|
Understanding through Discussion |
|
|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
| EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
|
| |
| ChatGPT | |
| Total: 916,824 Year: 4,081/9,624 Month: 952/974 Week: 279/286 Day: 40/46 Hour: 0/0 |
| Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
| Author | Topic: Are sexual prohibitions mixing religion and the law? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Rrhain Member  Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
holmes writes:
quote: (*blink!*) You did not just say that, did you? Rapists are an oppressed group? If your point was that there is a difference between sexual activity and sexual assault, perhaps you could have phrased it a little better. Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
riVeRraT writes:
quote: (*sigh*) Do we really need to go through the rigamorale of pointing out that AIDS is a heterosexual disease? That three-quarters of all cases of HIV transmission worldwide were through heterosexual sex? That another twenty percent were through drug use? That it is a tiny fraction of cases that were transmitted through male-male sexual contact? If you want to stop the spread of AIDS, stop having sex with people of the opposite sex. It's the most likely way to become infected. If AIDS is god's punishment, then lesbians are the chosen people as they have the lowest risk of sexually transmitted HIV of all. Why are you so obsessed with what other men do with their penises? Are you trying to tell us something? Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
riVeRraT responds to me:
quote:quote:When did I say it wasn't? Can't remember your own words, eh? Did you or did you not say the following:
Sticking you dinky in someones ass isn't exactly a clean thing to do Now, don't be disingenuous and claim that because the words "AIDS" or "HIV" did not appear in your post that it somehow means you weren't referring to them. And don't compound the problem by trying to claim that you weren't referring to male-male anal sex.
quote: Are you incapable of reading? Three-quarters of all cases of HIV transmission happened through heterosexual sex. Thus, by definition, AIDS is a heterosexual disease. Heterosexuals are the ones most likely to be infected by it and they got infected by having heterosexual sex.
quote: Not from gay people. Not from anal sex. Why did you feel the need to bring them up? Remember, claims that you didn't are transparently false.
quote: Then why did you bring up male-male anal sex?
quote:quote: Nice try, but you were the one who brought it up: "Sticking you [sic] dinky in someones [sic] ass." It is of no use to try to claim that you weren't talking about male-male anal sex.
quote: Right. Pull the other. It has bells on.
quote: Uh-huh...and why would you bring that up? After all, AIDS is a heterosexual disease transmitted primarily through heterosexual sex. Penis-vagina sex. Where does "crap" come into it? Are you of the opinion that the vagina is the orifice for defecation? You will note that I am not saying that heterosexuals do not engage in anal sex. I am pointing out that penis-vagina sex is the most common transmission vector for heterosexuals acquiring HIV.
quote: Indeed. And what it tells us is that if you want to stop HIV transmission, stop having sex with people of the opposite sex. That's the most common way the virus is transmitted. It tells us that we should all become lesbians since they have the lowest risk of sexually transmitted HIV.
quote: Huh? We're back to the gay men, aren't we? Those icky, icky ho-mo-SECK-shuls are doing something that I don't like, therefore it is morally unacceptable and should be made illegal.
quote: Well, I can't control the voices in your head. Perhaps if you were to stop listening to them and do some actual research into the subject, you'd stop hearing them...or at least stop listening to them. They are leading you astray.
quote: And thus, you have just proven that you don't understand what they're saying at all if you think they are advocating a "moral free society." You seem to be of the opinion that if someone doesn't share your morals, they don't have any morals at all. This seems to be related to the nihilism thread where many people seem to think that because someone recognizes that good and bad are socially constructed, that must mean that said someone has no sense of morality or ethics and would sooner kill you as say hello. We're back to my Monopoly example. The rules of Monopoly are completely arbitrary and man made. They even vary from house to house. And yet, they clearly exist and get enforced. Cheat, and you get punished.
