why is this OWE a no-no?

[MallardGoodbody]

ok so this is kind of a devil's advocate contemplation. But I wonder what reactions this will generate and if a legit discussion can be had. but here goes...

if Stella promises to give you $100 for a laptop you gave her the next time she gets paid, and she gets paid 10 times and never gives the $100, you could have ill feelings towards her and nobody would really blame you.

if Chuck lives out of town but promised to help you fix your car the very next time he comes to town then comes to town 5 times and never helps you fix your car again you could have ill feelings towards him and again nobody would really blame you.

if Betty promises to stand in your wedding and then never shows up for the event, friendships may end forever.

this kinda thing happens and people get pissed or whatever and most people would side with the person who didn't get what was promised. maybe even call the other person a flake or liar or in some cases a fraud.

UNLESS.....


this is all unless the thing that is promised is some form of sexual interaction.
a person can promise any and all manners of sexual interaction with absolutely no intentions of ever delivering on that and in this case people tend to side with the promiser and against the expector. saying things like, "well they have absolutely no obligation to ever keep that promise" and things like that. why don't they? did they not make a promise?

roomate A can leave their apartment every morning and promise roomate B oral sex upon their return that evening. this promise can be made everyday for a year and never delivered, yet nobody (or i would suspect very few people) would consider roomate A to be a fraud or particularly flaky. people would more likely consider roomate B lesser of a person for actually ever believing the promise.

so i guess the question is: why is there a separate set of rules for this that makes these promises excusable or deems the truster to be idiotic for believing in this promise? why does this promise not carry the same weight and obligation of oath as every other promise?

and i know some might say, "well the promiser changed their mind and their feelings about the matter might have changed. yeah people charge things on credit cards all the time and their feeling of wanting to pay for those purchases probably change, but they still gotta pay up what they promised. that's what a promise means. it's saying that regardless of how i may feel later on, i'm going to keep my word and deliver what i said i would.

also this is not along the lines of where people say things like, "i don't owe that stranger on the bus a smile" or anything like that. i'm talking specifically about when a person promises explicit sexual interactions.

alrighty...discuss

 

[yossi]

Sounds like you haven't been laid in a while.

 

[Pookie]

tl;dr

 

[LWulf]

My initial gut feeling is that if someone has sex with you out of obligation alone, you would not enjoy it. It's like pity sex and therefore shouldn't be pined over.

I've never heard of someone ever saying "I owe you a fuck," perhaps that's just me. I don't get out too much anymore and these kids nowadays...

 

[Wings]

ok so this is kind of a devil's advocate contemplation. But I wonder what reactions this will generate and if a legit discussion can be had. but here goes...

if Stella promises to give you $100 for a laptop you gave her the next time she gets paid, and she gets paid 10 times and never gives the $100, you could have ill feelings towards her and nobody would really blame you.

if Chuck lives out of town but promised to help you fix your car the very next time he comes to town then comes to town 5 times and never helps you fix your car again you could have ill feelings towards him and again nobody would really blame you.

if Betty promises to stand in your wedding and then never shows up for the event, friendships may end forever.

this kinda thing happens and people get pissed or whatever and most people would side with the person who didn't get what was promised. maybe even call the other person a flake or liar or in some cases a fraud.

UNLESS.....


this is all unless the thing that is promised is some form of sexual interaction.
a person can promise any and all manners of sexual interaction with absolutely no intentions of ever delivering on that and in this case people tend to side with the promiser and against the expector. saying things like, "well they have absolutely no obligation to ever keep that promise" and things like that. why don't they? did they not make a promise?

roomate A can leave their apartment every morning and promise roomate B oral sex upon their return that evening. this promise can be made everyday for a year and never delivered, yet nobody (or i would suspect very few people) would consider roomate A to be a fraud or particularly flaky. people would more likely consider roomate B lesser of a person for actually ever believing the promise.

so i guess the question is: why is there a separate set of rules for this that makes these promises excusable or deems the truster to be idiotic for believing in this promise? why does this promise not carry the same weight and obligation of oath as every other promise?

and i know some might say, "well the promiser changed their mind and their feelings about the matter might have changed. yeah people charge things on credit cards all the time and their feeling of wanting to pay for those purchases probably change, but they still gotta pay up what they promised. that's what a promise means. it's saying that regardless of how i may feel later on, i'm going to keep my word and deliver what i said i would.

also this is not along the lines of where people say things like, "i don't owe that stranger on the bus a smile" or anything like that. i'm talking specifically about when a person promises explicit sexual interactions.

alrighty...discuss

Okeydokey

 

[Noor]

Sex is a bad form of currency.
It's kind of like being in a country with a very unstable currency and expecting the same exchange rate to stay the same.

