randomness: (Default)
[personal profile] randomness
Sex is communication. If someone is a bad communicator out of bed, it's unlikely they'll be a good communicator in bed. Possible, but unlikely.

Edit: A number of commenters have drawn a distinction between verbal and non-verbal communication, and assumed I meant "verbal=out of bed"; "non-verbal=in bed". That is not what I posted. I do find it noteworthy that people make that assumption.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-09-13 05:00 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lyonesse.livejournal.com
samuel r delany wrote up some very interesting autobiographical stories describing rather a disconnect there. i think they were in "the motion of light in water" if you'd care to read a dissenting view.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-09-13 05:02 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] r-ness.livejournal.com
I seem to remember reading it at some point, but it was years ago. I should go and see if I can find a copy again.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-09-13 05:18 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] choirsoftheeye.livejournal.com
Delany's take on sex is very, very interesting. (I've been slogging through Dhalgren at fairly slow pace for months now).

(no subject)

Date: 2007-09-13 05:21 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] r-ness.livejournal.com
Yeah, I really like his work. I also find his take on economic class and welfare intriguing.

But he can be a slog sometimes.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-09-13 06:01 pm (UTC)
drwex: (VNV)
From: [personal profile] drwex
That does not match my experience at all. In particular, there are people who are crapTACular at communicating with words, whose communication without words is excellent.

people have different styles.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-09-13 06:08 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] r-ness.livejournal.com
You mistake my meaning.

I am not saying that people who communicate badly in words cannot communicate non-verbally.

I am saying that people who are bad at communicating tend to be bad at communicating regardless of the venue.

I class people who are good at communicating non-verbally as people who are good at communicating, so it's not surprising to me that they're good at communicating in bed. I've known a few people who are quite inarticulate who are good at communicating non-verbally; that's no surprise to me. Nor is it a surprise to me that they can communicate non-verbally in many contexts.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-09-13 06:12 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] r-ness.livejournal.com
As in my reply to [livejournal.com profile] drwex; I'm specifically not drawing a distinction between verbal and physical communication.

I'm drawing the distinction between people who are lousy communicators, verbally or physically, and people who are good communicators.

I have also been blessed in my associations with people who are good verbal communicators in bed, as well as being physical communicators, but that's another story.

(Although I admit that may be one reason why I don't draw the distinction between forms of communication; I often do a lot of verbal communication during sex as well, so it never occurred to me that people would assume that "in bed" = "non-verbal".)

(no subject)

Date: 2007-09-13 06:18 pm (UTC)
drwex: (Default)
From: [personal profile] drwex
then your statement is tautological, since by definition they communicate well.

I think I understood your meaning and disagreed on the basis that the change of venue may allow some people to communicate in ways that they're good at whereas other venues do not.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-09-13 06:20 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lyonesse.livejournal.com
i think his autobiographical stuff is more accessible, certainly than "dhalgren" :)

(no subject)

Date: 2007-09-13 06:21 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] r-ness.livejournal.com
I disagree, both on the tautology and your analysis. You are saying something different, with which I actually agree.

Here is a rephrase of what I was saying:

If you find that someone is a lousy communicator, do not expect them to suddenly become a good one if you change venues.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-09-13 06:25 pm (UTC)
drwex: (Default)
From: [personal profile] drwex
I got that. I disagree. As I said originally, it doesn't match my experience in several ways nor does it match with what I understand of interpersonal theory.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-09-13 06:28 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] r-ness.livejournal.com
It's fine that you disagree but my post does match my experience. Perhaps we are working from different theories.

I do interact with people a lot non-verbally out of bed, so I think I get to see a lot more of that that aspect of their communication style before I sleep with them.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-09-13 06:29 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] r-ness.livejournal.com
I think that's more of a societal shame/propriety thing than a communication thing, and as such it can be overriden with practice.

Definitely.

I do think it's telling that people connect communication during sex with non-verbal communication; there's certainly a lot of it, but the lack of verbal communication during sex is, as you say, something of a societal assumption.

Moreover, we're speaking on LJ, so simply because of the venue there are a disproportionate number of people here who are verbally articulate, so there's an obvious assumption that people out of bed generally communicate with words; this isn't as true as this sample set might assume.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-09-13 08:38 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] choirsoftheeye.livejournal.com
:), I find him to be very readable when I pick him up, but I've been busy and the plotline is so nonlinear that my desire to pick it up is much more akin to my desire to pick up a nonfiction book or a book of short stories. There's no urge to find out what happens.

Profile

randomness: (Default)
Randomness

November 2024

S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10111213141516
171819 20212223
24252627282930

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags