College Sex - Philosophy for Everyone: Philosophers With Benefits (13 page)

Graphic Sex

Making sex at a distance seemingly awaited tech-assisted communica- tion. Phone sex, sexting, and especially Skype sex may surpass the flow- eriest of love-letter rhetoric if done right, and it is far more timely than snail mail. One can’t “get naked” in letters, after all, even when baring one’s soul. Video-chats currently advance forbidden sexual purposes – partners stripping for each other, mutual masturbation, mutually observed. Couples can enhance these communications by transporting in-person sexual rituals to their media embrace – playing the same music, producing the same aromas (incense) and bedding patterns in each locale. A key here is how difficult it is to go in the other direction – email- ing each other while wrapped in bodily embrace. Thus, distance relation has the advantage. Enhancing up-close relation via such technology feels inherently inappropriate, as those few who Skype or film each other sex- ually at close quarters can testify. (I asked.) Doing so has its thrills, but couples are unable to hurdle the intrusive qualities of such media for in- person relating. Not so for distance coupling.

Does it seem perverse to nurture excellences in the arts of electronic lovemaking which merely simulate the real thing? Isn’t authenticity what marks true love? The idea posed, however, is that such lovemaking should

not be mere simulation. It is art’s perfect new lovemaking form. Regardless, there’s a lot more to sex and love than true love, and artifice is a part of all art, the art of love included.

Many couples get a sense of using each other for sex as the depersonal- izing features of passion increases, and the most creative media lovemak- ing can be accused of enhanced depersonalization to some degree. As we get addicted to email and sexting, so we may get addicted to videosex.We may crave its graphic appearance at the expense of less visual romance and tenderness on screen. “As soon as the Skype call is connected, all you want to do is get naked.”

As one interviewed student regarded in-person reunions, “We get together, the sex is great, wild, intense, but it seems to take over the visit, even before we can really reacquaint. It becomes all we seem to do during our visits. It’s like we barely “saw” each other when leaving. Raw sex isn’t really heart to heart communication, much less head to head.” And another student: “As much as I ached for sex while we were apart … it felt like we almost got that out of the way at first each visit. Then we could really talk and just hug each other.… Sometimes later in the visit, I don’t even want to have sex again. But I feel like we have to since we can’t soon.… It feels like a great gain at the time, but it’s really a loss.” Still another student: “Sex is the glamour part of reunion. And you feel, ‘how can I trade that for something as mundane as taking a walk together, holding hands or what- ever.’ But then you’re sorry later you didn’t make that trade more.”

Making this trade has consequences however, given our “glamour” expectations for reunions and videochats both. What if sex is unexpect- edly delayed at the start of a long-awaited visit or call? (Arriving during a must-see college event can cause this, as can some big news to convey on a Skype call.)What if the first opportunities to be alone bring estranged feelings rather than sex, or sex without the anticipated passion? In per- son, this is predictable psychologically. Our subconscious is not as rea- sonable as we are. It may want to punish our partner for abandonment just for being so geographically distant from us for so long. Videocalls leave us geographically distant the whole while, a subconsciously punish- able offense. And while a certain kinkyness to video lovemaking may spur passion, some partners may have difficulty responding to it. What if the evening goes on, during a visit, but without sexual accompaniment? If sleeping together then only brings sleep, there is more estrangement.
Far Away, So Close
, says the movie title. Having a videochat end with just chat, when more was expected, can leave an empty, disappointed, even resentful feeling.

The Ideal

How can we turn a distance relationship into a masterpiece of a relation- ship? Student interviews said little on this topic. And, of course, they never took up this Aristotelian challenge regarding media-assisted love. In part, excellence rises from the pursuit of goals – ultimate goals of ulti- mate value. Integrating true love with hot sex seems the college
summum bonum
(highest good). But may I pose two alternatives? First, consider sex, not love, as the distance-ideal.The burdens and sacrifices we consid- ered for the distance relationship all stem from deep feelings and strong bonds – love delayed and denied by separation. It’s simpler from afar. It allows easier compartmentalizing of work and play, along with greater fantasy delight from afar. There’s far less anguished tugging on heart- strings when things are amiss, and less complicated reunions as well. Space between couplings often enhances sexual thrill, keeping sex fresh

– not so love. Loving sex may be more elevated, but at a distance, it is a more difficult stretch.

