Scarleteen

From the descriptions of sex I've read, it sounds like the people involved don't entirely have control of themselves. They make noises, they move, they emit fluids, partly in response to levels of hormones that they can not directly control once they have circulated around the body.

If that's true, then if person B wants to have sex with person A, person B wants to see person A unable to control themselves.

And if person A's levels of hormones are partly in response to person B, then person B is indirectly controlling person A. And if person B wants to have sex, I'm not sure how they don't want to be in control of person A.

With this logic in mind, how is having sex itself or wanting to have sex with someone not sadistic? It is just because other people don't find it humiliating to cede control in this way, or is there something more to it?

Furthermore, if my logic is correct and sex is sadistic, how can I possibly stand for people to think I want to have sex with anyone ever? I can not stand the idea that people would think that I want to either cede control of myself, or control another person. It just all seems disgusting.

Hi Gladys, and welcome to Scarleteen.

I think it's important to keep in mind that sex doesn't involve any kind of hormonal changes that are controlling someone or that are preventing them from controlling their own behavior. Sometimes you'll hear people talking about "raging hormones" as a shorthand for something like "uncontrollable desire" but while some hormonal changes can impact someone's level of sexual desire or arousal, even intense arousal doesn't mean that someone loses control of themselves or their actions. What's tricky, I think, is that there are a lot of cultural narratives around sex as a total loss of control, or around the idea that if someone's really turned on they're unable to stop themselves from doing whatever they want to do, but those things just aren't true. It is true that things like sexual fluids aren't in anyone's control, and sometimes noises or movements may not be either. But while I obviously can't speak for all people, I don't think it's possible to reduce sexual desire down to wanting someone to be unable to control themselves, or to indirectly exert control over them (and again, hormones can't control someone's behavior.

There are people who enjoy a sexual dynamic that involves ceding control to a partner, but that dynamic isn't present in sex at all times. I'd argue that there are ways to take control of someone in a sexual context (when it's something both partners have agreed on and discussed) that aren't sadistic, but again I just don't see that dynamic of giving up or taking control as inherent in sex at all.

Another perspective might be, instead of seeing sex as a process of controlling or being controlled by someone else, to think about partnered sex as an exercise in shared vulnerability. "Losing control" in a sexual context can refer to a few different things (which doesn't help make this matter any clearer, I realize!), but sometimes if someone is excited by the thought of a partner "losing control," it's more about the enjoyment of seeing a partner experiencing a lot of pleasure and enjoyment during sex than about controlling or humiliating them.

If someone expresses to me that they're interested in sex, either in general or with a specific person, I don't ever assume that means they want to control or be controlled by someone. If someone tells me they are into a certain sexual dynamic, then sure, I will apply that knowledge to other sexual details they give me. But otherwise, someone saying "I would like to have sex" doesn't give me any more information than just that fact.

I think a good analogy is emotional reactions like laughing or crying. When I'm around people I don't know well, or don't trust, I usually control my reactions, maybe trying not to laugh at something until I see others laughing, maybe trying not to show how grossed out I am by something so people don't think I'm squeamish. Around my partner, my family, my close friends, I feel pretty free to not control my reactions, laughing or crying or saying "Ew!" without thinking. That's not a scary thing where I'm 'out of control', it's a nice thing where I don't put in the effort of control because I know they'll accept my reactions and won't make fun of them.

Or another that's more similar in some respects is getting a back or shoulder rub. The person might make sounds like "Mm" or move around, and the friend/sibling/whoever doing the rub will presumably take that as "Nice, they like what I'm doing" not "I have them in my power!" Because, also, the person doing the rub isn't entirely in control, if it's a healthy relationship: the other person can say "Can you rub this one particular spot?" and it will happen, or say "That's enough, thanks," or "You can stop now," and it will stop, or "Ow, that hurts!" and the person will change what they're doing or stop.

Or talking!

So many of the same things that happen in sexual communication (which is ultimately what sex is with partners when people are doing it right) also do in verbal communication:
• we make noises
• we move
* we emit fluids (saliva), partly in response to systems and operations of our bodies that are involuntary
• we're looking to connect
• we're looking to share something, and, if it's a mutually intimate talk, to be vulnerable together
• we and our bodies respond to each other

But none of that negates choice or consent, and talking -- like sex -- certainly isn't usually about sadism for most people (though I've certainly been a the receiving end of a few of the most boring, long lectures ever where I'v e had to wonder).

Thanks, Mo, Kaizen; I think the framing of sex as shared vulnerability and the comparison to expressing emotions helps.

I'm so glad you found that helpful!