The War on Sex is Awful

Originally posted by Angelaisaac
reply to post by MasterGemini

 

The reason it appears to you that those who disagree with your views only focus on the "physical" pain associated with sex is because the emotional/psychological damage from acting on ones desires would only exist if they have been repressed. If people didn't punish teenagers for realizing they have sexual desires, they would be able to develop in a healthy manner. When a developing sexual being is made to feel like those desires are BAD, that person feels BAD about them self. ESPECIALLY if they decide to ever act on such strong desires. This guilt about sexual desire doesn't just go away.

In short, it doesn't hurt children to learn about sex as an act of nature. To teach them it's a perverse or bad thing is what hurts them.

no one here is claiming that children should be taught sex is perverse or bad. no one here has said that at all - CHILDREN, however have little business meddling in sex. It is an act that has emotional and physical consequences, and children need to be taught that they are to refrain until they are old enough to accept said consequences. Boys need to be taught to vaue a girl's decisions, and girls need to be taught to be patient and wait until they are mature. And it does not hurt children of a certain maturity level to learn of the physical act of sex as being something normal that ADULTS do, but it needs to be age appropriate.

reply to post by Angelaisaac


I encouraged my children to wait for love, sex can kill now days, or ruin you life with unwanted pregnancy or an STD that makes you unable to have children,

Perhaps nothing new, many Biblical laws were for health reasons.

Would any parent want their underage child engaging in sexual activity, is that what we want for our children, of any age actually, out here in the world getting high and having sex with every Tom, Dick, and Harry?

Do You think Most men really respect promiscuous women?

reply to post by Salamandy

Emotions do not have to play into sex - especially when you are just learning the ropes.

It would be pretty hard for me to have sex with someone I didn't feel something for, don't they have blow up dolls for that?

Women are not just a piece of meat.

Originally posted by chrissiel123

Originally posted by Angelaisaac
reply to post by MasterGemini

 

The reason it appears to you that those who disagree with your views only focus on the "physical" pain associated with sex is because the emotional/psychological damage from acting on ones desires would only exist if they have been repressed. If people didn't punish teenagers for realizing they have sexual desires, they would be able to develop in a healthy manner. When a developing sexual being is made to feel like those desires are BAD, that person feels BAD about them self. ESPECIALLY if they decide to ever act on such strong desires. This guilt about sexual desire doesn't just go away.

In short, it doesn't hurt children to learn about sex as an act of nature. To teach them it's a perverse or bad thing is what hurts them.

no one here is claiming that children should be taught sex is perverse or bad. no one here has said that at all - CHILDREN, however have little business meddling in sex. It is an act that has emotional and physical consequences, and children need to be taught that they are to refrain until they are old enough to accept said consequences. Boys need to be taught to vaue a girl's decisions, and girls need to be taught to be patient and wait until they are mature. And it does not hurt children of a certain maturity level to learn of the physical act of sex as being something normal that ADULTS do, but it needs to be age appropriate.

"Boys need to be taught to value a girls decision" is a given for all aspects of life - not just sex. Same thing is true in reverse also.
I agree with what you say about children and the definition of a child should be up to the parent and/or nature and not laws and courts.
We say children become adult enough to enter the workforce at around 14. That sounds about right to draw some sort of line for "adult sex" and just playing doctor IMO. But again its up to the individual parent.

My only concern, you stay out of mine and my kids sex life, and ill do the same. No more billboards, pamphlets to abstain.. that stuff is so bad for our youth

reply to post by Salamandy

pamphlets to abstain.. that stuff is so bad for our youth

How so?

It didn't damage my libido

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
reply to post by Salamandy

 

Emotions do not have to play into sex - especially when you are just learning the ropes.


It would be pretty hard for me to have sex with someone I didn't feel something for, don't they have blow up dolls for that?

Women are not just a piece of meat.

Having an orgasm is not feeling something? Youre doing it wrong...

And who compared a woman to a piece of meat? What about the man and his likeness to a dead side of beef? See you cant accept some people like sex just because its fun can you? You have to vilify it.

reply to post by Salamandy

Youre doing it wrong.

LMAO

See you cant accept some people like sex just because its fun can you?

