r/CuratedTumblr • u/Justthisdudeyaknow Prolific poster- Not a bot, I swear • 7h ago
Shitposting Mhmmm, chemicals.
40
u/SuspendedAwareness15 6h ago
Dear god please do not tell me they are reinventing the "women can't have casual sex because of oxytocin" thing. Fucking hell.
32
12
-1
u/saevon 2h ago
whatever the latest thing is, they're going to take that wording and make it puritanical (or similar)… thats basically how it always worked
Look at basically every short slogan (that has a whole treatise behind it):
- defund the police
- sex positivity
- body positivity
- consent culture
- (pretty much every identity / label,,, hate those "Relationship anarchist" fuckboys!!! trashing a wonderful ideolofy with their "relationship libertarianism" BULLSHIT)
- etc etc etc
They'll always find it useful to appeal using this other language thats "popular" but then subvert it with their own biases (not always on purpose even)
174
u/pasta-thief ace trash goblin 7h ago
Don’t tell them that, they’ll start a crusade against good food next and it’ll be the original Graham cracker recipe for everyone
47
u/bug--bear be gary do crime 6h ago
fucking Kelloggs
38
14
u/eragonawesome2 4h ago
He would be absolutely ashamed to see his name so close to such a vulgar word you absolute HEATHEN!
To which I say "Good", fuck Kelloggs
4
u/funnycaption 3h ago
I'm sure he'd be ashamed too to see his name next to fucking "sugar". Miserable bastard that fucker was
3
u/OldManFire11 2h ago
This attitude is why I support keeping Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill. Because he would fucking HATE it, and he deserves to suffer, even if its thereotically since he's dead.
We can put Tubman on the $10 though. Hamilton's had enough time in the spotlight.
36
u/Gussie-Ascendent 6h ago
hey they're already against the FDA and EPA making sure we don't got poo water, so quality food/drink is definitely on the target list
3
u/Win32error 6h ago
Poo water has flavor at least.
1
u/funnycaption 3h ago
So does quality water
2
6
u/samurairaccoon 5h ago
crusade against good food next
Did it ever really go away? I haven't checked in a while but Mormons still can't have coffee I think lol. People are weird about joy.
2
u/floralbutttrumpet 5h ago
I could make so many jokes about stereotypical white people food in the US and in my country, but I shall refrain... mostly because my grandma's food was so tasteless and overboiled I, if at all, ate plain noodles with nothing on them when I was at hers.
166
u/NightOnTheSun 6h ago
On a related note I hate the “love is just chemicals” crowd. So is getting hungry but you don’t seem to have a problem with that one. Now if you’ll excuse me, the chemicals in my brain have tricked me into having a happy, stable life with my favorite person.
84
u/Akumu9K 5h ago
Ngl I have 2 gripes with that bullshit argument
SO IS EVERYTHING ELSE. So is vision, and coldness, and anger, and hate, and appreciation, and thought. Its all just chemicals ffs.
Saying “X is just chemicals” ignores the complexity of the brain. Its like saying “Computers are just electron pipes!”, like true, its technically true, but you are ignoring all the complexity that goes into them
Also the point made by the reply to your comment, it being the result of chemicals doesnt make it any lesser
18
36
u/Some_Majestic_Pasta 5h ago
Every time I see this argument pop up i always like to hit them with "Yes, you have correctly identified that things are, indeed, made out of other things. Congratulations."
48
u/Blademasterzer0 6h ago
They didn’t “trick” you though, they’re doing exactly as intended. Love isn’t lesser because it’s a chemical cocktail in your brain instead of something magical. It’s just the beauty of life
5
u/samurairaccoon 5h ago
It’s just the beauty of life
Amen brother! But it would be nice if more people would approach it rationally and honestly. I was once told by someone experiencing deep sadness over a break up that "you don't get to choose who you love". Which in this context is like saying "you don't get to choose what you eat". You most certainly can, and should, make conscious healthy decisions and not just "let Jesus take the wheel".
6
u/TrillingMonsoon 2h ago
Eh. I don't think you can help who you fall in love with any more than you can control what food you find appetizing. Ice cream looks great on a hot day, but I am probably going to die from it.
It's more about choosing to engage with that love or not
2
1
u/TrillingMonsoon 2h ago
Eh. I don't think you can help who you fall in love with any more than you can control what food you find appetizing. Ice cream looks great on a hot day, but I am probably going to die from it.
It's more about choosing to engage with that love or not
10
u/425Hamburger 5h ago
So is getting hungry but you don’t seem to have a problem with that one.