quote: Then why do you keep making other people's lives difficult? If you truly believed this, why do you feel that your phobias and neuroses must be inflicted upon others? Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
bkelly writes:
quote: Incorrect. You are referring to Gaetan Dugas. Dr. William Darrow of the CDC had done a population study to find out how HIV had entered the country (and remember, this is before we could detect the virus...he was working solely on people who had gotten sick with opportunistic infections, not by any test to show that they had HIV since, at the time, we didn't even know what was causing AIDS) and traced the sexual history of the men back to Dugas. Randy Shilts wrote of this in his article-turned-book, And the Band Played On, and it is played out in the movie adaptation that HBO did. Four years after Shilts published, however, Darrow retracted his claim, insisting that the methodology was flawed and that Shilts misinterpreted the results. In the movie, the character of Dugas points out something quite true: "Somebody gave it to me." As an example of the flawed methodology, it was assumed at the time that the incubation period from infection to becoming AIDS was approximately one year. The sexual history trail looked for people who had had sex with Dugas and come down with AIDS within a year of having had sex with him (on average for the men being traced, 11 months). As we now know, progression from HIV to full-blown AIDS takes much longer than that, most often. In fact, given what we know about the development of HIV disease from infection to AIDS, it is likely that Dugas didn't infect any of the men in the study. They were already HIV+.
quote: Obviously incorrect or you wouldn't be able to have anal sex. Since people have anal sex all the time (in fact, there is more heterosexual anal sex than homosexual anal sex), it is clear by simple inspection that the claim of "the lower colon was not designed for sex" is false.
quote: BWAHAHAHAHA! Studs fuck harder? THAT is your argument? And you provide no supporting evidence for this?
quote: Incorrect. Dugas didn't know he was involved until the CDC tracked him down. And remember, there was still no test for HIV since it still hadn't been discovered. He had had no opportunistic infection. While he did, eventually, die from AIDS, there was no way to show that he was infected at the time he was first contacted. [Wait...I'm having a creationist hypocrisy moment here: If we can conclude through indirect investigation that a person is likely to have been the agent in infecting a large group of men even though we cannot directly test for his infection, doesn't that mean that it's all just a sham and fraud and "bad science" to insist that he is? This is much like the claim of creationists that evolution is "stretching things" when it concludes that the fossil record shows clear transitional changes in morphology. After all, we weren't there to see it and thus, no "direct" evidence. Why is it that when a scientific process supports a creationist's political agenda, it's the best science in the world but when the exact same process contradicts the creationist, it's suddenly the hallucinations of atheists? But I digress.] quote: Indeed, but not before it was already well-established in the heterosexual community. Remember, three-quarters of all cases of HIV transmission worldwide were through heterosexual sex. To paraphrase from the movie, "Somebody gave it to gay men."
quote: "Now"? What do you mean "now"? It has always been that way. Every sexually transmitted disease has been that way. Sex does not generate disease.
quote: Incorrect. The issue is not the number of partners but rather the actions taken with those partners. I could have sex with every single person in the world and not risk even catching a cold let alone HIV if I do it right. 100% guaranteed. I don't even need a condom to do it, either.
quote: Then you'd have to lock up the heterosexuals because they are the ones most likely to be infected. The US is one of the last places in the world where HIV is transmitted primarily by men who have sex with men. Europe flipped to primarily heterosexual sex back in 1999. Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
bkelly responds to holmes:
quote: Incorrect. The risk is not that you have had sex. The risk is the kind of sex you have. I can have sex with every single person on the planet without risking any transmission of any disease, 100% guaranteed, and I don't even need to wear a condom or take anybody's sexual history. That you aren't clever enough to figure out how to do this doesn't mean it can't be done. It simply means that you have an extremely narrow view of what "having sex" means. Sexual activity does not mean intercourse. Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
quote: Huh? You're talking about fecal matter upon a penis and you have the temerity to say you weren't "refering" [sic] to any particular brand of sex? Exactly how would one get fecal matter upon a penis through sexual activity if not anal sex? Are you of the opinion that the vagina is an organ of fecal excretion?
quote: Neither. The question cannot be answered by a simple either-or. What is your definition of "healthy"? What is the context in which it takes place? And the word is "penis." Next topic.
quote:quote: Huh? Do you not understand that factions are percentages? "Three-quarters" is identical to "seventy-five percent." Therefore, if three-quarters of all cases of HIV transmission happened through heterosexual sex, that means 75% of all cases of HIV transmission happened through heterosexual sex. Do I really need to show how 75% percent means that the overwhelming majority of cases of HIV transmission happened through heterosexual sex?
quote: But you're the one who brought it up. If you didn't want to talk about it, why did you bring it up?
quote: Huh? Sex? You think HIV crossed the species barrier to humans through sex? