Santa Clara University

The-Big-Q_Header_4
 

The Big Q

Back to Blog

Sleeping Around

Monday, Jan. 9, 2012

The best student comment on "Sleeping Around" wins a $100 Amazon gift certificate.  Entries must be received by midnight, Sunday, Jan. 22.  Finalists are selected by "likes," so click the Facebook icon above to let your friends know about The Big Q contest

It was halfway through Mike's senior year. His grades were up. His friends were close. He was particularly involved in both the skiing and triathlon clubs. However, he recently got into a discussion with his friend Jason that continued to bother him.

Because Mike was both outgoing and good looking, there were a lot of girls interested him. Although he didn’t want any kind of relationship with them—and he told this fact to every one he started to become intimate with—he enjoyed fooling around with a lot of them. Sex was fun for Mike, and as long as he was safe about it, there shouldn’t be anything wrong with the number of partners he had.

His friend, however, disagreed. After calling Mike a man-whore, Jason said, "Isn't sex supposed to be more than just sleeping with any girl who shows an interest in you? And what about the girl's feelings? Shouldn't they be considered?"

Where do you stand on this issue and why? Would you feel any different if Mike were Michelle?

Here are some resources:

A Framework for Ethical Decision Making

Casual Sex in College

No Hooking Up, No Sex for Some Coeds

Good luck and don't forget to like our Facebook Page.  

 