The real question is why are they promising sex? Why do they feel the need to promise sex, what is your end of the contract?

Could your contract be if you promise me sex, I will let you leave in the morning with no hassle? If so, they have fulfilled the agreement.

People in intimate relationships have strange, often unspoken agreements that often they don't even understand, expecting understanding, explanations, and/or support from outsiders is unrealistic.

Why don't you just ask your partner why they do this or more importantly why you are not having sex?

 

[Wings]

I don't get it, no one said you can't be upset if you were "promised" sex and it didn't happen. The problem is if you force the issue.

If your friend who was supposed to fix your car the next time he was around and he doesn't are you going to find him and force him to wrench around under your hood with a gun pointed to his head? Of course not (or maybe, you psycho). So conversely: forcing your partner to put out when they said they were going to is rape. That's what's not okay. If you're having communication issues and you feel like you got the short end of the stick (poor schmuck) then that is one thing. To act like a complete asshole and make the other person feel badly because they didn't perform to your standards means you lose friends, and probably partners and that is another thing.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

Well over 50% of these promises are always broken -- including the sex. It often doesn't end well. It's a puppy kicking world out there.

https://www.theknot.com/assets/topic_pages/wedding-vows-ceremony-436d776651f3bff249f4c715c70fcc63.jpg

 

[doctor_insanus]

Maybe start with a handjob?

I dunno.

Stop whining!

 

[pensivepoet]

ok so this is kind of a devil's advocate contemplation. But I wonder what reactions this will generate and if a legit discussion can be had. but here goes...

if Stella promises to give you $100 for a laptop you gave her the next time she gets paid, and she gets paid 10 times and never gives the $100, you could have ill feelings towards her and nobody would really blame you.

if Chuck lives out of town but promised to help you fix your car the very next time he comes to town then comes to town 5 times and never helps you fix your car again you could have ill feelings towards him and again nobody would really blame you.

if Betty promises to stand in your wedding and then never shows up for the event, friendships may end forever.

this kinda thing happens and people get pissed or whatever and most people would side with the person who didn't get what was promised. maybe even call the other person a flake or liar or in some cases a fraud.

UNLESS.....


this is all unless the thing that is promised is some form of sexual interaction.
a person can promise any and all manners of sexual interaction with absolutely no intentions of ever delivering on that and in this case people tend to side with the promiser and against the expector. saying things like, "well they have absolutely no obligation to ever keep that promise" and things like that. why don't they? did they not make a promise?

roomate A can leave their apartment every morning and promise roomate B oral sex upon their return that evening. this promise can be made everyday for a year and never delivered, yet nobody (or i would suspect very few people) would consider roomate A to be a fraud or particularly flaky. people would more likely consider roomate B lesser of a person for actually ever believing the promise.

so i guess the question is: why is there a separate set of rules for this that makes these promises excusable or deems the truster to be idiotic for........
Well, to make a long story short,
~too late.

 

[MallardGoodbody]

Rainshine: isn't that somewhat a bit of victim blaming? the beleiver did nothing wrong. the liar is the bad person in the scenario.

LWulf: the issue is not about enjoyment. the issue is the promise and the breaking of the promise. the question is why is that promise not held to the same standard of any other promise?

Noor: people talk about sex all the time. people in long distance relationships promise sex all the time. as do married people with kids or people who work odd hours different from partners. life gets in the way sometimes. that is not such an absurdist concept. and the question actually ISN'T why were they promising sex. the question actually IS why is that promise treated differently from any other promise?

Wings: i never said anything about forcing anything. rape is never ok. again the issue is about a promise being broken. i'm in no way advocating gunpoint car repairs, but feeling like Chuck is a {insert negative moniker here} for not keeping his word is completely a social acceptability where as, regardless of why the promise was made, expecting PromiserA to keep their word is [per your response] regarded as tantamount to rape.

the issue is not force or demanding or why would anybody make such a promise.
those issues are irrelevant. people make all kinds of promises all the time for all kinds of reasons.
the question is why is a freely offered promise of sex not held to the same standard as any other freely offered promise?

 

[Noor]

Rainshine: isn't that somewhat a bit of victim blaming? the beleiver did nothing wrong. the liar is the bad person in the scenario.

LWulf: the issue is not about enjoyment. the issue is the promise and the breaking of the promise. the question is why is that promise not held to the same standard of any other promise?

Noor: people talk about sex all the time. people in long distance relationships promise sex all the time. as do married people with kids or people who work odd hours different from partners. life gets in the way sometimes. that is not such an absurdist concept. and the question actually ISN'T why were they promising sex. the question actually IS why is that promise treated differently from any other promise?