Second, consider infatuation as a distance ideal, too often short-sold. Infatuation holds the greatest intensity of joy and excitement love offers. It sustains “flow” and “peak experience” for unimaginable dura- tions, even in fantasy. And it provides nothing short of hormone-raging ecstasy on contact. Adults seem to relish calling this state superficial, childish, and fated to fade. So what? What happens afterwards makes infatuation no less spectacular and all-consuming while ongoing. (We’re not asking it to rival the pyramids after all – short but sweet is nice too.) And how credible is the “infatuation fade theory” on analy- sis? When questioning adult know-it-alls on this matter, I noticed that they couldn’t recall prior reflection on how infatuation could be extended. Much less had they ever tried to extend it in practice. The possibility had never occurred to them. They never considered the Aristotelian prospect that infatuation fielded a team of abilities that we can learn to wield and perfect.

The fading of infatuation may seem natural and inherent to the condi- tion, but it noticeably marks a general failure of diligence and proper care, like the pervasive adult tendency to lose curiosity and wonder, or let one’s figure go. Laziness in passion may be the best explanation for why love “matures” into “tender companionship” at older ages, trumping “a time for all seasons” rationale. As adults, we slowly retire our love and lives, neglecting the arts of keeping life fresh and romance alive.

No wonder kids typically respond that “parents just don’t understand” when they criticize infatuation. Young, immature, “irresponsible” love is also wildly intense love, as is young sex, once kids get the hang of it. Hormones, freshness of anticipated experience, forbidden pleasure, and the breaking of taboos make young love the perfect storm of emotional obsession and whole-self involvement.

The Arts of Distance Loving

Aside from goal-direction, the art of the distance relationship requires polished performance-abilities, “excellences” or “virtues,” and the moti- vations for nurturing them ably. On the matter of peak performance – on expressing our nurtured excellences in masterful action – the Aristotelian keywords are style and timeliness. To wit: doing the right thing, in the right way, at the right time, with the right people. A student interview addresses the matter:

Long, drawn-out phone calls every night from far away can become monotonous and, consequently, draining. We’re blessed with a variation of technologies that can mix up the styles of communication, providing the feeling of multiple activities together. And in fact, we communicate differ- ently via each one – short emails, videochats, text messages. An intimate relationship should be full of those minor, trivial comments that can be shared freely, not for practical reasons or adherence to social norms but just for off the cuff thinking out loud. If two partners can casually text mes- sage throughout the day … both members stay a part of each other’s lives in real-time. It’s like the real thing of being together where the little things count most. Mixing in a short phone call at night, a videochat now and then, that’s wonderful. It’s just the right combination.

We found that visiting each other every three weeks worked best. If we saw each other more often it would have interfered with opportunities to have meaningful friendship with other students on our campuses. Then we’d feel like outsiders in our own homes.… There’d be too much pressure on the relationship and the partner to deliver during those brief visits. Better balance this way. And it also means that when we talk at night, we have something worthwhile to say.

I leave you to discover the artful particulars here for yourself, which Aristotle perceptively left to each person’s exploratory experience and

self-development. No general principles or formulas are likely here to allow general evaluation – at least none that avoid sounding like cheesy self-help programs. Completing the comparative case for distance and up-close relations awaits a comparative justification for these possible ideals, and the previous love ideal. It also requires evaluating the chal- lenges of pursuing them – how hard they are to master.

The Last Word

Perhaps distance relationships should be avoided by most of us where feasible. Perhaps the case for them must always play catch-up to up-close alternatives. Still, some couples, I suspect, should consider marrying into them. I’ve met couples who have done so permanently, and to good effect. All of us may be meant to love, but some of us only as hermits. We are the hermit type and too picky to accommodate others’ little quirks. We live too much “in our heads” to summon the constant attention needed for constant interacting. And so, living together is a really bad idea! Such couples have worked out creative arrangements to live largely apart, dating each other (exclusively) from the privacy of separate abodes, ‘til death do they part. Seeing much less of each other, missing each other occasionally, not only keeps their love alive and untrammeled, but romantic and vibrant. And over time, with increasing age, they stop car- ing “how it looks.”

NOTES

1. I’d like to thank my Rensselaer students for information on distance relation- ships, especially Kyle Monahan, James Letteney, Cale Hays, Josh Seldin, and John Mazza, as well as my sweet Mt Holyoke daughter, Emma Puka-Beals, and her NYU boyfriend Dave Seaward.
   

2. Aristotle,
   Nicomachean Ethics
   , in
   The Basic Works of Aristotle
   , ed. Richard McKeon (New York: Random House, 1968).
   

PA RT II

SOPHOMORE YEAR

Friends With Benefits

WILLIAM O. STEPHENS
1

CHAPTER 6

WHAT’S LOVE GOT TO DO WITH IT?

Epicureanism and Friends with Benefits

Epicureans and Pleasure

The ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus and his followers believed that the good, the ultimate goal of all our actions, is pleasure. By nature all animals pursue pleasure and avoid pain and behave appro- priately in doing so. Since human beings are ani- mals too, and particularly intelligent ones at that, the good life for human beings is, the Epicureans argued, the pleasant life. This conception of the

good life has an obvious appeal, and not only for college students. But the best strategy for achieving this pleasant life may not be quite so obvious. It may seem safe to suppose that Epicureans would consider all kinds of gratification, including sex, to be worth pursuing, but in fact they rejected the idea that all pleasures should be sought equally. Epicurus writes: “No pleasure is a bad thing in itself. But the things which produce certain pleasures bring troubles many times greater than the pleasures.”
2

Epicurus and his followers also rejected the common opinion that the more pleasant something is, the more vigorously one should go for it. The Epicureans believed that the best kind of pleasure is the purest kind, and the purest kind of pleasure results in no pain at all. They argued that happiness consists in freedom from pain and in particular from pain caused by unfulfilled desires. Consequently, we need to understand the nature of different kinds of desires and use reason to

distinguish among them in order to lead a happy life. Epicurean ethical philosophy thereby provides a conceptual framework that enables us to fulfill those desires that need to be fulfilled, to avoid pursuing those desires that are difficult to satisfy, to avoid pursuing those desires which tend to result in greater pains than pleasures, and to eliminate alto- gether those desires that are impossible to fulfill or that always result in more pain than pleasure.

What did the Epicureans think about sex? In this essay I will explore how Epicurean philosophy applies to sex and the idea of friends with benefits among college students. I will argue that Epicureans regard good friends to be much more reliable than good sex, and so college students ought to keep their friends by avoiding having sex with them.

Freedom from Anxiety and Types of Desires

The Epicureans distinguished between two kinds of pain that our natu- ral powers of reason can remove: physical pain and mental distress. Physical pains afflict us only in the present. Mental distress includes present unpleasant memories, present regrets about the past, present fears, and present worries about the future. Whereas present pangs are ever transient, the scope of past and anticipated future pains is much broader. Consequently, the Epicureans believed that mental suffering threatens a pleasant life much more than physical pains do. Physical pains, they argued, tend to be either mild (and so easy to bear) if they are chronic, or relatively short if they are intense. Mental distress includes all kinds of emotional upset and perturbation, including fear, frustra- tion, anxiety, and grief. So the Epicureans offered a set of principles from which they derived arguments designed as therapy for the mental afflictions that ruin peace of mind and painless living. To rid oneself of all those desires which disrupt mental tranquility is to attain what the Greeks called
ataraxia
, that is, the ideal state of freedom from anxiety. The fear of death, fear of a future harm, the Epicureans considered to be the greatest obstacle to this life free of anxiety. So the Epicureans devel- oped strategies for eliminating false beliefs that occasion worries about the future and for dispelling false beliefs that generate painful thoughts about the past.