Comments Comments

Stu Mill said on Jan 11, 2012
For many people, religious beliefs alone will dictate whether or not Mike's actions are acceptable; however, if we bracket that line of reasoning, I believe we can still decide if his choice is moral or not. To begin, we should note from a utilitarian approach, that as long as having sex brings Mike and others happiness, then there should be no issue with his proclivities. However, if girls do become emotionally connected, even though he warns each one beforehand, he still has to account for the fact he knew it was a possibility. And if he knew it *could* happen, then he has responsibilities to refrain. He should also ask himself in each instance if he is treating his partner as an individual human being or simply a means to an end. If his sexual encounters are merely intended for sexual satisfaction without regard for the girl involved, then I think Mike needs to step back and reanalyze whether these interactions are appropriate. - Like
Justmyopinion said on Jan 15, 2012
Id approach this from a personal standpoint, what affect will this behavior have on Mike as a person? What if the scenario was flipped on him? Does Mike value himself? I believe that Mike is not only devaluing the women he sleeps with but also himself by making himself easy. By allowing any woman who shows interest in him to have him he lowers his own expectations and values as a lover. In addition, Mike might not feel so good about himself (his character) if he had insight into the negative emotions he left in his wake. I anticipate that Mike would feel hurt if he fell for a girl that was supposed to be just a hook up, and she rejected him. This must be taken into account because we are human. You cant always anticipate how you are going to feel after taking a particular action. Making a promise not to feel anything after taking a very intimate action with someone is asking for disaster. However, when looking at it from a very black and white standpoint, he told the girls of his intentions and it is a humans right to choose (on both sides) their actions. The fact that both parties consent is of utmost importance. If Mike were Michelle, I would generally give the same perspective and raise the same questions. However, I think it is important to note that Jasons outlook on Mikes situation is somewhat unusual. In most social scenarios Mike would be admired as a player, and he would be worshiped socially for his success with women. In sharp contrast, Michelle might get a reputation as a slut or as being easy. Socially, Michelle could be damned for her actions. It is a sharp double standard. - Like - 1 person likes this.
Hammer Time said on Jan 15, 2012
Regardless of the religious beliefs and teachings that each of his encounters as well as he has been raised with, no means no and if there is consent on both parts then there should be nothing wrong with Mike's actions. Socially, it is up to Mike how he wants to be known. If he does not mind being known as someone who gets around then that is up to him. Jason can have his own opinion on the matter but telling someone that something is wrong will not make a difference in their opinion (in this case Mike). The only way that anything will change is if Mike realizes this is not the life that he wants to live by. Both parties here (Mike and the girl he is with at that time) have the power to go through with their actions, therefore as long as the girl knows that it is not for a serious reason and agrees to whatever is to follow, there is nothing wrong with either of their actions. If there is no deception on Mike's part, then there is nothing wrong. This is where the girl's feelings come into play. As long as Mike does not lead the girls on to believe there is more to their encounter then the girl can not blame Mike for his actions if she feels differently in the future. If Mike were Michelle, the scenario should be the same. Unfortunately, girls have to be more careful in our society because their reputation can be tainted much more easily if they are to sleep around. It is up to the individual to decide how the want others to think of them and how they feel about themselves after each encounter. - Like - 1 person likes this.
Carlos Gomez said on Jan 16, 2012
Personally I feel that no one is entitled to tell Mike that his actions are wrong. I believe that Mike is free to engage in premarital sex (with no strings attached) as long he asks for consent from his partner. In my opinion I feel that his vision of sex is oversimplified and perhaps as he experiences sex with different partners, his vision of sex may mature. Having friends such as Jason, who question Mikes thinking may influence and help Mike shape his own vision of sex. Yet if this was Michelle, I also feel she is free to engage in sex with whomever she desires as long as consent was taken. Unfortunately, todays society holds a double standard that makes this a hard possibility for women. As Jason pointed out, Mikes actions make him come off as a man-whore, but a man-whore has a lot less to lose than a slut. This then should become a matter of whether the woman engaging in similar actions as Mike, is okay with being viewed as a slut. - Like - 9 people like this.
Bill Klim said on Jan 16, 2012