Wings: i never said anything about forcing anything. rape is never ok. again the issue is about a promise being broken. i'm in no way advocating gunpoint car repairs, but feeling like Chuck is a {insert negative moniker here} for not keeping his word is completely a social acceptability where as, regardless of why the promise was made, expecting PromiserA to keep their word is [per your response] regarded as tantamount to rape.

the issue is not force or demanding or why would anybody make such a promise.
those issues are irrelevant. people make all kinds of promises all the time for all kinds of reasons.
the question is why is a freely offered promise of sex not held to the same standard as any other freely offered promise?

Are you sure it is freely offered? Sex promises are often a result of coercion.

 

[MallardGoodbody]

yes Noor, sex can be freely discussed between 2 or more consenting adults.

 

[Aglaopheme]

Sex is not an obligation, period.

 

[Pookie]

...

roomate A can leave their apartment every morning and promise roomate B oral sex upon their return that evening. this promise can be made everyday for a year and never delivered, yet nobody (or i would suspect very few people) would consider roomate A to be a fraud or particularly flaky. people would more likely consider roomate B lesser of a person for actually ever believing the promise.

so i guess the question is: why is there a separate set of rules for this that makes these promises excusable or deems the truster to be idiotic for believing in this promise? why does this promise not carry the same weight and obligation of oath as every other promise?

and i know some might say, "well the promiser changed their mind and their feelings about the matter might have changed. yeah people charge things on credit cards all the time and their feeling of wanting to pay for those purchases probably change, but they still gotta pay up what they promised. that's what a promise means. it's saying that regardless of how i may feel later on, i'm going to keep my word and deliver what i said i would.

also this is not along the lines of where people say things like, "i don't owe that stranger on the bus a smile" or anything like that. i'm talking specifically about when a person promises explicit sexual interactions.

alrighty...discuss

I'll bite.

What did Roommate B offer in return for the promise of a blowjob?

 

[MallardGoodbody]

Pooka, does it matter?


everybody, this is not about 1 specific promise that was made bay any 1 person to any other 1 person.

this is a conceptual discussion about why the promise for this thing is treated differently than promises for all other things.

this is about a conceptional promise being made between 2 or more consenting adults, of free will.

WHY this freely given promise was given is of NO consequence. the issue is why the actual promise is treated differently.

 

[silver gurl]

I have never promised sex, who does this and why?

 

[Pookie]

Pooka, does it matter?


everybody, this is not about 1 specific promise that was made bay any 1 person to any other 1 person.

this is a conceptual discussion about why the promise for this thing is treated differently than promises for all other things.

this is about a conceptional promise being made between 2 or more consenting adults, of free will.

WHY this freely given promise was given is of NO consequence. the issue is why the actual promise is treated differently.

It doesn't really matter. Just curious.

I do wonder about this though: "... unless the thing that is promised is some form of sexual interaction"

It is treated differently? Who says it is?

 

[Aglaopheme]

It doesn't really matter. Just curious.

I do wonder about this though: "... unless the thing that is promised is some form of sexual interaction"

It is treated differently? Who says it is?

Exactly.

The cat is whining because everyone is not outraged that they can't deal the deal, line they may be if someone did not deliver on services paid for.

Did a hooker rip you off?

 

[bronzeage]

I know a guy who is in prison for killing a man. The dead man's wife promised him "sex for the rest of his life," if he would do this one favor. I don't know how much he got out of the deal, because he was arrested three days after the event.

He didn't ask my advice. I wouldn't change a flat tire on the promise of a sloppy tongue kiss, unless I got the kiss, first.

 

[Aglaopheme]

http://img.memecdn.com/hooker-cat_o_1650847.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/LnaCzj8.jpg

 

[Pookie]

I'm betting a spurned lover.

Even with the other scenarios, who's to say Stella didn't have some life changing event that caused her to reprioritize her money spending. Unexpected medical bills? The rent was raised? I wouldn't hold it against her if she didn't buy the laptop as promised.

Chuck might be having to do something important for family with his time that came up unexpectantly.

Betty may have gotten in a wreck on the way to the wedding. A parent may have become suddenly ill.

Any number of things with all the scenarios.

His blowjob is different though because ... blowjob.

 

[Noor]

yes Noor, sex can be freely discussed between 2 or more consenting adults.

If that is the case, why is this happening?

 

[bronzeage]

If that is the case, why is this happening?

He needs a jury to hear his case in the Court of Hurt Feelings. It's a division of small claims court.

 

[Que]

There is no such thing as futures trading in sexual favors. If she is not noticebly aroused, at least partially disrobed, and actively engaged in actual foreplay, never expect sex.


Next time, let her see you putting the cash in an envelope, place the envelope on the nightstand behind you. Be sure to keep your body between her and the nightstand.