What does "sex positivity" mean on online dating profiles?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would expect this is a man trying to weed out women who view sex as an optional thing that is nice when the stars aligned. As a man who views sex as an ESSENTIAL regular part of a relationship, I fully understand wanting to weed those women out.

100%.

Of course, American social decorum dictates coded language be employed in this way.

I wouldn’t put it in a profile if I was single, but I would want to know if a woman saw sex as some sort of special event and less akin to, say, a normal healthy workout. Sex is so important to men in a relationship.

And I as a woman would want to know if you were any good in bed before I ventured to guess how often I’d want to have sex with you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sex positivity written on a man's profile in a dating site conveys to me that he is interested in a wide variety of sex acts and has his own kinks and desires high frequency (which is fine) but will label you as "not sex positive" if you do not agree to his tastes and frequency (which is not fine).

For me this is a kind of "coercive control" that is often part of abusive relationships. I have met a number of men who are into some version of non-monogamy, BDSM, etc. who use the label "frigid" for partners or potential partners who express a lack of interest in those activities.

That kind of labelling creates a kind of not-truly-consensual quality to the professed "sex positivity", IME.

+1000. Women and girls are still pressured and manipulated into sex they don’t want, all the time. A man saying he is “sex positive” or wanting a “sex positive” date rings all kinds of warning bells to me.

Mmm - this sort of proves the point about being more open about sex - first and foremost with yourself. Women who are empowered about sex and their sexuality are not going to be pressured or manipulated by a man who claims to be sex positive but isn’t.

Thanks for victim-blaming women in abusive relationships by telling us that empowered women are not going to be pressured or manipulated. You are doing exactly what I predicted the sex-positive label does - you are saying women who don't agree with it aren't being "open with themselves" about sex and that we are not empowered about our own sex and sexuality. BS. The problem is that even when we are comfortable with our sex and sexuality when we express that it is different than Mr. Sex Positive's desire at any given moment, our desires are labelled as the problem. We are "frigid" or "prudes" or as you more politely couched it "not empowered".

The problem is - women don't control men's behavior. I am an empowered woman who is not going to be pressured or manipulated. Despite that, I have lost count of how many times a guy has tried to pressure or manipulate me regarding sex. Most women have endured such pressure many times over the course of their life. Since I'm empowered, I am often able to walk away from these men. But that doesn't mean I wasn't pressured or manipulated - women frequently endure these attempts at manipulation, even if they are empowered enough to walk away.

But sometimes I'm not so empowered, and that doesn't have to do with *me*, that has to do with the structure of society and the role of dishonesty in sexual manipulation.

"Sex positive" declarations set up a situation that any disagreement means that the person disagreeing is "sex negative".

I'd much rather see a guy declare that he is into "mutually pleasurable and consensual sex" rather than "sex positive".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sex positivity written on a man's profile in a dating site conveys to me that he is interested in a wide variety of sex acts and has his own kinks and desires high frequency (which is fine) but will label you as "not sex positive" if you do not agree to his tastes and frequency (which is not fine).

For me this is a kind of "coercive control" that is often part of abusive relationships. I have met a number of men who are into some version of non-monogamy, BDSM, etc. who use the label "frigid" for partners or potential partners who express a lack of interest in those activities.

That kind of labelling creates a kind of not-truly-consensual quality to the professed "sex positivity", IME.

+1000. Women and girls are still pressured and manipulated into sex they don’t want, all the time. A man saying he is “sex positive” or wanting a “sex positive” date rings all kinds of warning bells to me.

Mmm - this sort of proves the point about being more open about sex - first and foremost with yourself. Women who are empowered about sex and their sexuality are not going to be pressured or manipulated by a man who claims to be sex positive but isn’t.

Thanks for victim-blaming women in abusive relationships by telling us that empowered women are not going to be pressured or manipulated. You are doing exactly what I predicted the sex-positive label does - you are saying women who don't agree with it aren't being "open with themselves" about sex and that we are not empowered about our own sex and sexuality. BS. The problem is that even when we are comfortable with our sex and sexuality when we express that it is different than Mr. Sex Positive's desire at any given moment, our desires are labelled as the problem. We are "frigid" or "prudes" or as you more politely couched it "not empowered".

The problem is - women don't control men's behavior. I am an empowered woman who is not going to be pressured or manipulated. Despite that, I have lost count of how many times a guy has tried to pressure or manipulate me regarding sex. Most women have endured such pressure many times over the course of their life. Since I'm empowered, I am often able to walk away from these men. But that doesn't mean I wasn't pressured or manipulated - women frequently endure these attempts at manipulation, even if they are empowered enough to walk away.

But sometimes I'm not so empowered, and that doesn't have to do with *me*, that has to do with the structure of society and the role of dishonesty in sexual manipulation.

"Sex positive" declarations set up a situation that any disagreement means that the person disagreeing is "sex negative".

I'd much rather see a guy declare that he is into "mutually pleasurable and consensual sex" rather than "sex positive".

PREACH

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sex positivity written on a man's profile in a dating site conveys to me that he is interested in a wide variety of sex acts and has his own kinks and desires high frequency (which is fine) but will label you as "not sex positive" if you do not agree to his tastes and frequency (which is not fine).

For me this is a kind of "coercive control" that is often part of abusive relationships. I have met a number of men who are into some version of non-monogamy, BDSM, etc. who use the label "frigid" for partners or potential partners who express a lack of interest in those activities.

That kind of labelling creates a kind of not-truly-consensual quality to the professed "sex positivity", IME.

