relationship.
You can call me an idiot when I advice someone not to start relationship with a person who experiences sexuality completely differently but I still think that avoiding serious sexual incompatibility in a relationship is not a sign of mental retardation. Doing otherwise is at least an expression of total ignorance to sexual frustration experienced by people all around the world (BTW - it is not my case as I am lucky to have a great sex life with my partner).
Lack of sex does not necessarily imply rejection by a partner or anyone else, so the point about the emotional impacts of rejection is moot.
The diagnostic manuals are ever-changing. They are not gospel, they are not facts. They are guidelines based on the small amount of information we have.
The key word is "otherwise". "Otherwise they experience sexual frustration which is detrimental to one's psychological health", you say. "Otherwise". I need to write my essay, otherwise I will fail. By your logic, this means I have "essay needs". I need to write this comment otherwise I will be bored. By your logic, this means I have "comment needs". I need to wash my face otherwise I will become spotty. By your logic, this means I have "face-washing needs". "Otherwise" is a word that turns "needs" on it's head. "Needs" implies there is only one, single course of action: I MUST have sexual relief. "Otherwise" implies there is a conceivable alternative, so it is not true that you MUST have sex after all.
I have no problem with that advice. The advice is sound and probably accurate. That is not what I found idiotic about your post; I'm sure I made perfectly clear what I found idiotic about your post.
The point with lack of sex resulting in sexual frustration makes sense only in case of people who have sexual needs. You can skip that - if you don't have sexual needs it is understandable that discussing emotions going hand in hand with that makes little sense to you.
As for the diagnostic manuals, I agree with you that they are not gospel etc. However, based on knowledge we currently have, conditions which are seen unhealthy or dysfunctional have been defined. You can deal with it or reject it and if you are ill (or dysfunctional) you can call it a different mode of existence.
""Needs" implies there is only one, single course of action: I MUST have sexual relief. "Otherwise" implies there is a conceivable alternative, so it is not true that you MUST have sex after all."
What I mean is this:
A person with healthy sex drive needs sexual release and they either have it or experience sexual frustration. I suggested that there are only these possibilities for such person so the term "needs" is accurate in their case. Other possibilities are irrelevant because they are applicable only to people who don't fulfill the condition of having sexual needs such as you are.
For the majority of people they are "wants", "likes" or "dislikes". But there are some people who suffer sexual addiction, and for them, they are "needs". But this is the minority.
From my perspective, people who do not have sexual dysfunctions (such as arousal difficulties, lack of sexual desire etc...) have sexual needs, or as the previous user stated "It´s human nature". I mean if it is possible to speak about emotional needs, educational needs or physiological needs, why not also sexual needs? I guess that also animals have sexual needs or sexual instinct, and people are animals in biological sense (we are primates, animal species etc...). So I would say that people with sexual needs are not ill or suffering from sexual addiction. If anything, then maybe people without sexual needs suffer from sexual dysfunctions:)
But maybe I am just another sex addict, who knows? Fortunately sexual addiction is not an official medical diagnosis, it is not included in DSM IV and chances are that it will not appear in DSM V either, so this term is used mainly in pop psychology but naturally pharmatheutical companies or religious lobby groups would like to see it also officially recognized.
No.
I like sex. I'd go as far as to say I love sex. Sex is great, awesome, and I have a strong desire for it.
But do any of those things mean it is a need? No, absolutely not. If I didn't have sex, I would be fine. It would not cause me to become depressed, it would not kill me. It would not detriment either my mental or physical health.
"I like sex. I'd go as far as to say I love sex. Sex is great, awesome, and I have a strong desire for it."
Of course - you TOTALLY LOVE sex and have STAGGERING desire for it - although you don't NEED it and would be completely fine without it. Go say that bullshit to asexuals or someone who hasn't heard the word "sex" yet.
I HATE men who think that they are fucking horny and want sex all the time / every day etc. but if they met a woman who REALLY wants sex, they would run away from that nymphomaniac / sex addict!!! Fucking idiotic bullshit!!!
Because you'd be fine doesn't mean others would. You seem to be the one with "you should think like me" syndrom. I can definitely tell you that if I'd never have sex again I'd kill myself.
You are very lucky. Many men take medications for hypertension caused by inadequate sexual caring from a female partner.
Then I sympathize with them. They clearly have a need that cannot be satisfied with what they have, which is a shame. Some people have sexual needs, and others do not.
I am confused. Help me understand why they have shame.
The guys I am thinking of cannot get women because of their facial scars. One of them goes to nude beaches. Nudism is not sexual.
You misunderstand my use of the word "shame". You think I am suggesting these men ought to be ashamed. I am not suggesting that, that would be nonsense for me to say. I am suggesting that these men are unfortunate, and deserve my sympathy.
Replace the word "shame" with "misfortune". They mean the same thing.
"They clearly have a need that cannot be satisfied with what they have, which is unfortunate".
As a virgin I'm living proof that people don't have sexual needs... just an extremely large amount of desire and want
i think itz a desire or urge, we do notneed it but would like it. we could live with out it. we need to poo or we die, we dont need sex or we will die. u would re adapt .
i am a man and i have zero sexual needs. i never understood why it's so damn important to most people.
There can be a need for sexual release, sometimes I can't sleep when I feel especially horny but haven't masturbated (or persuaded boyfriend to wake up and have sex)
You just shouldn't put your sexual needs before your other needs, or anyone else's needs. It's also not an excuse for cheating or rape.