Here’s why today’s “hook up” millennials may be our best hope yet for a shift towards true intimacy.
– – –
When I was the age of today’s millennial men I thought about one thing when it came to women—getting “lucky”. This was something that didn’t happen all that often, hence why the term “getting lucky” was so apropos. In our current culture getting lucky has been replaced by “hooking up” where having sex is about the same as ordering a cheeseburger with animal-style fries at your local In-N-Out burger joint.
At first blush this may seem like culturally we are going backwards with respect to relationships. However, I contend that the millennials are well positioned to take the next evolutionary step towards truly conscious intimate relationships because of the prevalent hook-up culture. Just stay with me for a bit, you will see where I’m going with this.
Surprising attention from the Ritalin Generation
The millennials in my audiences seem to be extremely interested in achieving truly connected intimacy which seems totally counter to the casual sexual behavior so ascribed to this generation.
|
What I’m about to share is strictly anecdotal. However I’ve experienced it so many times I believe there is a fundamental shift happening. As a fully impotent prostate cancer survivor I speak and write about extraordinary intimacy to people of all ages, orientations and stages of relationship. What I have noticed (surprisingly so) is that the millennials in my audiences seem to be extremely interested in achieving truly connected intimacy which seems totally counter to the casual sexual behavior so ascribed to this generation.
Too much of a good thing is no longer a good thing
Here’s what I think is going on. In a hook up encounter, sex is so accessible that it essentially becomes just a form of mutual masturbation for the primary purpose of releasing sexual tension. Within this context there is rarely, if any semblance of true connection between the parties. And without connection there is no intimacy. And it is that lack of intimacy that becomes the unfillable hole that so wants to be fulfilled. Therefore there is this huge disconnect between sex and intimacy (generally speaking) for the millennials.
Getting lucky seemed to be a far more transcendent experience than just getting off. And it’s this lack of experiencing transcendence that I feel our millennials crave.
|
At least in the days of “getting lucky”, when we actually did get lucky it was so special we often associated a deeper connection with the other person, whether the encounter warranted it or not. That is, getting lucky seemed to be a far more transcendent experience than just getting off. And it’s this lack of experiencing transcendence that I feel our millennials crave. And this kind of transcendence typically can only come from risking a deep, authentic and vulnerable connection with another human being, be it on the emotional, physical or even spiritual level.
Maslow’s hierarchy of intimacy
In Maslow’s model of the hierarchy of human needs, base-level needs (i.e. survival, food, clothing, shelter) come first. Then procreative needs show up as a strong second place (i.e. sex drive). As these lower level needs are met, people will (as the theory goes) seek to meet higher level needs, with self-actualization being the highest.
For much of the developed world, most of their lower level needs are met. This leaves a craving for higher level ones –including the feeling of transcendence (which is a form of self-actualization) that can occur during intimate encounters. So viewed through this lens, hooking up is certainly a way to address ancient procreative urges, but does nothing for achieving a deeper level of connection between partners.
The fact that many millennials seem to feel and acknowledge this emptiness is actually a good thing. This means they are *aware* of what is missing / possible –a critical first step to change and being open to exploring how to achieve the deeper intimacy they crave. Whereas I find many men in my “getting lucky” generation not as open to this same exploration –perhaps because that sense of emptiness is not as strong as it is with the millennials.
There is hope yet…
The passing of the baton from one generation to another is always interesting to observe. The older generation gives it over with a mixture of relief and concern. The new generation, always different, takes it with a mixture of confidence and trepidation.
I think we have much to hope for in our current generation of millennials. I personally find them to be very caring, intelligent, and most importantly –ready for much more in terms of deep, connecting intimacy than what their hook up culture suggests. And for that, I am grateful to and for them.
– – –
image: activerain
finally an optimistic perspective on casual sex that doesn’t shame it
Dude: My first marriage was a complete mulligan. I totally outkicked my coverage the second time, BUT and there is always a big butt somewhere, my second wife and I have stayed connected sexually through all the trials of marriage, and believe me we have been tested. I guess that is why I like your messages so much. There is a subtext here that might be fodder for later posts or draw fire, so much of the quality and quantity of sex in a monogamous , consensual relationship is determined by the woman. (INCOMING!) My six word biography is: Got… Read more »
Thanks Spencer,
BTW, I’m giving a TEDx talk this coming Friday at 3:40pm (PST) on “Creating Extraordinary Intimacy in a Shutdown World” at TEDx University of Nevada Reno.
They are going to live stream the entire event (I’m the last speaker :)) –just go to http://new.livestream.com/crowleystudentunion/tedxuniversityofnevada to watch if interested…
Spencer, can you please explain how “so much of the quality and quantity of sex in a monogamouse, consensual relationship is deteremine by the woman”?
Because “no” means no and “I’m not interested” means no. I know I’m walking on thin ice here but in many relationships the man has the desire for more frequent sex than the woman. But if you want to respect her boundaries you have to wait until she is in the mood-so she is by default determining the frequency and if she simply submits without participating, she determines the quality.
I don’t completely disagree with you but perhaps the key is for a man to find new ways to engage with his partner that are intimate and or sensual without it always having to lead to sex? If he craves connection, intimacy and developing the relationship, and not just the satisfaction of an orgasm; perhaps finding new and innovative ways will build their relationship to new highs AND she may be in the mood a little MORE often. What do you think? On that note, I will say that in this day and age more women are actually experiencing this… Read more »
Erin, “I don’t completely disagree with you but perhaps the key is for a man to find new ways to engage with his partner that are intimate and or sensual without it always having to lead to sex? If he craves connection, intimacy and developing the relationship, and not just the satisfaction of an orgasm; perhaps finding new and innovative ways will build their relationship to new highs AND she may be in the mood a little MORE often. What do you think?” If the woman is also interested in connecton, intimacy and developing the relationship, perhaps she also needs… Read more »
Of course, it works both ways. It takes two people to make the relationship work. Communication, the ability to talk about what is or isn’t working in the relationship can be difficult but it’s key. Both people need to have an open heart. Not a perfect one..but an open one.
Spencer you are not treading on thin ice ,you already fell in to the icy cold water with your remark.
I do not want to say anything more than that I DISAGREE with your statement that the quality of sex in a monogamous relationship is determined by the woman. Yes men often complain that sex does not happen often enough , but how can you say that the quality of the sex is determined by the woman?
I do not understand how you think, and see no logic here…
That’s a really good point Silke. I didn’t think of that.
It’s hard for men to know what pleases a woman, even a life partner. It can be different from one time to the next. If a woman simply participates in sex passively out of some sense of ‘duty’ the quality of the sex will be pretty low. Does that make sense? I have learned how to please my wife by her gentle guidance, without it, I’d be lost.
Many women really don’t know what they want sexually. My boyfriend sometimes asks me during sex, “what do you want me to do right now?” and I’m like, “I don’t know, kiss me?” and he’s like, “ok but where should I touch you? what position do you want?” and I’m like “just surprise me!” I’m actually very ethusiastic about sex but I rarely have anything in particular in mind that I feel like I want at that very second. I don’t know if this is an inhibition or just how I am. I know he’d like more direction but I… Read more »
I like the tone and optimism of this article. I’m a baby boomer who had to rely on getting lucky. My wife says that most women have a great sixth sense, they know when a guy is going to get ‘lucky’. Been getting lucky with the same woman for 27 years and hope my luck never runs out.
Thanks Spencer –it is so refreshing to hear about a relationship that is so good after so many years –and I suspect “luck” has nothing to do with it 🙂
Michael