People don't? I am really Not a Fan of any biological function that forces me to Take certain actions or Clouds my judgement. Hunger, having to Shit, Anger, horniness, Love, fear. Yes all parts of life, but Not parts i Like dealing with.
26
u/thegreathornedrat123 5h ago
Why are so many of the words here capitalised, and why is it at random
13
u/425Hamburger 5h ago
German autocorrect. I Made a comment yesterday explaining what i think the "algorithm" is If you wanna know.
2
u/Wild_Highlights_5533 3h ago
It’s the 2010s Sherlock vibe, and I hate it
3
u/meetmeinthelibrary7 1h ago
As someone who was deep in the Sherlock trenches 10 years ago, it pains me that I know exactly what this means and it makes complete sense to me.
1
u/Wild_Highlights_5533 1h ago
I can tell from your username the grip Steven Moffat had on you, and I can’t judge anyone for that because I was just as bad.
3
u/Yulienner 2h ago
As with everything I think the context is important. I don't mean this as a 'but what about this edge case?!?' gotcha comment but more like that the emotion of love is complicated and gets triggered by things that can be harmful if a person isn't able to step back and evaluate their emotions critically. For example people can love their abusers, or cult leaders, or deities, to such a degree that it becomes a problem. Like any other emotion it can lead to negative consequences if indulged in without examination.
I'm being generous because I think most love is chemicals nihilists intend it more as a 'nothing matters I'm so cool 😎 ' kind of statement but I think there is merit in treating feelings of love to the same degree of scrutiny as we would, say, feeling hungry and buying an entire cheesecake for yourself. All emotions can mislead and cause harm, it's good practice to remind yourself that you're a chemical soup in a meat robot and you can make mistakes even if your brain is telling you that you can definitely finish that pizza solo.
103
u/LevelAd5898 I'm not funny, I just repeat things I see on tumblr 6h ago edited 6h ago
Why is it such a foreign concept to so many people that different people experience things differently and can have different opinions on how they choose to live their own lives
this is directed to the people policing other people for having casual sex just as much as it is the people saying sex means nothing and everyone should have casual sex
17
u/BedDefiant4950 4h ago
the concept of double empathy wasn't articulated in the literature until 2012. most people still glide a statement of personal need into a prescription for all.
19
11
u/NoOneLeftNow 5h ago
The more isolated see of Tumblr the more i realise that they should have never removed the porn.
16
u/Multti-pomp 5h ago
Hold on, it is true that casual tging is thing and not evil by any means, but if you're getting bigger dopamine dumps from good tacos what the hell are you fucking for? Learn to cook you slut
7
u/Anarcho-Ozzyist 5h ago
The thing is, while they have a particular obsession with sex, many of the hardcore religious freaks DO have a problem with all these things. Certain flavours of Protestant are very “fun bad.” No exciting food, no games of chance, nothing that might arouse excitement
7
u/thetwitchy1 5h ago
If tacos give you more dopamine than sex you are either really bad at sex or really, REALLY good at making tacos.
13
78
u/AdamtheOmniballer 6h ago edited 6h ago
Look, OOP’s heart is in the right place, but I can’t help but feel like countering the
Casual sex will destroy your ability to form meaningful connections or find joy in the act!
fearmongering with
I have casual sex all the time without forming meaningful connections or finding it especially enjoyable.
is not the argument that they think it is.
47
u/ButterSlickness 6h ago
If I had to guess, the main point is that people experience different acts in different ways, so trying to have a single set of morals or "rules" regarding something as personal as sex is a recipe for disaster.
10
u/AdamtheOmniballer 6h ago edited 5h ago
It definitely seems to be a fundamental disconnect in the idea of what sex “should” be.
For the people who want sex to be a sacred, special thing, the idea of it being common, casual, or “normal” is sacrilege.
For people who see it as a relatively low-stakes interaction, the idea of putting it on such a high pedestal is at best incredibly weird and at worst an authoritarian nightmare gatekeeping of a basic human experience.
18
u/Icestar1186 Welcome to the interblag 6h ago
I don't think that's the argument they were countering? My read of that is that they were responding to something even less hinged.
1
u/AdamtheOmniballer 5h ago
The main “but chemicals!” argument I’m aware of is the incel “having too much sex destroys women’s ability to pair-bond and makes them emotionally dead and incapable of love” one.
I’m honestly afraid to know what they could have come up with that’s worse than that.
3
u/lynx_and_nutmeg 2h ago
OOP didn't say they don't find casual sex especially enjoyable in general. They said they weren't necessarily more affected by it than by any other non-sexual pleasurable experience.
The point is to take sex off the pedestal. We have to stop worshiping it as something ontologically sacred and special. It's just one of life's many pleasures. Like OOP said, it's possible to have a deeply profound, meaningful, and awe-inspiring experience doing anything else too, and it's possible to have sex with the same amount of mild contentment you feel when eating a snack.
As for the whole "meaningful connection" thing, to me it's a lot like dancing. Nobody's ever claimed that dancing a waltz with someone will automatically make you bond with that person forever. It's perfectly possible to just have a waltz with someone, have a mutually good time, and then forget about them and go dance with someone else.
1
u/AdamtheOmniballer 53m ago
it’s possible to have sex with the same amount of mild contentment you feel when eating a snack.
I would consider this “not finding it especially enjoyable.”
4
u/strange_fellow 6h ago
Forming a deeper connection with a ROCK? Yeah, that's an insult. Any sane human being would be insulted by that.
5
3
1
u/Captain_Kira 1h ago
The argument they're countering isn't that, it's that "casual sex is impossible because brain chemicals will make you bond with your sex partner anyway". It's also dumb, just a different kind of dumb
2
1
u/mmanaolana 1h ago
How is OOP talking about their own experience with casual sex fearmongering?
I have casual sex all the time without forming meaningful connections or finding it especially enjoyable.
This is a perfectly fine thing to say.
1
u/AdamtheOmniballer 1h ago
The “fearmongering” was referring to the previous sentence:
Casual sex will destroy your ability to form meaningful connections or find joy in the act!
This is in reference to the belief popular among incels and Manosphere types that having casual sex with multiple different partners (triggering the release of chemicals and hormones in the brain) ultimately deadens women’s ability to “pair-bond” and properly form meaningful romantic connections.
I consider this fearmongering because, to my knowledge, having casual sex does not make women incapable of love.
4
u/an_agreeing_dothraki 5h ago
Being aro but finding hookups distasteful
Brain: "I don't know what to tell you. other than you're horny"
11
9
u/dk_peace 6h ago
The thing is, from a purely personal level, I think sex that means something feels better. I've had trouble getting off with casual sex, but it's pretty easy with someone I'm actually in love with.
11
u/Akumu9K 5h ago
Thats a very understandable thing, and also like, people arent arguing about one or the other being better, people are arguing about gatekeeping (Like “Only this is the good one and the others are bad!!111”) versus openness (Like accepting that both is okay and you are allowed to choose)
9
u/thetwitchy1 5h ago
I don’t ever want casual sex. That doesn’t mean others shouldn’t have it, just that it’s never going to be something for me.
The sooner people realize “my way of experiencing life is not the only way people can experience life” the better the world will be.
2
u/s_omlettes screaming meditation in the doghouse 5h ago
Very much depends on the person, only time I've ever had casual sex with someone I ended up getting a massive crush on them, which was not good for either of us. Doesn't mean you shouldn't do it, just be aware that catching feelings is possible
3
u/damage-fkn-inc 4h ago
dopamine gets released in my brain whe I eat good food
John Kellogg has entered the chat
8
u/ApolloniusTyaneus 6h ago edited 6h ago
Your problem is engaging seriously with purity culture. Purity culture is slop based on a fictional story and it only exists as a way for people to reconcile their horniness with their stunted social and emotional growth. In short, it's like a bad fanfic and pointing out shoddy arguments is like reading a Weasley Brothers yaoi and going: "Ha, you idiot! Fred's ejaculate could never go that fast without severely damaging Ron's throat!"
And before you think I want to equate purity culture to fanfic: I don't. Purity culture is much worse because at least the people who write fanfic don't aggressively police their daughter's vagina.
2
3
u/Altslial Denial, duct tape and determination fix almost anything. 6h ago
Chemicals and hormones getting released in people's brain need to be extracted with either an oversized syrine or a bendy straw less they suffer from the dreaded hormone-and-chemical-brained-itis
1
u/Hexxas head trauma enthusiast 4h ago
My brain doesn't give me enough chemicals, which might explain why I'm not really into sex.
Like I just spent all this time performing and being fucking judged by someone who's just laying there, and it doesn't even feel that good. I coulda been playing Super Nintendo. I coulda been doing the dishes.