Oh I think sex is fun, just not with strangers.

reply to post by Salamandy


yes it may be a given, but it is not a norm at all. Peer pressure runs rampant of course, not just about sex but about everything.
and dont worry - i will be no where near your sex life or your kids - - - unless you bring them to a public forum for discussion.

Originally posted by Salamandy

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
reply to post by Salamandy

 

Emotions do not have to play into sex - especially when you are just learning the ropes.


It would be pretty hard for me to have sex with someone I didn't feel something for, don't they have blow up dolls for that?

Women are not just a piece of meat.

Having an orgasm is not feeling something? Youre doing it wrong...

And who compared a woman to a piece of meat? What about the man and his likeness to a dead side of beef? See you cant accept some people like sex just because its fun can you? You have to vilify it.

edit on 013131p://bSunday2011 by Stormdancer777 because: (no reason given)

edit on 31-7-2011 by Salamandy because: (no reason given)

ummm, i believe they were referring to emotional feelings. an orgasm is a physical feeling, although the rush of chemcials and hormones can make a person feel like they are havign an emotional experience, it is only temporary and not real.

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
reply to post by Salamandy

 

Youre doing it wrong.

LMAO

See you cant accept some people like sex just because its fun can you?

Thats cool as long as you dont go making laws about it
Oh I think sex is fun, just not with strangers.

edit on 013131p://bSunday2011 by Stormdancer777 because: (no reason given)

reply to post by chrissiel123

Emotional feelings are exactly the same thing - rush of chemicals and hormones. I think youre living in a dream world when it comes to sex. Too many hollywood love scenes and scenarios for you. That or daytime soaps.

reply to post by Salamandy


"pamphlets to abstain.. that stuff is so bad for our youth "

how is that bad???? telling young adults that might not be getting the message at home, that sex is better enjoyed later in life? That sex can alter a person's life drastically, or end it and should be shied away from until they are adults capable of weighing the risks and benefits themselves? I dont see how that can be bad.
The truth is, it is how the paretns around these kids react to it that is bad. The billboards or commercials are a great way to bring up the topic with young teens, maybe a starting point for a healthy discussion - but if the ads make you embarrassed or uncomfortable or high and mighty - then yes, YOUR REACTION TO THEM may not be beneficial - but dont blame it on the ads themselves. It is a very sad sign of the times we live in that some people have felt the need to make these ads. gone are the days when we can innocently assume that every parent will be raising their children with high expectations when it comes to morals and values. now it is obvious that children are not on average being taught properly and some have taken matters into their own hadns with these campaigns.
and as for the children - if you set high expectations and cheer them on lovingly to meet them, they will make you proud. if you set low expectations and assume that the educational system will keep an eye on them for you - well, pride wont be a problem

reply to post by Salamandy


uhm, are you talking to me? how has absolutely anything i have said in this forum given the impression that I have a hollywood view of sex, or that i watch too many soaps? I think at this point you are just stringing words together for something to do. I have the opposite opinions of sex than hollywood does, to be honest. nothing in the media, movies, television or music industries portrays a normal and healthy portrayal of sex. it is all fake, you do know that right? And as for soaps, never watched them and never will.

And emotions are not just chemical and hormone reactions my dear. The hormones may heighten an emotion, but the emotions i am referring to are the result of our minds. our thoughts, our memories, our observances. It is like the difference between lust (the hormone induced desire) and love (the emotion that grows through our association of a person that we enjoy being around, that has been kind to us or supportive, that has made us the center of their world.
please, you really shouldnt make assumption about people in a forum, you are not going to be correct.

reply to post by chrissiel123


Your sex is not divine. Your sex is terrible and not good for anything other than "function." My sex and the sex of millions of others is great, and you are making a plainly false blanket statement. Like the Prohibitionists, you generalize your bad experiences upon the entire world, and tell people who have healthy, enjoyable, magical sex lives that no, it is just a mechanical motion to go through in order to manufacture babies. Those feelings you have? They aren't real! I know because I have never felt them...

The attitude that sex is to be hidden, to be treated as a subhuman urge to be controlled and used only under very specific circumstances and only for industrial purposes is sickening to me.

You cheapen sex. You devalue it. You deny its incredible psychic power and treat it like a tawdry, meaningless affair unless it is stripped of all joy whatsoever.

I don't deny that you have never had good sex. But you have the gall to deny that I have?

reply to post by chrissiel123

If i had a son I would warmly encourage him to have an interest in girls - a healthy interest that was age appropriate of course.

If your children are interested in sex or in members of the opposite sex or members of the same sex, they do not need you to coach them. If they are ready for an erotic relationship, they will pursue it on their own. Unless, of course, you have so thoroughly indoctrinated them with the lie that sex is only for people who reach a certain age that I and I alone define that they are too ashamed to act on their natural desire.

Of course, you have also promised to shame them for every feeling any kind of embodied attraction! No sex, no "using your body," no touching! Love is an abstract thing, don't you kids know? That feeling in your belly? That's sin...

And of course, you also invoke the tired theme that disease is a physical sign of sin! If you act "properly and age appropriate" (read: obey your erotophobic mother unquestioningly) then your body will never be marked with STDs or the worst disease of all, pregnancy!

reply to post by chrissiel123


This is the central tool of the religious right's efforts to destroy sex. They put an imaginary and supposedly unbreakable line between "sex" and "love." They claim that love is possible without sex. They claim that sex is never identical with love. They claim that love without sex is superior to sexual love. This is classic dissociation.

As we enlightened ones know, sex and love go hand in hand. Sex is a natural and healthy expression of love. We lucky liberated few know that human love is not the ridiculous theological conception of Love as a dispassionate, detached, formal concept. We know that true love is embodied, passionate, and lived through experience. It is Eros, it is inseparable from sex. Sex is the physical union of two bodies through the universal attractive force of Love.

You don't need to be spiritual or philosophical about sex to see this. The very experience of having good sex is sufficient to convince anyone that sex always involves love; whether it is love of your partner's body, or mind, or anything else you can conceive.

Religious morals strip love from sex in order to 'purify' it, and in so doing they make possible the virgin-whore dichotomy. If we did not have insane theology forced upon us (as I never encountered growing up in an irreligious, atheistic household) then we would develop into healthy adults.

Here's the text from the link, since I doubt you will read it otherwise:

According to Freudian psychology, this complex often develops when the sufferer is raised by a cold and distant mother. Such a man will often court someone with qualities of his mother, hoping to fulfill a need for intimacy unmet in childhood. Often, the wife begins to be seen as mother to the husband—a "Madonna" figure—and thus not a possible object of sexual attraction. For this reason, in the mind of the sufferer, love and sex cannot be mixed. The man is therefore reluctant to have sexual relations with his wife for, according to his unconscious mind, this would be incest. He will reserve sexuality for "bad" or "dirty" women, and will not develop "normal" feelings of love in these sexual relationships. This introduces a dilemma where a man may feel unable to love any woman who can satisfy him sexually and is unable to be sexually satisfied by any woman whom he can love.

By the way,

Finding total bliss and happiness in a moment shared with a person whom you love, caring not for anything of the physical world, just to prolong the moment of connecting on a spiritual, now that in cosmic.

That is good sex. Try having some.

edit: By the way, you still haven't addressed this absolutely false statement:

Sex is often disappointing, never feels as good as we have to make it look like, never leaves a woman feeling like a better person than before she did it.

You are wrong.

reply to post by SmedleyBurlap


You are literally changing the entire statement they made and inserting the things you hate. That is called projection. Read carefully and stop inserting words and statements that are not in the individual's post.

Read it at face/material value like you do sex. Then tell me if you read the same thing as what you posted above.

And thank you for posting frued. Maybe you should take a long look at your history and analyze it for yourself.

You then go to having sex with someone you love, which is what you have been arguing against the entire time, so welcome to our side where the grass is greener.

reply to post by SmedleyBurlap


well now you are just talking out of your $^$%#! None of the things you have just said have wnything to do with what I am talking about, so perhaps you should direct your discussions to people that are not so different from you. At least then you can understand them
I have no sexual dysfunctions whatsoever. it is just a thing. can be fun, can be boring. it is just a thing, and nothing people need to place such importance on. in a relationship it is not the defining thing that makes it tick or work or succeed.

