Day 36: What's in a Number?

Speaking of numbers, the number of pieces in this ensemble is lower than usual. The dress makes such a statement that it doesn't need much. Even without the necklace, the accessories would be sufficient, but I like to add a little pendant necklace to every v-neck. That's just me. Because it's safari-inspired, we'll call it "Chillin' Outback."

I think I have an ulcer, because my stomach has been on fire for a good three days now. In fact, I didn't really get up much today but to eat the occasional Salteen and soup. Apparently, my addictions to Starbucks, Siracha, and stress have all conspired against me. It didn't help that we had spaghetti two nights in a row. Tomatoes are notorious for tearing your stomach up. So now, I am lying down as I write (talk about commitment), trying to take deep breaths and focus on the classical music playing in the background (Thanks, Hank). I am not allowed to have citrus, alcohol, caffeine, spice, and cheese for a few days, doctor's orders (which would also be my mother's orders). This is incredibly bad timing, as we have good friends coming to dinner tomorrow, one of whom is a sommelier and promises to bring amazing wine. Damn. Also, Friday is my birthday, and we're planning to eat at a Brazilian steakhouse (incomplete without wine) that night and have a dessert and wine party on Saturday. Triple damn.

Today's episode examines the idea of slutdom, specifically asking, "When it comes to sex, how many partners is too many?" Carrie's new boyfriend says he wants to wait a while before hopping into bed, which makes Carrie worry that he isn't into her. After four or so more dates, they sleep together, which dispels her worries and makes the waiting worthwhile. Miranda discovers she has an STD and has to write down and call all her past partners, all 42 of them. Steve then gets tested. His results are negative, remarkable considering his "number" is over 60. Samantha has a 2 am caller, who accidentally lets a robber into her high-security building. The other residents blame the resulting robbery on Samantha, since she's always buzzing in different men late at night. Rather than stay and take the flack, Samantha moves to a part of town where she'll never be criticized for her lifestyle. Charlotte dates a man who unknowingly screams out during sex that she's a whore. For a brief moment she wonders if he's right, but the two ultimately decide it's he who needs sexual reformation.

I have thought a lot about what the number of people we sleep with says about us. Some of my friends have never slept with anyone. One friend has only slept with her husband. Some have made it a point to sleep with as many men as possible before marriage, reasoning that if men can do this, why can't they. Most of the women I know are somewhere in between.

I don't have a real feeling one way or the other about what's the best way to go. Part of me is jealous of the intimacy my friend who was abstinent until marriage must have with her husband. Part of me wishes my number was lower, even though it's not very high (and, no, I'm not telling it here). But the bigger part of me knows I couldn't have done that if I had tried (which I didn't). I was always too curious, too rebellious, and too romantic. That said, most of the sex I've had has been in relationships--or in the hopes of having a relationship. I never really understood the concept of trying to establish good sexual technique with someone you know you'll never see again. And if it's not going to be good sex, why bother at all? That's my argument for having wise sex--sex that hopefully has some emotional fulfillment beyond the two hours in bed one night. Without this guideline for myself, I think I would have become jaded long ago.

But if I were single living in a big city like New York, where relationships are the exception not the rule, would I be able to have casual sex in order to have sex at all? Does a woman have to be okay with casual sex to have a social life in today's society? Sex seems like part of the dating process these days. Let's face it: you are considered prudish if you won't sleep with a man by date 3 or so. And that means, if you don't want to rack up your number, you had better know pretty soon on whether it's serious or not. That's hard to do, especially in places where the options for partners are infinite and no one wants to settle. Even if the guy wants to wait--like Aidan in the episode--how do you decide when is too early? Is there such thing as too late? If you're waiting to have sex until you know a person really well, could you be waiting forever?

I think of Arnold, the first man I was engaged to. He wanted to wait until marriage. We fooled around, but we didn't have sex for an entire year, even when we were living together with his mother. By that time, I had lost interest. Plus, he had asked me to marry him a month into our relationship, as if that would make the waiting easier to take. It just made me neurotic and sex deprived. When I broke up with him the first time, I immediately went out with a Russian guy who was in one of my classes at school. He had a you-know-what the size of my pinky finger--I kid you not--but at that point I didn't care. After that affair fizzled out, Arnold wanted to get back together. When we did, we decided to have sex. I just couldn't take what felt like living a lie (there was no "saving myself" going on anymore, that I knew). The sex was terrible, and I wished I would have found that out a hell of a lot sooner. Besides, I nearly hated him by this point, which I'm sure didn't help matters.

My point is not to not wait. But if you're in a healthy relationship, I think part of the healthfulness is being free to be sexually expressive. Even if you're just sleeping around casually, I'm not sure there is much correlation between whether or not the relationship works out and whether or not you wait to have sex. Either the pair works or it doesn't, and I'm not sure having sex early on makes much of a difference. Many couples I know (including the one I'm in) slept together on their first date, and things have worked out well for them (and us). Maybe waiting works for some people, but waiting too long just seems like a waste of time and good, healthy sexual energy. Again, that's just me.

So, maybe the sex goes somewhere. Maybe it doesn't. However you roll, does the number matter? I think it only matters to the person who has it, meaning each person is having the amount of sex that is right for them, in the way that's right for them. For some that may mean waiting for marriage. For me, that means sex with the potential for a relationship. I don't really care how many partners that ends up being. For others, it may mean sex with the potential for orgasm, and that's cool too. Anyway, who's counting? Seriously.

I hope you'll be back. I will.