+1000. Women and girls are still pressured and manipulated into sex they don’t want, all the time. A man saying he is “sex positive” or wanting a “sex positive” date rings all kinds of warning bells to me.

Mmm - this sort of proves the point about being more open about sex - first and foremost with yourself. Women who are empowered about sex and their sexuality are not going to be pressured or manipulated by a man who claims to be sex positive but isn’t.

Thanks for victim-blaming women in abusive relationships by telling us that empowered women are not going to be pressured or manipulated. You are doing exactly what I predicted the sex-positive label does - you are saying women who don't agree with it aren't being "open with themselves" about sex and that we are not empowered about our own sex and sexuality. BS. The problem is that even when we are comfortable with our sex and sexuality when we express that it is different than Mr. Sex Positive's desire at any given moment, our desires are labelled as the problem. We are "frigid" or "prudes" or as you more politely couched it "not empowered".

The problem is - women don't control men's behavior. I am an empowered woman who is not going to be pressured or manipulated. Despite that, I have lost count of how many times a guy has tried to pressure or manipulate me regarding sex. Most women have endured such pressure many times over the course of their life. Since I'm empowered, I am often able to walk away from these men. But that doesn't mean I wasn't pressured or manipulated - women frequently endure these attempts at manipulation, even if they are empowered enough to walk away.

But sometimes I'm not so empowered, and that doesn't have to do with *me*, that has to do with the structure of society and the role of dishonesty in sexual manipulation.

"Sex positive" declarations set up a situation that any disagreement means that the person disagreeing is "sex negative".

I'd much rather see a guy declare that he is into "mutually pleasurable and consensual sex" rather than "sex positive".

Sincerely - I hope you are getting the support and love need to work through this and continue your healing journey with self-compassion and care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sex positivity written on a man's profile in a dating site conveys to me that he is interested in a wide variety of sex acts and has his own kinks and desires high frequency (which is fine) but will label you as "not sex positive" if you do not agree to his tastes and frequency (which is not fine).

For me this is a kind of "coercive control" that is often part of abusive relationships. I have met a number of men who are into some version of non-monogamy, BDSM, etc. who use the label "frigid" for partners or potential partners who express a lack of interest in those activities.

That kind of labelling creates a kind of not-truly-consensual quality to the professed "sex positivity", IME.

I just read the 8 pages of this thread, and this is the closest to the correct answer.

Everyone on OLD is looking for romance, so it should be a basic starting place that they're ultimately looking for sex. Therefore, putting "sex positive" on your profile means something more than being open to a satisfying sex life.

I take "sex positivity" as a guy who wants to do butt stuff, so that on the third date when he tries to take things that way, and the woman deflects, he gets frustrated, calls her out for doing a bait and switch on her OLD profile, and tells her that she's not "sex positive".

This is complete "cool girl" tactic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would expect this is a man trying to weed out women who view sex as an optional thing that is nice when the stars aligned. As a man who views sex as an ESSENTIAL regular part of a relationship, I fully understand wanting to weed those women out.

Nobody gets to demand sex from another person … it sounds incredibly entitled coming from a man.

And you are person that this guy is weeding out. You are a red flag.
The idea that you don't understand that people have different needs and wants versus rape is a huge red flag.

“Sex positivity” = will have sex with me per the frequency & type of sex I “need” and “want.” Conceptualizing sexuality as unilaterally getting your “needs” met is … extremely unsexy.

This.

Fine if you need a one time palate cleanser after a breakup. Not worth the effort otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Man: non-monogamy (he actually probably already has a wife or serious partner/girlfriend at home), and/or wants “porn sex” all the time.

Woman: current or former sex worker.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would expect this is a man trying to weed out women who view sex as an optional thing that is nice when the stars aligned. As a man who views sex as an ESSENTIAL regular part of a relationship, I fully understand wanting to weed those women out.

Nobody gets to demand sex from another person … it sounds incredibly entitled coming from a man.

How do you see this as demanding sex? Especially of someone he hasn't met.

[Anonymous]

I would assume it means that they're kink or are very open to sex however anyone wants it (for example if someone is into anal) or if they want to experiment and try new things even if it means they find they don't like some of them.

For me, experimentation and fun sex is good. That said, I would be cautious initially because sex positive is a bit of an amorphous term that could mean a lot of different things to a lot of different people.

[Anonymous]

In my OLD experience, “sex positive” or “open minded” were the code words for men who were looking for threesomes, ENM, or had a serous GF/wife already and just looked to step out. Usually these guys don’t invite you back to their place as she lives there

[Anonymous]

DTF

[Anonymous]

They are into sex not just as a part of a relationship, but as a larger “lifestyle.” Poly, swinging, BDSM, fetish stuff. The stuff that people make their entire personalities.

[Anonymous]

Means they have a high body count and will do threesomes.

[Anonymous]

Many of these replies mention the things that would worry me. I would assume it means more than just “likes to do it frequently” which would be fine with me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Many of these replies mention the things that would worry me. I would assume it means more than just “likes to do it frequently” which would be fine with me.

And you should worry. Absolutely all men who had “sex positive”, “open minded” and “sexy” in what they were seeking in a woman were into the above listed “kinks”, or not technically single. It’s important to learn more about the person first and really pay attention if you don’t want to be dragged into a relationship of this sort. Where you would have to pretend that you enjoy or tolerate certain kinks out of love to him. Absolutely all men of this sort I came across were very attractive, successful types, who projected insane masculine energy, and were easy to fall for them.