I believe that no one has a right to tell Mike what to do or what not to do as long as he isn't putting anyone in danger. I guess I take more of a psychological confidentially approach to this problem where Mike is allowed to live his life however he wants and it shouldn't be much of my business what he does unless there is a potentially dangerous situation arising from his actions. I feel like his friend, Jason, has a good heart for worrying about Mike but Mike is an adult that can handle himself and think for himself. As long as Mike isn't asking for help, no one should interfere with him and persuade him to stop. If Mike is to realize what Jason is saying, I feel like Mike needs to make his own mistakes and learn those things by himself. Personally, I would like to think of sex as something special but everyone has their own ideas about sex and what it means to them. If Mike were to become a Michelle, I feel like there should be no difference as to what I said about Mike. The only difference would be the perception of Michelle would be different as opposed to Mike. There is this double standard about guys sleeping around and how it is not as horrible as girls sleeping around. There shouldn't be this double standard yet it is still there and present. - Like - 1 person likes this.
Matt Ozanne said on Jan 16, 2012
If Mike is letting the girls know beforehand that he does not want a relationship then he is in the clear. He is just having a good time and being a college student. In this day in age college students hookup and it is a big part of the social culture at schools. There is a lot of pressure put on students to participate in the hookup and drinking scene in college because everyone around them is doing it. There is a line that Mike must draw to not hookup with too many girls and I would say that number is 4. As long as he keeps it below four and informs them of no relationships then it is fine. - Like
Kaleigh Durket said on Jan 17, 2012
I have mixed feelings about Mikes situation. I think the fact that Mike is open with his intentions with women before he sleeps with them makes his actions less condemnable. If he truly is being honest with these women and telling each and everyone that he does not intend to have anything more than casual sex with them than he is in the clear. I think in response to Jasons question about sex being important and not just casual, that is pretty much irrelevant to Mikes case. Sex means different things to different people, and to Mike, sex is nothing more than a good time. When it comes to considering girls feelings, I think Mike is trying to do that in his own way by being open with them about his intentions prior to sleeping with them. If a girl gets feelings for Mike after sleeping with him, she knows that Mike does not feel the same way and should have thought twice before she slept with him. A girl is naïve if she thinks casual sex with a guy is a way to his heart. If Mike were a Michelle things would be a little different. A woman sleeping with multiple men tends to be a bigger deal because of the emotional ties women put on sex. Sleeping with multiple men, having no intentions of anything more than casual sex, could be draining both emotionally and physically for anybody, but more likely a woman. Although Im sure there are many women who feel, like Mike, that sex is nothing more than fun, Id say the majority of women think sex is a bigger deal than the majority of men. So if I were Michelles friend I would certainly warn her that casual sex can be draining as she may get emotionally attached to one or more men, and I would also warn her about getting a reputation. Unfortunately, a promiscuous woman is usually negatively called a slut or a whore where as a Mike would simply be called a stud or the man. This is definitely a double standard our society has, but never the less it is there and Michelle needs to heed caution in her escapades. - Like - 5 people like this.
Alexandra Palmer said on Jan 17, 2012
I like that Jason is asking Mike these questions because then it allows Mike to think more about his actions. Because Mike is telling the girls prior to sex that he does not want a relationship and that he just wants casual sex makes his actions ok. Some might agree that he is looking out for the girls' feelings but any time a girl has sex feelings are developed. Therefore, Jason must know too that Mike has done his job being straight forward with the girl and it is then the girl's job to not be naive and let her feelings grow for Mike who is not interested. Mike's definition for sex is that he enjoys it and doesn't think it is just for that one special girl while Jason disagrees with him. That is totally fine! Everyone thinks about sex differently whether it's guys having different opinions or girls or both. This leads me to my next point. If Mike were instead a girl (Michelle) sleeping around with a lot of guys, things would be different. Michelle would definitely be considered a slut because of the double standard our society places on men and women. Mike in this case is an absolute stud for getting a lot of girls in bed but it is highly frowned upon in our society if Michelle were to sleep around. Therefore, Michelle would need to be careful about her actions if she worries about building up a negative reputation. - Like
Robert Avila said on Jan 17, 2012