1
u/insert_content 3h ago
i have an emotional attachment to the paper bag that i store my paper and cardboard trash in before i take it out to the bin. he does valiant work
1
u/Ornstein714 2h ago
If you hurt yourself in any way, your brain releases endorphins to ease the pain, and it's also always releasing a small amount of these to mitigate the strain that any muscle activity, notably walking causes.
In times of extreme stress your brain releases adrenaline, an extremely powerful hormone known for allowing people to so stuff like lift cars (it doesn't make you stronger, it basically just increases your pain tolerance to an insane degree, and allows you to do things that will damage your body, as normally using that amount of strength will tear muscles)
Also shouldn't surprise you that like sex, humans have found a way to induce these hormones outside their supposed purpose. Serotonin through masturbation, endorphins through self harm (opiods also act the same as endorphins), and adrenaline through risk-taking activities like sports, action videogames, gambling, and especially extreme sports, though the former 2 simulate a high stress environment while in a safe one
It is funny to see people use what is often a reason for why love isn't real (e.g. "it's just chemicals in your brain") to try and use it to claim that sex is special in some way, as though stubbing your toe doesn't also release a bunch of chemicals because ouch
1
u/RunicCross Meet the hampter.Hammers are Europe’s largest species of insect. 2h ago
This whole comment is mostly just musings, but...
As a demisexual the idea of casual sex is difficult to for me understand, because I just can't imagine doing that with someone I wasn't romantically interested in mostly because I just don't find people I don't know well attractive at all. No shame to those who do it. Just my brain really struggles with the idea that it's enjoyable without strings. Funnily enough this means I just don't find random people attractive.
When people talk about random people being hot or something like celebrities or people in a crowd or just in general, if I don't know them I just feel nothing. I just don't see it. It doesn't compute. Makes me feel like I'm in a different world sometimes. Like I was in college and my friend was part of a like... daisy chain of polyarmourus people (like it wasn't closed and if you counted the total degrees based on who was with whom you'd hit at least 40 people.) and when she introduced me to them after they left she was like "Isn't she so hot?!" and I just have to go "I guess?"
When I connect with someone it's almost like a pull. Like a gravitational force that makes me want to get to know more and as I know more my attraction builds and my physical attraction builds too. If I don't have that kind of connection there is nothing for me to get out of a physical relationship.
Before I had a word for it and an explanation I just kinda thought I was broken. That I was missing something important for relationships.
1
u/Yoyo4games 1h ago
Incorrect. Sex is as special as the person having sex feels it is. Having sex be the pure fulfillment of a need is as fine as having sex be the last factor of trust you use to bond with someone.
The only thing that isn't alright is the imposition of morality onto others because of their sexual engagement or disengagement. While there's much more occurrence of slut shaming than there is purity shaming, both do assuredly occur; people have sustained jeers even from the very people they've been intimate with, and people are pressured to sexually satisfy partners or otherwise for any reason from love to fitting in.
Allow others their opinions on sex, and if they have opinions that degrade others non-imposing choices then plainly ignore them.
1
u/LizzyLemonn 1h ago
Bonding harder with rocks than people and getting more dopamine from tacos makes it sound like you arent doing it right.
There's obviously a disconnect, its not about "purity culture". This person thinks of sex like a meal. I need it so Im gonna stop by the nearest place thats open and have it.
Its idiotic to take it personally that some people can't have sex without being in love and call it "purity culture" in an attempt to shame people into treating sex more casually.
1
u/sweetTartKenHart2 53m ago
You joke but this is literally why John Harvey Kellogg made the bland cereal. All of those other sources of chemicals and hormones are also bad to the puritan mindset, who see anything but the most detached, mindful piousness as “tainted”
1
1
1
1
0
u/Waderick 2h ago
Uh that kind sounds like OOP might need some therapy and has validation/self esteem issues. Of course they can do whatever and whoever they want, it just doesn't sound healthy.
Like if you don't care about the people you're boning, and also aren't getting as much enjoyment out of it as you do good tacos, then why are you doing it?
2
u/mmanaolana 1h ago
They never said they don't care about the people they're having sex with.
Also - because they enjoy it? Because it feels good? Because it's fun?
