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

[Anonymous]

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.

[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.

Of course this is a possibility - but do you the remaining are all great non-shaming, non-coercive lovers who ensure their female partners finish first (or at all)? Or read or talk about sex?

[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.

+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.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People are misunderstanding and completely misusing this phrase.

People who dont understand it are (apparently) using it to mean "I like sex a lot". It's more about being open and nonjudgemental and wanting to explore consensual activities with their partner.

+1 I see it as “I may already have a kink and don’t want to be shamed for it, plus I may want to look for other possible kinks with you.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People are misunderstanding and completely misusing this phrase.

People who dont understand it are (apparently) using it to mean "I like sex a lot". It's more about being open and nonjudgemental and wanting to explore consensual activities with their partner.

+1 I see it as “I may already have a kink and don’t want to be shamed for it, plus I may want to look for other possible kinks with you.”

It’s such a turn-off to wear that as a label though. I can like sex and even have kinks without having to join some kind of affinity group. My best lovers would never have pasted that label on themselves.

[Anonymous]

Maybe the guys are checking box to show they are highly interested in sex, but to me it reads alternative: bisexual, polyamorous, into threesomes, swingers clubs, used to date a stripper, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People are misunderstanding and completely misusing this phrase.

People who dont understand it are (apparently) using it to mean "I like sex a lot". It's more about being open and nonjudgemental and wanting to explore consensual activities with their partner.

+1 I see it as “I may already have a kink and don’t want to be shamed for it, plus I may want to look for other possible kinks with you.”

It’s such a turn-off to wear that as a label though. I can like sex and even have kinks without having to join some kind of affinity group. My best lovers would never have pasted that label on themselves.

Did you meet your best lovers via OLD? And did you talk about sex / preferences before you became lovers? Or just dove in?

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People are misunderstanding and completely misusing this phrase.

People who dont understand it are (apparently) using it to mean "I like sex a lot". It's more about being open and nonjudgemental and wanting to explore consensual activities with their partner.

+1 I see it as “I may already have a kink and don’t want to be shamed for it, plus I may want to look for other possible kinks with you.”

It’s such a turn-off to wear that as a label though. I can like sex and even have kinks without having to join some kind of affinity group. My best lovers would never have pasted that label on themselves.

Did you meet your best lovers via OLD? And did you talk about sex / preferences before you became lovers? Or just dove in?

Why would I talk about it? It’s not like I need to read the reviews on Amazon. Is this why the kids these days aren’t having enough sex?

The issue with OLD is indeed that you can’t tell how much chemistry you have compared to meeting in person. But putting a Tik Tok label on yourself doesn’t solve that - it makes it worse, as if sex is something like a job interview.

[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.

Are you confusing putting a chili pepper on your OLD profile with actually being open about sex?

[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.

Are you confusing putting a chili pepper on your OLD profile with actually being open about sex?

? What?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People are misunderstanding and completely misusing this phrase.

People who dont understand it are (apparently) using it to mean "I like sex a lot". It's more about being open and nonjudgemental and wanting to explore consensual activities with their partner.

+1 I see it as “I may already have a kink and don’t want to be shamed for it, plus I may want to look for other possible kinks with you.”

It’s such a turn-off to wear that as a label though. I can like sex and even have kinks without having to join some kind of affinity group. My best lovers would never have pasted that label on themselves.

Did you meet your best lovers via OLD? And did you talk about sex / preferences before you became lovers? Or just dove in?

Why would I talk about it? It’s not like I need to read the reviews on Amazon. Is this why the kids these days aren’t having enough sex?

The issue with OLD is indeed that you can’t tell how much chemistry you have compared to meeting in person. But putting a Tik Tok label on yourself doesn’t solve that - it makes it worse, as if sex is something like a job interview.

Are you asking why you would talk about sex with the person you’re having sex with? Or about to have sex with? Pause and think about this.

If you were going on a date with someone - going out to eat - wouldn’t you ask about food preferences? Aversions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Are you confusing putting a chili pepper on your OLD profile with actually being open about sex?

? What?

PP seemed to be arguing that by labeling themselves as “sex positive” on OLD, women can become more empowered. I’m saying that’s silly and has zero to do with how empowered a woman actually is another her sexuality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People are misunderstanding and completely misusing this phrase.

People who dont understand it are (apparently) using it to mean "I like sex a lot". It's more about being open and nonjudgemental and wanting to explore consensual activities with their partner.

+1 I see it as “I may already have a kink and don’t want to be shamed for it, plus I may want to look for other possible kinks with you.”

It’s such a turn-off to wear that as a label though. I can like sex and even have kinks without having to join some kind of affinity group. My best lovers would never have pasted that label on themselves.

Did you meet your best lovers via OLD? And did you talk about sex / preferences before you became lovers? Or just dove in?

Why would I talk about it? It’s not like I need to read the reviews on Amazon. Is this why the kids these days aren’t having enough sex?

The issue with OLD is indeed that you can’t tell how much chemistry you have compared to meeting in person. But putting a Tik Tok label on yourself doesn’t solve that - it makes it worse, as if sex is something like a job interview.

Are you asking why you would talk about sex with the person you’re having sex with? Or about to have sex with? Pause and think about this.

If you were going on a date with someone - going out to eat - wouldn’t you ask about food preferences? Aversions?

The question is about *what you put in your profile.* Not how you actually approach sex. And no, I don’t think interviewing someone prior to sex about their sexual preferences is going to yield much information! Is this actually what you think? That by writing an essay about sex and giving yourself some kind of label, you’re going to have good sex? I’m not saying talking about sex is bad but it’s kind of about practice not theory. Talking during sex, well that’s another thing …

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Are you confusing putting a chili pepper on your OLD profile with actually being open about sex?

? What?

PP seemed to be arguing that by labeling themselves as “sex positive” on OLD, women can become more empowered. I’m saying that’s silly and has zero to do with how empowered a woman actually is another her sexuality.

PP was arguing that men who claim to be sex positive are actually being manipulative. I wrote in response that women who are comfortable talking about sex and their sexuality (ie - not ashamed) are less likely to be manipulated re: sex and certainly would be able to see thru a dudes BS better.

Also - the shaming around signaling in a straightforward (albeit imperfect way) that one is into sex and sex communication on OLD underscores the need for more transparency and comfort around discussing it. I mean - we include preferences for hiking or sports teams or food on OLD.