If Mike chooses to sleep around it's really no one's business but his own, unless he has a destructive reason for doing so. If he's sleeping around to try and get over someone or to try and get through a hardship in his life, then there should be a friendly intervention rather than allow him to continue to be destructive. Besides being destructive, if he's been honest and direct with the women that he's been sleeping with before he does anything with them, then all parties are aware of the situation and his actions are ok. If it were a Michelle, then people would judge her much harsher than they do with Mike. Mike may be considered a stud, while Michelle would be a slut. This could have something to do with Michelle having more to lose than Mike because she could become pregnant, and may end up having to deal with that on her own. It may also have something to do with the male's perspective dominating society's views, treating women differently than their male counterparts. - Like - 1 person likes this.
John Nash said on Jan 17, 2012
There is a fine line determining whether Jason is in position to question Mike's sexual habits. I feel that because Mike is telling the girls before having sexual intercourse that he has no interest in having a relationship, I think his actions have to be considered OK. Ultimately it's his decision. In reality, I'm not sure how many people really disclose their desires regarding whether they want a relationship or not before they hook up. I feel that is a bit unrealistic in today's society. THere is no doubt that if Mike were a Michelle, she would instantly be labeled a slut, or maybe a whore. People seem to look as men as "studs" where as women unfairly become land as sluts. - Like
Victor Republicano said on Jan 17, 2012
Although it is risky for Mike to sleep around (because of obvious potential consequences-- STI's and pregnancy), it is his decision to make. While it is important for someone in Jason's position, as Mike's friend, to be concerned and look out for Mike, Jason approached the situation the wrong way. Instead of insulting Mike by calling him a man-whore and perpetuating the social stigma of premarital sex, Jason should have found a more constructive way to talk to Mike by maybe asking Mike why it is he enjoys sleeping around so much and if he ever desires a deeper or more meaningful sexual experience. By doing this Jason will be able to better understand Mike's intentions and may be able to open Mike up to the possibility of being more aware of the power of sex. Additionally, Jason ignored the fact that Mike did consider the girls' feelings by being completely honest with them even though this increased the chance that they would not sleep with him. Mike is not some smooth talking guy that deceives women to get them into bed-- Jason largely ignores this fact. If Mike were a woman (Michelle) I believe the same rules should apply and I would advise Jason to handle the situation as I stated above. Unfortunately Michelle would doubtlessly experience a heightened social disapproval because of the gender inequalities pertaining to sex. As a result, it is completely Michelle's decision if she wants to continue having sex despite the labels and reputation that will most likely follow her. - Like - 2 people like this.
Andrea Hernandez said on Jan 17, 2012
I don't believe that Mike's sexual actions are a problem since he is not hurting anyone around him. As long as everyone involved is aware of the situation and agrees with the circumstances then outside parties should respect his decisions. It seems like the girl's feelings are being considered in these situations since they agree to go through with the sexual actions. Mike is not being insensitive to other people's wishes so seems to not be hurting himself or others. Personally, I don't agree with this kind of behavior because I believe that, like Jason says, sex should be more than just sleeping with anyone who shows interest. While I understand completely that this is not how most people (especially most college students) feel about sex, Jason should also respect that his friends may have different views than he does. Furthermore, of course the situation would be different if Mike were Michelle. If it were a girl, she would be immediately judged for engaging in various sexual acts with multiple partners. The double standard of girls vs guys in the hookup culture is obvious and unfair but probably almost impossible to get rid of as well. - Like
Celia Trujillo said on Jan 17, 2012
Personally, I feel that Mike is old enough to know whether or not what he is doing is wrong. Because he is being safe about it and he tells the girls he has sex with in advance that he is not interested in any type of long term relationship, I do not see why it would be a problem for him to be stopped. I don't feel that anyone is in any position to tell him what to do and because this is not affecting him in any negative way (academically, socially, etc.), there is no need to approach him. If he began to run into some trouble, however, such as low grades or changes in his mood, it may be okay to approach him without being aggressive. The question was also raised about whether or not the girls' feelings matter, but what is overlooked is that Mike is technically taking their feelings into consideration by letting them know that nothing long term would come out of their sexual encounter. Whether or not sex is something meaningful to them or to Mike is not important as long as they both give consent. - Like
Adrienne said on Jan 17, 2012
Some people consider sex to be extremely intimate, others consider it to be purely physical, and many fall somewhere in between in their beliefs. Mike seems to fall closer to the purely physical end of the spectrum. While I dont personally subscribe to Mikes approach to sex, I dont think that theres anything inherently wrong with what he is doing. There are undoubtedly problems that could arise, among them being girls lying about their feelings, or forming feelings after intercourse. However, based on the information given, since Mike is honest and upfront about his expectations, and practicing safe sex, I dont believe that he is doing anything wrong. Facts that arent given, though, such as whether or not Mike openly discusses his sexual encounters and partners with others, and how he treats the girls he has sex with (before, during, and after intercourse), could easily sway my opinion against him. Although Mikes friend does not overstep any boundaries by being concerned about Mike, the friend inappropriately addresses the issue by verbally attacking Mike. Though the questions that the friend brings up are valid, if he is truly concerned he should approach Mike in a nonthreatening, nonjudgmental way. Furthermore, the friend should realize that just because their morals and beliefs about sex differ, no one should claim or presume that his beliefs are superior. Ideally, if Mike were Michelle the same rules and standards would apply to her. Unfortunately, our society has a long history of imposing different standards of conduct on men and women. While a sexually promiscuous male might be accepted, or even admired, a sexually promiscuous female is often looked down upon and labeled with derogatory names such as slut, and whore. I personally would not feel any differently about the situation if it were Michelle rather than Mike. Because of the societal double standard for men and women, though, she might have to exercise more caution to protect her reputation. - Like
Blair Mitchell said on Jan 17, 2012
First, I would like to start off by saying that it is not my place or anyone else's (including Jason) to judge Mike's actions. Everyone is allowed the freedom to have their own personal views on sex. However, sex is not an individual action. It takes two people to mutually agree on it. Since there is no mention of alcohol in the hypothetical situation, I am assuming that the girls Mike has had sex with are not being taken advantage of. Thus, they have just as much say in the situation as Mike does. Since Mike is upfront with them, the girls' feelings should not be hurt. They can choose to opt out of the situation. My view is applicable if Mike were Michelle and would not change. Her sexual partners have just as much of a say in the situation as she does. Again, neither Mike nor Michelle should be judged on their more "active" views of sex. - Like
Devin Ingersoll said on Jan 17, 2012
In my personal opinion, I think that it is entirely up to Mike to decide how he interacts sexually with the girls he gets involved with. His friend Jason, however, has every right to disagree with Mike actions. I would also consider Mikes actions to be immature and somewhat inconsiderate of the girls feelings. At the same time, I believe that each girl getting involved with Mike is responsible for her actions as well. Because Mike has made each girl aware of the fact that he is not interested in turning the hookups into relationships, the girls arent necessarily getting deceived. Therefore, those who choose to continue to be involved with Mike do so with the knowledge that he views them as means to an end rather than ends themselves. It is curious to note that Mikes conversation with Jason has continued to bother him. That could suggest that he struggles with his actions as well. More important than what anyone else thinks about Mike is how he feels about himself. It is true that I would have different feelings if it were Michelle rather than Mike. The reality is women are judged more severely in these cases than men. In addition to my previously noted opinions of these actions being immature and inconsiderate, I would also think of the girl as slutty and easy. - Like
Student on Bellomy said on Jan 17, 2012
Sleeping around is accepted in most circles on campus. There is nothing wrong with it if you do it respectfully and do not lead the other person on if the two of you want different things, however its easier said than done. If you sleep around with enough people eventually feelings get hurt and its just a fact of life. There is a double standard and women get labeled as hoes or sluts more often than men but everyone knows this and its up to each of us decide how we go about our sex life, and deal with others' perceptions of us. The number of people we are involved with at one time does cause some trouble because as much as we try to fight it there are some emotional attachments if you are hooking up with someone steady, even if you agreed that it wouldn't be anything serious. But once again its a risk we take and we should just enjoy ourselves while we can. One advice I give is that if you do begin to have strong feeling for someone let it be known because we have been conditioned to move on from our flings quiet quickly and the other person might give up on you if they feel that you'll never come around. - Like
Corey Smith said on Jan 18, 2012
I personally feel that Mikes sexual life is his own business. He acts respectfully towards the women he hooks up with and fully discloses his intentions. Both parties know what they are getting into and because of that I think that Mike cannot be accused of hurting these girls feelings. While people may hold beliefs concerning "sleeping around" different than Mikes, I don't believe that he should be judged for his choices. A persons sexuality is their own and they can choose to express that in whatever way they choose as long as they do so in a safe and considerate manner. - Like
Scott Terrill said on Jan 18, 2012
I think that Mike has every right to behave in such a way. He isn't doing anything humanly wrong, having premarital sex with the consent from girls. His sexual encounters should be his own personal matters, and if jason has a problem/disagrees with them, then he disagrees with the majority of the college student demographic. The norm in college relationships has become casual "hooking up", sexual encounters with no strings attached. Both guys and girls see this as socially acceptable behavior today, and take equal responsibility for initiating a sleeping around culture. It is unfortunate that a double-standard exists for girls who's sex lives are similar to Mike's, and we all know the terms: slut, ho, etc. Why this double-standard exists is another debate on its own. Back to Jason and Mike, I really think it boils down to the fact there are no right or wrong lifestyle/opinions about a topic such as sex, and that one must respect another's personal views on the matter. I don't see any room to judge Mike for his sexual activity, but I do understand where Jason is coming from. - Like
Mots said on Jan 18, 2012
I think that Mike's honesty regarding the situation makes what he's doing okay. He's upfront with the girls from the beginning, and he's being safe about having sex. What others think about him (for example, his friend Jason thinks he's a man whore) is his issue though, and if he doesn't mind, then that's his choice. I feel like if Mike were a Michelle, things might be more or less the same. The differences might entail public opinion of this Michelle versus this MIke (Michelle's actions might be looked down upon more than Mike's because she's a girl) but if she doesn't mind the criticism then this would also be her choice. In general though, I think it's easier for girls to get emotionally attached than for guys, so playing either party in this situation (Mike or the girls he sleeps with) is a little more dangerous for the girl. - Like - 1 person likes this.
John Locke said on Jan 18, 2012
It seems that Mike is doing the right thing by telling the girls before hand that he is uninterested in a relationship. He does not hide his intentions, and the girls continue to have relations with Mike. Do I believe girls get hurt in the process, Yes. As the girls might believe that they might be able to change him, or sway his perspective to the point where he might want a relationship. Most often that not "Michelle" will be unable and she will get hurt through the process. If MIke were Michelle, maybe Mike would be more careful, as it is less appealing in society for girls to have more hookups. It is a double standard where Men in society seem to almost get away with it, while women have to be more careful with there partners. Overall its seems to be a construct that society has created where hookups are almost a standard. Most of the times these hookups end up having strings attached, where one of the participants may be expecting something more. In this situation the person expecting more will mostly likely end up getting hurt in the process of hooking up. - Like
George Costanza said on Jan 18, 2012
I believe that Mike is doing nothing wrong with his actions. By letting the girl know that he does not want anything more than a physical relationship, it is up to the girl to continue to pursue Mike. Having said that, Mike needs to reconize when she may become to attached. If Mike is hooking up with alot of girls then what would the big issue be if he did not have sex with one just because they were getting emotional. Mike is not being a bad guy, as I sense Jayson may feel, is just likes sex. In our society, especially college, sex is not about the emotional aspect but about physical. Which makes me see nothing wrong with what Mike is doing. Now if Mike were a Michelle, the only difference would be is how she is looked at by her peers. They would both be "whores" but the girl would get a worse reputation. After hearing about the number of guys a girl has been with a guy typically does not want to be in the higher region. She makes her own choices and if she likes sex why can't she have it just as much as Mike. - Like
Anne Nino said on Jan 18, 2012
What Mike is doing is socially acceptable (at least within the context that is presented here), however, from my ethical standpoint it is wrong and therefore unacceptable for me to behave in such a way. In my ethical ideal (and ideals are not always met) sexual intimacy should be reserved for someone with whom you share an equal emotional intimacy with. It is not realistic to expect that there can be a true "no-strings-attached" outcome from something that is, in our culture, all about strings-attached. This opinion can be applied to any female in the same situation. Still, although I think what Mike is doing is wrong and somewhat destructive, it is not the kind of destructive that should or can be stopped. Mike/Michelle have the freedom to do this kind of thing, and it would probably be a lot more dangerous than helpful to attempt to quantify what is wrong, how wrong, and in any way "prosecute" such behavior. - Like
Mitchell Metling said on Jan 18, 2012