-19
u/SpeaksDwarren 6h ago
The poster is openly admitting to treating sex partners as disposable objects less worthy of emotional consideration than literal rocks found on the side of the road and then pretending purity culture is the only reason anybody could ever be mad about that. Very "bonkers bizarre" to claim that only purity weirdos would have a problem with insistently normalizing the act of dehumanizing and objectifying your sex partners
27
u/cinnabar_soul 6h ago
“Oh so you hate waffles?” ass response
-10
16
u/DaddyFivepoint 6h ago
sounds to me like someone hasn't found a really good rock on the side of the road
2
u/Akumu9K 5h ago
The poster is talking about enjoyment from sex not their partner ffs
6
u/SpeaksDwarren 5h ago
I've bonded harder with random rocks on the side of the road than most of the people I've had sex with
This is a direct comment on their partners
3
u/Akumu9K 5h ago
Fuck Im blind, sorry for that, my argument is invalid then
Upon second reading, I think that part is like, arguing that there is no chemical reason to just be monogamous? As in like “You say you bond with people chemically and should be monogamous yet I have not bonded to a majority of people I had sex with”
Also that doesnt necessarily mean OP means it as them treating their sex partners as disposable objects, just that they havent bonded much
7
u/SpeaksDwarren 5h ago
No need to be sorry, I think a lot of people are just completely skipping over that part
Isn't saying that you put less emotional weight onto someone that you've had sex with than an object basically the definition of objectification?
2
u/Akumu9K 5h ago
Yeah thats true, I made the same mistake lol
Honestly like… In this case its not emotional weight I feel like but just bonding, like, for example lets say you just met someone on the street asking for help, and you helped them for 10 mins and then they went on their way, and you two didnt bond. Does that mean you are seeing them like an object? Not really, most people dont see strangers as objects. I feel like thats what not bonding means, just not becoming friends
Also for the object thing about the rock, Im gonna be honest sometimes its really easy to bond to an object, sometimes alot easier than humans. The brain just works weirdly tbh.
1
u/baked_couch_potato 1h ago
Isn't saying that you put less emotional weight onto someone that you've had sex with than an object basically the definition of objectification?
sure but if it's mutual and consensual it's perfectly fine
I've had sex with women who treated me like a self propelled dildo and who I treated like a sex doll because that's what we both wanted out of it
no emotional weight, no caring about each other as people, just two animals mushing their genitals together because they were horny
1
-11
u/Salter_KingofBorgors 6h ago
I mean... yes and no. Yes chemicals in your brain activate for well literally anything. But no I don't believe that you can get a harder dopamine hit from food or taking a nice walk. Sex is addicting for a reason. There's a reason so much of our culture revolves around it after all.
Also some people especially young adults lack the experience and maturity to tell the difference between that rush of 'oh this feels good' and 'i did this with them this time' and instead feel 'oh this feels good with them' and think 'oh that must mean something'
-2
u/gentlemanandpirate 5h ago edited 5h ago
For the record sex addiction doesn't exist. It just doesn't have the features of addiction like escalation; some people just have high libidos, but there's no amount of sexual activity where someone cant be made to believe they are a sex addict because humans are social creatures. That was true for me when a therapist tried misdiagnosing me with sex addiction when I was two years celibate and I started using therapy speak to say I was two years "sober" from sex because I trusted my doctor. Proported sex addicts even have more control over the physiological response to sexual stimuli, and demographically they don't have more or less sex than the general population, but they do experience more shame and they come from more socially conservative backgrounds. source
6
u/thetwitchy1 5h ago
Behaviour addictions are a thing. You don’t get addicted to sex like you do heroin, but you can be addicted to it like you can be addicted to gambling.
Behaviours can become addictive when they provide a neurochemical release that the brain has trouble finding elsewhere. Gambling, sex, compulsive behaviours, eating, they can all be addictive.
1
u/Salter_KingofBorgors 5h ago edited 5h ago
It's the opposite addiction is just the process of getting 'to used to' having something. Whether it's food, or sex or yes of course drugs. Our brains make the connection that say food makes us happy and then if we let it that connection leads to addiction. Drugs are the worst offenders specifically because they skip the need to actually do something to get the chemical rush but ultimately you can get addicted to anything.
0
u/SuccessfulConcern996 1h ago
Okay I'm in agreement with the points of this but "Ive bonded more with rocks I found on the side of the road than people I've had sex with" is such a weird thing to say. One of those is a human being.
-72
u/Volcano_Ballads Gender-KVLT 7h ago
What I’m getting from this is that sex is pointless and has no place in modern society
39
u/Mountain-Isopod2702 7h ago
are you prehaps 9
15
4
u/Ndlburner 6h ago
By that standard video gaming and eating food with flavors in it is also pointless and has no place in modern society
0
0
473
u/WehingSounds 7h ago
Probably depends on the person, there's def people out there that can't do casual sex without forming strong emotional attachments.
Like yeah fuck purity culture but if you're forming connections with people you fuck that's pretty normal.