Yup! Getting laid is in the first level (physiological needs), and saving the world would fall into the second level (safety.) Or maybe the third level (belonging.). After all, it’s hard to belong to a group if everyone else is gone.
Being repeatedly told there’s something wrong with you is annoying. Asexuality is, AFAIK, the only sexuality still in the DSM-V.
(You can get out of a diagnosis by declaring yourself asexual, but that… no. Go away.)
(Also, sex sounds like it would be fun if one were into that kind of thing. Fun fact, at least some aces have a fully functioning sex drive, and no way to satisfy it. Like if you were straight, and everyone was the same gender as you.)
> Fun fact, at least some aces have a fully functioning sex drive, and no way to satisfy it.
Masturbation comes to mind…. š
I do know a bit about gray sexuality; there are also many people who simply don’t get to have sex for various reasons; physical, psychological or social. But the original point was about the place of sexuality in the Maslow heirarchy, and in that context, sex falls with the other low-level biological drives. As with the other drives, individuals vary widely in their natural urge to sexuality, but for any given degree, having the drive frustrated is a Maslow gap that implies various issues.
That said, the Maslow heirarchy itself is a particular theory of psychology, and one that is not universally accepted, largely because of issues like this. It’s especially true in psychology that “the map is not the terrain”; it is extremely hard to construct a psychological theory that accounts for the full range of human diversity.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen a “normative” theory that doesn’t dismiss at least some people as “broken”, even when they can demonstrably function within both society and the natural world. In general, such systems tend to pick on anyone who does not match the theorist’s ideal of a high-status individual. (Don’t even get me started on Freud. š )
Procreation might be considered a first-level necessity (although I would argue that, since you can personally survive just fine without procreating), but just getting laid (intimate relationships) is actually in the third level.
It depends if you are referring to sex, or you are referring to the relationship. Those aren’t necessarily synonymous. Tip has frequently had sex with no feelings of relationship at all.
Tipās problem is that this time, his sexual involvement was at a higher Maslow level, not just a pleasant physical encounter. Getting together with Berenice got him out of his existential morass and restored the mojo heād sacrificed to help other folks. Being with her met his needs at the apex of Maslowās pyramid, āself-actualizationā. And, as all good Psych 101 students remember, that implies that his needs were met on all the lower levels, too, from physical through belongingness. He always felt a unique attraction her, sending that she was (no pun intended) his soul-mate. Not an easy thing to lose…
Or…he was once one of those ninety-eight-pound weaklings who was drawn to pacifism because the bigger kids beat him up regularly. (There was some news story about statistics on this recently but I don’t have chapter-and-verse and may be garbling something.)
Say what you will, you have to remember that despite Tip not being a therapist (he’s a psychologist, probably with a PhD as it’s not a medical profession) he is very good at getting people out of themselves… usually by being an insufferable narcissist, but it works.
Well, at least Tip got the actualization he was needing!
Is that what we’re calling it these days? **badum-ching!**
Good for you, Nick. About time someone put Tip in his place.
Hurrah!
Well, Nick, if you and Dr. Lee hadn’t taken the titles of King and Queen of Avoidance from Dave and Helen, then maybe you’d have gotten you some, too.
Getting laid… saving the world… I’m pretty sure those are on Maslow’s hierarchy.
Yup! Getting laid is in the first level (physiological needs), and saving the world would fall into the second level (safety.) Or maybe the third level (belonging.). After all, it’s hard to belong to a group if everyone else is gone.
I wouldn’t put getting laid in one, you can function without sex just fine.
It’s still a primary drive, among the strongest we’ve got.
Speak for yourself, meatbag.
Sexuality is just a sublimation of the mathematics drive.
Some people are in fact asexual (“aces”) and it doesn’t seem to bother them much.
Other people are not asexual, and it still doesn’t bother them too much if they don’t have sex.
It bothers a lot of us a lot.
Being repeatedly told there’s something wrong with you is annoying. Asexuality is, AFAIK, the only sexuality still in the DSM-V.
(You can get out of a diagnosis by declaring yourself asexual, but that… no. Go away.)
(Also, sex sounds like it would be fun if one were into that kind of thing. Fun fact, at least some aces have a fully functioning sex drive, and no way to satisfy it. Like if you were straight, and everyone was the same gender as you.)
> Fun fact, at least some aces have a fully functioning sex drive, and no way to satisfy it.
Masturbation comes to mind…. š
I do know a bit about gray sexuality; there are also many people who simply don’t get to have sex for various reasons; physical, psychological or social. But the original point was about the place of sexuality in the Maslow heirarchy, and in that context, sex falls with the other low-level biological drives. As with the other drives, individuals vary widely in their natural urge to sexuality, but for any given degree, having the drive frustrated is a Maslow gap that implies various issues.
That said, the Maslow heirarchy itself is a particular theory of psychology, and one that is not universally accepted, largely because of issues like this. It’s especially true in psychology that “the map is not the terrain”; it is extremely hard to construct a psychological theory that accounts for the full range of human diversity.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen a “normative” theory that doesn’t dismiss at least some people as “broken”, even when they can demonstrably function within both society and the natural world. In general, such systems tend to pick on anyone who does not match the theorist’s ideal of a high-status individual. (Don’t even get me started on Freud. š )
Procreation might be considered a first-level necessity (although I would argue that, since you can personally survive just fine without procreating), but just getting laid (intimate relationships) is actually in the third level.
It depends if you are referring to sex, or you are referring to the relationship. Those aren’t necessarily synonymous. Tip has frequently had sex with no feelings of relationship at all.
Tipās problem is that this time, his sexual involvement was at a higher Maslow level, not just a pleasant physical encounter. Getting together with Berenice got him out of his existential morass and restored the mojo heād sacrificed to help other folks. Being with her met his needs at the apex of Maslowās pyramid, āself-actualizationā. And, as all good Psych 101 students remember, that implies that his needs were met on all the lower levels, too, from physical through belongingness. He always felt a unique attraction her, sending that she was (no pun intended) his soul-mate. Not an easy thing to lose…
Didn’t they both lose their groove the first time they mated?
Come on, Nick! Just go for it!
Nick’s much better at this counseling business than Tip is.
For a pacifist, Nick’s really good at whacking people upside the head with a clue-by-four.
In general, pacifists tend to be good at that, since they prefer to talk things out, rather than punch them out.
Or…he was once one of those ninety-eight-pound weaklings who was drawn to pacifism because the bigger kids beat him up regularly. (There was some news story about statistics on this recently but I don’t have chapter-and-verse and may be garbling something.)
Further thought makes me think they may have been talking about socialism, but I still can’t find an article.
“Anyway, you were about to talk about some sort of head impla-”
“Nope, no use explaining or even mentioning that again for at least a few months.”
Say what you will, you have to remember that despite Tip not being a therapist (he’s a psychologist, probably with a PhD as it’s not a medical profession) he is very good at getting people out of themselves… usually by being an insufferable narcissist, but it works.