Straight-edge Warning Against Physical Intimacy

I genuinely don't understand, what exactly is the "true self" you're trying to protect in this case? I can see how drugs and alcohol are essentially wireheading, making you feel like you achieved something of value while in fact your didn't (or otherwise affecting your judgement through various "undocumented back doors"). But hormones and neurotransmitters are not something external, they are you, or more specifically a part of the physical implementation of any reasonable definition of "your self". Your motivation for whatever is it you feel it's appropriate to be motivated for is also mediated by hormones, only (maybe) slightly different ones.

To be clear, I completely understand a position "I want to be more motivated by X and less motivated by Y of my lower-level desires", e.g. more motivated by the fear of death and less motivated by impulse to eat tasty food. But, I don't understand how the fact that all of those desires are mediated by hormones makes some of them "less true" than others? Or what does it even mean for them to be "less true"?

My main thought would be that you consider the risk factors of physical intimacy but possibly ought to look a bit more closely at whether there are risk factors associated with avoiding physical intimacy (are you sure that that's not harmful as well if taken to sufficient lengths?) 

What about food? Which has arguably a much bigger effect on your hormones, mood, and lived experience? Will you commit to a bland and static diet to remain true to yourself? 

What about illness or injury, and what about trauma? Will you commit to an ultra-low-risk lifestyle to avoid your "true self" being altered by adverse experiences?

What about sleep loss and tiredness? Will you commit to a strict sleep schedule? Are you capable of that without the use of substances?

What about the way successes and failures and the way they make you feel? Will you commit to a state of not-doing to preserve yourself from the dopamine highs and lows from achieving or not achieving your goals?

Anywhere you draw the line seems incredibly arbitrary to me. Life will affect your hormones and neurotransmitters, which will in turn affect your personality, moods, affect, and experience. Unless you plan to become a monk and remove yourself from stimulus, you can't avoid this. It makes sense to me to avoid doing highly mind altering substances and activities when you need to make a big decision or have a clear head, but I don't see any sense in abstaining completely or especially in drawing a line at sex but not food. 

Thanks for writing this out! I consider myself pretty "straight edge" too, in that I've never done drugs or gotten drunk for many of the same reasons you've stated, and I've never considered other forms of mind-alteration such as intimacy to fall under the same category, but it makes sense to. One exception to that, however, is that lust is very clearly a result of mind-altering chemicals, and the solution (for guys at least, not sure how it works for women) is very effective. I've actually advised young men quite often to masturbate before making romantic decisions to see if it affects their judgement... basically if you still want to go on a date with someone even after recent release, you probably like them for more than just horniness.

My main thought would be that you consider the risk factors of physical intimacy but possibly ought to look a bit more closely at whether there are risk factors associated with avoiding physical intimacy (are you sure that that's not harmful as well if taken to sufficient lengths?) 

Strong like! For me, this is an important consideration to preserving my identity, staying productive / mentally sharp, and as independent as I want:)

My only question is, why privilege your “natural state” so much? Seems like naturalistic fallacy. For example, why would I think my anger at my partner is more authentic than how I would feel if we had sex? When that happens, I usually remember how much I love them and let go of my anger, which feels a lot more true to me. And what’s the true amount of funny for a movie?

I think saying “everything in moderation” is a really unsatisfying answer, but it’s true here. Sex can warp your judgment but it’s also a need for most people. Overeating can make you complacent with a bad situation, but that doesn’t mean your judgment is better when you’re hungry. Unfortunately there’s no one true base state and we need to keep applying inputs as well as abstaining to stay in the right zone.

The big failure mode I see with physical intimacy is people rushing into major commitments (kids, marriage, moving in together) in the first two years of a relationship, when they’re still in the tempestuous, exciting, misleading phase of being “in love.” The solution is to be slower to commit.

I am not sure you can avoid the cognition-distorting effects of these hormones by avoiding physical intimacy. It’s very possible to be in love without any physical contact.

Note that these effects are stronger within people who produce predominantly oestrogen over testosterone, but everyone is affected by them.

That's an odd way of phrase male/female. I would expect that blood levels of either are more important then how much a person produces (blood-levels include artificial supplementation). 

I'm coming to this article by way of being linked from a Facebook group though I am also an occasional LessWrong user. I would have asked this question in the comments of the FB post where this post was linked, but since the comments were closed there, I'll ask it here: What was (or were) the reason(s) behind:
 

1. Posting this to a FB group with the comments open;
2. Waiting until a few comments had been made, then closing them on FB and then asking for commenters to comment on this LW post instead?

I understand why someone would do this if they thought a platform with a higher variance for quality of discourse, like FB or another social media website, was delivering a significantly lower quality of feedback than one would hope or expect to receive on LW. Yet I read the comments on the FB post in question, in a group frequented by members of the rationality community, and none of them stuck out to me as defying what have become the expected norms and standards for discourse on LW.

Yes, oxytocin and other hormones released during hugs/sex have a similar effect to drugs. Actually, most drugs don’t add anything into your body but will simply increase/activate or affect hormones naturally present, which will give you an altered state of mind

This doesn't seem surprising or compelling to me. People say similar things about morphine and sugar, but of course drugs take advantage of existing systems that evolved (imperfectly) to help you: why would you evolve a neurochemical system set up for the sole purpose of fucking up your life if you took the wrong chemical? The surprising thing would be if drugs used a system that didn't have a normal, survival-aiding purpose.

I think I largely agree with you, but just a thought: Mayyybe drugs can help us explore / learn about parts of ourselves that are usually "keep in check" (in some ways) by other parts^_

Does your drugged self not want to get subber to stay their true (from their reference point IIUC) self?

Speaking as someone who tends to be low-oxytocin by default, I've got to note that there are some serious drawbacks to quality of life without oxytocin-inducing activities. For me, my "true self" is more evident during the day or two of "afterglow" from high-oxytocin activities than in the dragging, "who cares about people and what's the use of living anyway" tendencies of lower oxytocin.

So I would be rather doubtful of the utility of avoiding "normal" amounts of oxytocin induction. Am I a different person while riding an oxytocin high? Yep: cuddling and zoning out in a satisfied way goes to the top of my preferences, followed by playfulness and silliness. But this phase doesn't last very long, and is quickly replaced by, "I feel/act like a normal human being again, with a greater sense of well-being", while oxytocin deprivation leads to a decreased sense of well-being.

Based on my experiences, I would expect that chronic deprivation of oxytocin-inducing activities would produce significant physical and mental stress and illness. I can't even imagine how I could have even survived the last two and a half decades without my spouse's affection... or that I would have even wanted to.

My main thought would be that you consider the risk factors of physical intimacy but possibly ought to look a bit more closely at whether there are risk factors associated with avoiding physical intimacy (are you sure that that's not harmful as well if taken to sufficient lengths?) 

Others have already pointed out how line-drawing in any given place is arbitrary, because all of our thinking/feeling/motivation is chemically driven in many ways, so I'll come at this from another angle. No idea if it will help you, but I certainly found it helpful when I first encountered it.

Basically, this is an ancient problem despite the modern framing. Have you read Euripedes' The Bacchantes? Dionysus isn't just the god of wine and partying, he's also a god of balance and renewal, and the proper, mature use of all forms of intoxication. Intoxication can destroy, but with his initiation rites and rituals (translation: social context, training, self-discipline) it can intensify experiences, promote social cohesion, and enhance exploration of the full range of ways of being human. 

These days, our culture rejects letting others decide for us what the proper use of sex and drugs and so on are, and so refuses to provide much useful guidance or a reliable social context. But it's at least a way of thinking about the problem. If you find yourself in a setting/culture where use of intoxicating substances or practices seems to cause problems, avoid them. If you find yourself in a setting/culture where they seem not to cause problems, or even seem to make things better, then take the time to learn why and how that setting/culture uses them, and then decide if and when you want to follow along. Throughout, strive to monitor yourself and know your limits, and to have people you trust watching your back (and listen to them if they suggest you cut back on something).