Having sex with someone you don’t have emotional attachment to is not a relationship it’s a transaction
You say transaction like that's a bad thing. Paid employment is a transaction. Buying a house is a transaction. Publishing a book is a transaction. #freemarkets
-
-
I said it in a neutral objective tone. It’s up to the consumer to invest according to the free market
-
Emotional connection has value, and can be seen as one of the goods being exchanged. If we’re going to reduce sex to transactions we should accept that many human relationships are transactional even when they doesn’t feel like it.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
The ability for adults to engage freely in transactions is at the heart of a liberal society.
-
making everything transactional is at the heart of what is wrong with liberal society
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Having an emotional relationship with someone also tends to be transactional. If there were no exchange or reciprocation, even if asymmetrical or in different proportions, there wouldn't be much of a relationship on that level.
-
symmetry is inherently impossible; the "exchange" isn't comparable
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Transactions are hawt.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
One could go even further and say that sex with emotional attachment is a transaction with extra steps.
-
it's a community ritual
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I think you're both wrong. Having sex with someone you don't love is still a relationship. Make it as salacious or mundane as you like; deciding you find someone appealing enough to bang is not like publishing a book or buying a house.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.