Sleeping around with no intent of a relationship has become a taboo in our society, especially in the college environment, due to the dishonesty usually associated with it. This being said, Mike is contradicting this norm, this established system of leading someone on for a relationship in order to simply have sex with them. By being honest with his partners he is displaying a knowledge of social standards which contradict those usually shown in "hook-ups." Whether or not this makes the act of hooking-up moral is something I can honestly admit to having no set belief of. However, it is a step in the right direction. Honesty allows all parties to be aware of the situation and assess it with their own set of beliefs. If a girl is told by Mike that he is not looking for a relationship, that he is purely seeking to hook-up, then it puts the responsibility on her to assess her own moral code and judge whether or not she is okay with the scenario. As stated by many others, the difference with Mike being Michelle is simply the perception of society on her. Morally there should be no difference; in the end it should come down to the moral code of the individuals in question and not be a matter of gender. - Like
Kevin treeds said on Jan 18, 2012
I think that he is not in the wrong by doing this he is a college student that is just having fun with no strings attached. Big deal. I dont think anothe guy should be calling him a manwhore, I think that is pretty weak. As for Michelle, she might be seen as slutty by society, but she is just a college student also experimenting and having fun I don't see anything wrong with it. But I think overtime in both situation people will stop hooking up with these two people because of their past. I think that it is fine to do but there will alway be people judging them. - Like
Anne Nino said on Jan 18, 2012
Mike's actions are generally accepted by society, at least within the context which they are placed here. It is not a practice that is totally free from harm, but society deems these harms (emotional, psychological, spiritual, maybe physical) "not so bad," or at least not bad enough to make it a serious issue. Although my personal code of ethics says that hookups are not desirable, beneficial, or justified for me RIGHT NOW, it is more of a personal and private conclusion that I have come to. If people are able to go through them without substantial harm to themselves, it is their freedom to do so. I think if one engages in such behavior, they must be the one to look out for their emotional well-being, however. Nice of Mike to let them know up front. But even if he didn't, these girls should be prepared to deal with rejection and regret. There is no partnership in hooking-up-- real partnership at least. Maybe there is an imagined partnership. I don't see gender (i.e., the Michelle Scenario) posing any actual differences. Perhaps there is a double standard, but it doesn't play a role in the way I sort out the ethics of the matter. - Like
Claudia said on Jan 18, 2012
If Mike informs his sexual partners of the situation and that he is not looking for any sentimental relationships, I do not see a reason of why he should be judged. In my opinion, the act of hooking up, nowadays, has become so common that, for the most part, it is only criticized when one or more of the individuals are harmed in any possible way. By informing his partners of the situation, Mike will be reducing the risk of harming anyone in multiple ways. I believe that this situation should be approached similarly if Mike was a Michelle instead. Unfortunately, as many people have suggested, we are part of a society in which Michelle would be treated differently if she were to be sleeping around. - Like
Kendall Preston said on Jan 19, 2012
Because of the introduction of this situation, it is obvious that mike priorities sports and schoolwork high above relationships. As a varsity student athlete at SCU I can relate to this struggle to balance school, sports, and relationships. I myself have do not have a boyfriend, nor do I plan on having a boyfriend because of this time constraint, however unlike Mike, I am also not sleeping around with multiple people. Many people may argue that this is because Mike is a boy and I am a girl, however I do not think this is the primary reason. Although there is an undeniable double standard surrounding the sex lives of men and women, each still has the decision of whether or not the want to be promiscuous or monogamous. The issue with Mike however is not that he has made the life choice to sleep around, but instead that he can not get his friends comment out of his head. Because he is bothered by the man whore comment, he obviously is no longer 100% confident in his decision to be loose. Up until Jason brought up that there may be something wrong with sleeping around Mike was completely content, however no that he is not, emotionally he needs to strongly reconsider his choices. I personally see nothing wrong with men OR women sleeping around as long as they are safe. Let it be noted however, that when I claim they need to be safe, I mean physically and emotionally. Once either of those things is not being protected, then it is no longer ok. This is of course just from the standpoint of the individual. When the significant other (or I suppose insignificant in this scenario) is taken into consideration, then the grey area increases. Although Mike is saying that he is only looking for a fling, it is natural for women to think they are the exception. It is in this situation that I feel there would be a difference between men and women. With men, they must tread very lightly while sleeping around so that they do not let the women become too emotionally attached. With women however, I feel it is much easier to go into the situation saying it is just a hookup and have it remain that way. All in all, I personally would not choose to live my life the way mike does, however because he was originally physically and emotionally protecting himself (and from the sounds of it the women involved too) I see nothing wrong with his life choice. - Like - 3 people like this.
