Hey /adv/, How does a person have casual sex without emotional

File: 1445992172797.jpg (12KB, 251x241px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 251x241px

Please.

find someone who is willing to have sex with you

>>16519955
Already have, I want more but the other person doesn't want a relationship "right now". We already had a romantic involvement but stuff changes I guess. Anyways, I'm able to have casual sex with this person, it's just I'm too attached. I want to continue a sexual relationship without any heartbreak/disappointment.

Just fuck and leave.

>>16519982
i wanna and stay though

By finding other ways to channel the emotions your feeling for him. Can you paint, write, sing, build stuff, hike, or anything? Do so, do so as if it is important as your relationship, because it is. If it helps, the more you have going on besides him the more interest you'll have.

File: 1445563181747.jpg (5KB, 250x193px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 250x193px

>>16519989
And that will help with any possible further disappointment...?

You can't. You can't control the chemicals in your brain, unless you actually mess with them directly.

Maybe find someone who is able to give you the emotional connection you need?

Look up "demisexual"

It's not just that easy to fuck someone if you need emotional reciprocation and you can't just "get over" having that need.

File: divorce.jpg (473KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

473KB, 1280x720px

If you're a woman, you literally can't. Your brain releases oxytocin whenever you have sex, which is directly responsible for pair-bonding.

This is why sluts who fuck too many men later can't settle down with a single one and still be happy/faithful.

Oddly enough, men who had more partners previous to marriage are not more or less likely to divorce, compared to their female counterparts.

pic related

This is also why most women with FWBs are trying to turn that FWB into commitment.

>>16520185
this

1) Men aren't vending machines you insert sex coins and a relationship comes out.

2) Stop lying to yourself OP. you aren't having "casual sex", you're having sex and hoping to turn it into a relationship. It will obviously fail.

File: 1448402789004.jpg (111KB, 319x307px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 319x307px

>>16520195
>>16519965
>We already had a romantic involvement
Number one wouldn't be true. However, number two is probably true.
> It will obviously fail.
thank you for bringing me back down to earth

>>16520195
Exactly. The only way for a woman to short-circuit your brain into allowing yourself to have casual sex with little-to-no strings attached is to have sex with as many people as possibly feasible, in order to fuck-up your pair-bonding ability for life.

There's nothing inherently wrong with being a slut, just know the after-effects and what it will do to your brain.

File: image.jpg (63KB, 536x616px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 536x616px

>>16520185
>Oddly enough, men who had more partners previous to marriage are not more or less likely to divorce, compared to their female counterparts.

Actually, no. Men still show the same pattern, just a bit less extreme than women. Men with more sexual a partners are more likely to have failed marriages as well as be unfaithful.

Men have vasopressin for their sex-bonding hormone. New research has shown that men with certain mutations to the vasopressin receptor gene are more likely to be unfaithful. Pretty interesting stuff.

The bottom line is, it's best to not try and attempt monogamy with the promiscuous.

>>16520195
>turn into a relationship
No, turn back into a relationship.

>>16520240
Literally the same thing. Whatever relationship you had before is irrelevant, becaue right not you don't have it anymore, and you're trying to use sex to rekindle it.

It literally makes no difference.

File: 1445991910014.jpg (58KB, 960x834px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 960x834px

>>16520242
You're right, thank you.