Why do we actually have sex?
Our author is a couples and sex therapist and has written for us about sexuality and all the conventions, myths and other constructs associated with it. His polemical text is based on psychological and sexological theories as well as clinical experience and is intended to encourage readers to think about their sexuality.
If you ask people why they actually have sex, the first answer is usually: "for procreation". This is of course correct and important. We learn this in biology lessons at school: "The man inserts the erect penis into the woman's vagina. After a certain period of penetration, sperm is released, which meets an egg in the vagina, which then implants in the female uterus. Nine months later, a child is born" - so this is supposed to be sexuality?
Sure, we need to have sex in order to reproduce and ensure the continued existence of humanity. But if that were all that mattered, it would be enough to have sex five times in a lifetime, because that would result in two or three children and humanity would be saved. However, homosexual couples would then not have sex at all - no children can be conceived naturally through gay and lesbian sex. Reproduction can also be easily separated from sexuality with the invention of condoms, pills and other protective measures. So there must be other reasons why people have sex with each other.
When asked, people also confirm that they often simply "feel like it" and are "following an urge". They need to "let off some pressure". Of course, this is also completely true. The pleasure component plays an equally important role in sex. But if sexuality was reduced to this, we wouldn't need other people to do it. We could simply masturbate with the help of fantasies or pornographic media and relieve the pressure that way.
But why do we feel the need to have sex with other people? Even fewer respondents find adequate answers to this question. "Sexuality and intimacy to fulfil basic psychosocial needs" is the explanation from sexual science. We humans are social beings who are programmed to bond and are literally dependent on others. Although we can be proud of ourselves, it has a different quality when our friends and parents show us this, for example. Of course, we can also feel sorry for and comfort ourselves, but the embrace of someone close to us has a deeper effect. We all have a common need for recognition, closeness, security, safety, reassurance and much more. Sexuality is therefore a form of communication that can satisfy many of these needs. If we question and reflect on the meaning of sexual acts, we will realise that sexuality is much more than reproduction (procreation) and the satisfaction of pleasure.
Let's just ask ourselves the following questions: What does it mean when we get naked in front of another person? Isn't that proof of trust? What does it mean when we exchange bodily fluids and penetrate each other? We open up, feel safe, share something special, feel accepted and validated - exactly what social beings need. We can tell another person that they look good, that we like them, that we trust them, accept them or we can have sex with them. So which type of communication has the greater effect - verbal or physical?
In modern sexual therapies and counselling, the reflection of meaning is moving to the forefront and the so-called disorders and problems into the background. In the case of erectile dysfunction, you can also ask why an erection is so important for a fulfilling sexuality. "It's like this", "I need it, otherwise I can't satisfy my partner". These misconceptions are often recognised and accepted as a law of nature. Can two lesbian women have a fulfilling sexuality? Yes, aha - how is that possible without an erect penis? The supposed importance of penis size and erection is emphasised by pornographic media. Prototypically, we see a well-trained man penetrating his partner for hours in all possible positions in all available orifices. His actions are loudly validated by moans from the other person until he squirts loudly and clearly visible to the camera. Romance? Tenderness? Affection? Not a chance!
The internet is full of these images. From a sexological perspective, however, the flood of pornography is not too much sexuality, but rather too little[1] . Only the pleasure dimension is ever depicted. However, a reduction to this does not reflect the truth - what we see there is fiction and has little to do with real sexuality.
If he or she has an orgasm, then I can't have done that much wrong
What is good sex is determined by the partner's orgasm: "If he or she has an orgasm, then I can't have done that much wrong." Orgasm becomes "orgasm must" in order to confirm myself in my role as a sexual partner - as a "horny stud" or a "femme fatale". Driven by the idea of spasmodic "OrgasMuss production", we often don't even realise what beautiful and wonderful things are happening on the way there. What a pity. Perhaps we should replace "OrgasMuss" in favour of "OrgasKann" or "OrgasDarf" - that could take the pressure off one or the other.
"It was ONLY sex - honey!" Many people have certainly heard this sentence. If not in a private setting, then perhaps in a Hollywood film. After realising that: "it's not what it looks like" doesn't really cut it when you're caught in flagrante delicto, the importance of the sexual act must lose weight. But if we start to reflect on the meaning, we will soon realise that the "ONLY" is completely out of place. Why jeopardise her/his relationship, which is classified as very important in subjective terms? ONLY for sex? It is also no coincidence that people with a narcissistically accentuated personality do not manage to remain faithful. Narcissists need an excess of recognition, appreciation and affirmation. Sex seems to be a good way to get exactly that - at least in the short term and superficially. In contrast, there are people who are more anxious and avoidant. For these people, sex will probably be less about recognition and more about safety and security.