i did not say that sex is only for procreation, just that that is its primary purpose. everything about it is designed to make us want it. big deal. we are not mere animals, and in a day and age where std's and unwanted pregnancies abound, i think it behooves people to be a little more reserved with their sexual choices.
most of what i have been saying however pertains to the portrayal of sex, particularly where childrencan see it. it takes a lot of time and energy now to filter out the adult content fromt he family content, and for anyone to imply that my children will not benefit from my efforts is just being hateful. There is nothing wrong with sheltering them until they are older. cripes, they are only toddelrs. do you have children? How would you like it if whent hey were two or three everyone started telling them that santa and the tooth fairy were fake? Would have likely ticked you off i presume. It is the same with me and my girls. Life is only innocent for so long before reality comes in and mucks it all up. My children want to believe in santa, they want to be children, they want to play and frolic with no cares for the grown up world, and i will allow them that for as long as they want it. and sex is a big part of that. i do not want to see their freedom and fun and innocence removed from them before its time. once sex seeps in to their life, it begins to change the way they see the world, the way they view themselves, and the way they view the opposite sex. i am not saying it is bad, and when those changes arrive i will be here to help them embrace them - BUT it iwll be when they are ready to give up their chidlishness and grow beyond that stage of their life. and while i will teach them that sex is fun, enjoyable, pleasing, it is only that way when it exists with love, with a loving monogamous partner. they may not listen to me, but that is the message they will be given.



OMG - you what - i cant believe that the world has moved on so much that a person with high morals and standards has to actually explain stuff like this to people. you are a sick person to be arguing with me about any of this. My girls will grow up to be sexually responsible, and will not be promiscuous or whoreish. there is nothing wrong with that at all. if you think it is terrible, bugger off. you are the one here with terrible problems.

adn agin - you put a lot of things in my mouth that i did not say - shame on you just for that. you do not debate under very fair terms and i have nothing futher to do with this discussion.
so sad that a person who loves God, lives as good as she can, raises her children to say their prayers and behave is no longer welcome to have ideas or opinion. just disgusting, no wonder God has promised an armageddon - i know why He weeps over the mess that is becoming humantiy.

reply to post by MasterGemini


many thanks mastergemini for sticking up for me there - i hate when people imply i have said things i havent' it makes for a dirty debate in my opinion. just becoming a very sad discussion anyway - i am proud of my values, as i feel i have earned them throughout my life, and i am so proud to be able to pass them down to my daughters in the hopes that they may be able to have an even better life than i have. but he is trying to force shame upon me for this, which is ironic - me being shamed by someone telling me to let children play at sex whenever they feel ready. io am outta here, my heart cant take much more of this anyway. i like to think that decent moral people are not so rare in this world. i hope my daughters never bring home a fellow like this dude!
thanks again! star for you for sticking up for others.

reply to post by chrissiel123


As a friend of mine once said, 'A good pooh is infinitely more satisfying than a bad shag.' While I do not agree entirely with your perspective, I can respect it, and on certain matters regarding parenting, concur. It is a fine line. I don't know if your children are old enough for Scooby Doo, but the latest version has Daphne pining pityfully over Freddie, while he is interested in every girl but Daphne, and Velma nagging Shaggy to make their relationship public, and him concerned about how Scooby will take it. What have sexual politics ever had to do with Scooby Doo?

reply to post by chrissiel123


OK my bad on assuming you watch too many mushy wushy shows. But I disagree, emotions are chemical reactions just as orgasms. Not the same chemicals maybe, but I think I was correct in my original assertion. They each have there time and place IMO. The point in regards the the OP, is that there is a war on sex. The war is against any type of sex that the moral police dont like. Moral police meaning religious groups, or gov health agencies, people who demand that sex have some deep emotional meaning behind it every time.

People who actually offended by Janet Jackson's nip slip. Ive never met one person. Have you? Some dope had to stoke the fires. Honestly who or what type of person do you think did this and why?

You are so wrong. When you treat sex like a textbook function, like when you hand out flyers, you encourage kids to try sex sooner than they would have. You are basically telling kids "hey look at me I'm a creepy adult who puts too much time into thinking about your sex life. Wanna enjoy my pamphlet."
Any teen I know or used to know would switch to animal sex just to have to never again3 think of the creepy person with the pamphlets/put up the billboard.

People over 35 should not be talking sex with teenagers. It's creepy. Teens figure stuff like this out pretty quickly without the "remember to consider your emotions" overdramaticism of an older person who looks at genitals as emotional skin meters