Pix247 said on Jan 19, 2012
Sex in itself is a personal choice. As long as we are of the legal age to consent to sexual activity, how we do it is our business. That being said, as long as we are sexually active, we must take responsibility for our actions: How do they affect us as well as others? In Mike's situation, I have to disagree with his friend. Mike simply isn't interested in a relationship and is taking responsibility for his actions. He wears protection and makes it well known to his partners that he does not want a relationship before hand. He makes his aim clearly known. It is his personal choice to do as he sees fit for himself. If we respect persons who do not sleep around because of religious beliefs and other personal reasons, then we should also respect Mike's choice. Part of taking responsibility for your actions includes dealing with the consequences. It is Mike's choice to do what he pleases, he will have to deal with the outcome of his actions. - Like
Miriam Schulman said on Jan 24, 2012
The panel of students and staff who judge The Big Q contest were really struck by the number of responders to "Sleeping Around" who did not want to judge Mike's behavior. That's an attitude we applaud if it means that you're not going around on your moral high horse, deciding who is worthy and who is not. You don't want to be judgmental. But not being judgmental is different from declining to engage the ethical issues at stake in the case. If all we can say about an ethical issue is that everyone has a right to his or her own opinion, that doesn't advance our understanding very far. And, as almost everyone pointed out in their comments, people are judged for hooking up--men are often applauded as studs while women are scorned as sluts. We thought that JustMyOpinion did the best job this time at laying out this double standard, raising the ethical issues, and speaking to the effect this behavior might have on Mike himself. - Like - 1 person likes this.
Stephan S. said on Jan 28, 2014
In my point of view, I would go with Mike's friend against him. The points they rose are very valid. Even though he might make the point that from a natural basis there is nothing wrong about sleeping with lots of women without having some sort of emotional relationship, I do feel this issue is much more serious than just having sex. The practice of this kind of sexual behaviour is becoming more and more common nowadays, and most of the young sexually active population (i.e college/(senior)high-school) are apparently happy with that. But if we look on the other hand it seems like meeting websites and other kind of devices are encountering more and more success on the populations ranging from 30 to 40. Why is it so? From my point of view there is this evolvement in being "like the other" and being able to owe one's virginity to seems as cool as the others. And this tendency, I believe is not exclusively masculine. I don't want to overgeneralise here, however it seems that the evolution of the moral schools in both sexes are evolving in this direction. Why is that bad then? Well, I'm sure they are having pleasure on the fire of the action, (Freud's Id). But on the other hand, as one of the friend mentioned, what about the girl? Does she count? Does her desire count? Well let's assume that on the moment of the action she is agreeing. In the future he might regret this, and She might regret this as well, when he will be face with the woman/man (s)he want and be rather ashamed of what his/her past was. Sexuality is something, that from the very beginning of modern society was hidden and rather not discussed in public. And there is a reason to that: it is intimate. Intimate means personal and that only a handful (if not less) of people know about. What is the point when half of the school knows about your intimacy? I feel that, either way, if it is mike of Michelle, sexuality is something special and you might want to wait a little, even if often it is frustrating, but it is. I think, worth it. - Like
rathk said on Jan 28, 2014
I would have to agree with Mike's friends on the matter, however there is certain aspects which could alter the situation and by doing so also change my opinion on the matter. As the situation is presented at the moment where Mike completely disregards his sex partners feelings afterwards as well as before I would have to agree that it is unethical,completely selfish and thoughtless. Nevertheless if his sexual partner (temporary) were to understand that Mike has no intention of a lasting relationship and that it is nothing but "casual" sex, and if Mike's partner would agree to that beforehand then the partner would have no right to complain furthermore Mike would not have to be perceived as a "man-whore" as his partners are on the same terms and mindset as him. If Mike and Michelle were to switch roles I would still apply the same logic. Even though women are more commonly perceived as "whores" for such behaviour I find it completely ridiculous, why should women not be allowed to have just as much fun/ sexual alleviation as men. However with the world growing to become more and more gender equal I have no doubt that this will be a dying concept (women regarded as sluts vs. men) and if looked at with an open-mind can easily be accepted. - Like - 2 people like this.
Post a Comment

Tags: ethics, hooking up, sexuality