Now it quickly becomes clear that in order to fulfil these basic needs, we have to be meant as a person and not just as some objects that are available at the moment. These days, we find ourselves in this predicament not only in swingers clubs or at sex parties, but also on random or casual sex dates arranged via online platforms, where the motto is "in, up, down, out". This is not at all bad or reprehensible as long as the participants are aware of this. However, sex addictions often arise for precisely this reason. These people are looking, usually unconsciously, for recognition, closeness, safety, security or affirmation. However, the high of orgasm is often followed by a feeling of emptiness in these constellations - which results in the search being renewed. To increase the thrill, the number of sexual partners is increased, more extreme practices are tried and/or drugs are consumed. Basically, those affected are not permanently horny, but rather permanently lonely, in the sense of a lack or loss of the basic psychosocial needs listed. Psychologists call this condition deprivation. Against this background, trying to counter this emptiness with random sex is often the wrong plaster for the wound.
Away from erections and orgasms, towards "I feel good with you", "I think you're great" and/or "thank you for sharing this intimacy". Away from banging, fucking and blow jobs, towards the fulfilment of basic psychosocial needs. Away from "I have to function" and towards "I give and take very mindfully and consciously." In practice, the dimensions of sexuality are of course inseparable. However, reflecting on the different levels makes perfect sense in order to improve lived and perceived sexuality, prevent dysfunctions and avoid putting yourself and others in dangerous situations. Why am I actually doing this? Why am I having sex with this person? What is actually happening here and do I want it at all? Do I like to lick or suck because I like it or because I think I know that the other person thinks it's great? Do we do this because we think from porn that this is how it should work?
Sexuality in the mirror of society
Another important aspect that we must not forget when considering human sexuality is social influence. In a capitalist meritocracy, growth and performance optimisation are among the overriding and desirable goals. This is also reflected in our sexuality. It is an arena of performance in which the participants have to perform and deliver. Erections must be maintained and orgasms produced. It's best to moan loudly so that even the neighbours can hear that all sex partners involved have delivered an adequate performance.
The body is becoming a commodity - an asset that needs to be constantly improved. Cosmetic surgery is on the increase. Teeth must be whiter than snow and the areolas of the nipples must be in perfect proportion to the cup size. "As a homosexual, you don't have to live with such a dark anus": this could be the advertising slogan of a proctologist (specialist for the bowel) for so-called anal bleaching. With the new modification, I quickly create profiles on a few online platforms - "I don't want to meet people, I just need to check my 'market value'".
Neoliberalism teaches us that we should be free and autonomous individuals. We can and should achieve everything, preferably of our own accord and of our own free will. In this supposedly new freedom, the need and the endeavour for autonomy take centre stage. Unfortunately, autonomy is at odds with the need for intimacy. This results in a new task, namely to reconcile these two poles - but to do so, we first have to be aware of these needs - a major challenge for any relationship.
Male homosexual sexuality
One might assume that homosexuals are much more concerned with such things, as they inevitably deal with their sexuality during their development. During puberty, we get to know ourselves as sexual beings: The alpha boys in class are now into Marlene and into Sarah, I'm into Frank. That's stupid, especially in this phase of development it's good to be like the others and to go with the flow prevents unnecessary stress. Now I realise that I'm different from the others and I'm sure that I'm alone in my environment. So I set out in search of like-minded people - first on the internet and then in the so-called scene. I feel comfortable and, above all, understood there. I'm not an outsider, everyone here is different, just like me. Here I learn what it means to be gay and how gay sexuality works. A narrative emerges, a meaningful image that could sound like this or something similar: "Everyone has uninhibited sex with everyone and looks good doing it." What is learnt is how the "scene" lives its sexuality. However, it is rarely questioned why this is the case and, above all, whether I as an individual actually want this and whether my needs are really being adequately satisfied in this way. Sexuality is lived according to a learnt narrative and one's own needs are not questioned. Incidentally, homosexuals have no different needs to heterosexuals.
Notes from the author
Scientists would say that what is written should be seen probabilistically and not deterministically. This means that not every person in general and not every homosexual or narcissist in particular behaves in this way and must be exposed to these thoughts. However, there is a certain likelihood that some readers will recognise themselves in one part or another and be able to identify with them.
The ideas presented are based on psychological and sexological theories as well as on the author's clinical experience as a couples and sex therapist. The text is not intended to be judgemental or judgmental, but merely to stimulate reflection. We humans are far too complex for there to be one objective reality. However, perhaps the thoughts presented here will help the reader to reflect on individual sexuality and find a subjective truth - emancipated from social conventions, myths and other constructs that don't really suit him or her.
