Sociosexual

[ErosWired]

I just recently came across the term sociosexual as meaning a person inclined to non-committal, no-strings sexual contacts with other people, as opposed to relationship-oriented or monogamist sexual attachment. Sociosexual people are the promiscuous ones, the ones who end up being looked on as sluts, whores, people of loose morals and poor discrimination, yet simply take what I would consider a more open and less constrained view of sexual behavior.

 I’m starting to think that I like sociosexual as a term for my sexual orientation far better than bisexual or gay, which both impose constraints of their own and neither of which conveys any sense of my open attitude toward the use of my body for sex.

Currently sociosexual is a term largely confined to studies of human sexuality and social behavior, but I can see a place for it in the way we talk about how we identify ourselves. What do you all think?

Edited August 12, 2022 by ErosWired

[BootmanLA]

4 minutes ago, ErosWired said:

I just recently came across the term sociosexual as meaning a person inclined to non-committal, no-strings sexual contacts with other people, as opposed to relationship-oriented or monogamist sexual attachment. Sociosexual people are the promiscuous ones, the ones who end up being looked on as sluts, whores, people of loose morals and poor discrimination, yet simply take what I would consider a more open and less constrained view of sexual behavior.

 I’m starting to think that I like sociosexual as a term for my sexual orientation far better than bisexual or gay, which both impose constraints of their own and neither of which conveys any sense of my open attitude toward the use of my body for sex.

Currently sociosexual is a term largely confined to studies of human sexuality and social behavior, but I can see a place for it in the way we talk about how we identify ourselves. What do you all think?

I'd want to see a clearer definition before endorsing the term for a particular meaning, and my reasoning is thus: "non-committal, no-strings sexual contacts" covers a wide range of behaviors, from people who want "friends with benefits" and thus limit partners to people they actually know and like, to people who go ass-up in a cruising park or bathhouse on a regular basis. Plenty of people who like "non-commital, no-strings sexual contacts" are anything BUT promiscuous (though I will admit there are some judgey folks out there who think any sex outside of a serious relationship is slutty).

It sounds to me (from  your post, and correct me if I'm wrong) that you want to redefine the term away from its human sexuality/social behavior meaning (ie "doesn't want strings") towards a "I'll do anyone who wants it" connotation. Is that because there doesn't seem to be an existing word for how you view your orientation? Something that means "exceptionally non-discriminating"?

[hntnhole]

20 minutes ago, BootmanLA said:

"exceptionally non-discriminating"

Interesting topic.  The Googler includes a pre-existing condition in it's definition, namely a pre-existing relationship (no further qualifiers included).  There were several sources* cited, most specifically including that requirement.  It appears that someone who isn't in a relationship couldn't fit into that definition. Of note, there are tons of guys that are in a relationship that also regularly indulge in extra-relationship sex, whether the other half knows it or not. 

How would you quantify "exceptionally"?  99 out of 100 opportunities taken?  80? 70?  By opportunities, I mean any available Holes in a backroom/fuckjoint.  

There are guys in those places that I wouldn't bother with, for any number of reasons; unprepared, asscheeks so fat I couldn't get past them and into the Hole, talking too much bs, stuff like that, but I imagine that's pretty much a universal experience for us.    

Thanks for the subject post, EW, and cranking up the issue, BMLA

*some more scholarly, some less so

[BootmanLA]

Just now, hntnhole said:

How would you quantify "exceptionally"?  99 out of 100 opportunities taken?  80? 70?  By opportunities, I mean any available Holes in a backroom/fuckjoint.  

I was using that phrase specifically for ErosWired as it seems (from my perspective, which of course isn't his) to describe his particular situation accurately. I wouldn't want to hazard a guess as to *how* non-discriminatory one would have to be, in order to qualify as "exceptionally" - just that his own reference to "any and all" would seem to fit any such requirement.

[hntnhole]

Alright, I understand your phrasing.  Thanks for that explanation then ... 

[VersGuyAnon]

1 hour ago, ErosWired said:

I just recently came across the term sociosexual as meaning a person inclined to non-committal, no-strings sexual contacts with other people, as opposed to relationship-oriented or monogamist sexual attachment. Sociosexual people are the promiscuous ones, the ones who end up being looked on as sluts, whores, people of loose morals and poor discrimination, yet simply take what I would consider a more open and less constrained view of sexual behavior.

 I’m starting to think that I like sociosexual as a term for my sexual orientation far better than bisexual or gay, which both impose constraints of their own and neither of which conveys any sense of my open attitude toward the use of my body for sex.

Currently sociosexual is a term largely confined to studies of human sexuality and social behavior, but I can see a place for it in the way we talk about how we identify ourselves. What do you all think?

Based on your description I like it and it definitely applies to me!

[ErosWired]

5 hours ago, BootmanLA said:

It sounds to me (from  your post, and correct me if I'm wrong) that you want to redefine the term away from its human sexuality/social behavior meaning (ie "doesn't want strings") towards a "I'll do anyone who wants it" connotation.

Not at all. I merely find the term more fitting in the sense that my sexual interactions with other people are social in nature rather than personal and intimate. One of the interesting things about sociosexual types is that they have been found to be predominantly extroverts; I’m an introvert by most any measure except when I’m engaged in sexual interaction and the pursuit thereof. My tendency to behave in a mote extroverted way sexually, for me, is another reason the term seems to have some utility.

 I’m not attempting to find a word to mean “I’ll do anyone who wants it”. For my purposes cumdump is perfectly adequate for that. I’m looking at this term mote as an alternative to the gay/bi lexicon, which has always seemed unnecessarily laden to me, focusing as it does on preference. I have no particular preference. But I do like sex. Sometimes when I hear someone express uncertainty about whether to say they’re gay, bi or something else, my advice is just to say, “I’m sexy.” I like this term because it ignores those distinctions.

I’m by no means suggesting that this term replace terms already in use that fit individual situations better. I’m just proposing that this one may be a useful addition for some people if they find it describes them better.

[funpozbottom]

It is difficult to find a term that fully encompasses a person's sexuality because sexuality is complicated and fluid, and each term only addresses one single aspect. So for example, I am only interested in individuals with a penis, so I consider myself "gay" (although I leave open the possibility of sex with someone who is trans). So that explains attraction but doesn't address the type of relationship I'd like. For that, I'd use the term, "asocial", which  means I am not interested in social relationships, however, it doesn't fully express my desires to have sex, or that I'll have sex with guys I'm not particularly attracted to. Sociosexual helps to express my desire for anonymous, non-committed sex, but I still need the other two terms to clarify that I am only interested in sex with men and not looking for any relationship. But even adding that doesn't address the role/position, type of sex, kinks and fetishes I enjoy or are willing to indulge in for someone's pleasure.

The only single term I've found that fully expresses my sexuality is simply to say I'm human.

[ErosWired]

3 hours ago, funpozbottom said:

The only single term I've found that fully expresses my sexuality is simply to say I'm human.

I’ll mark you down as a lumper, not a splitter. 😉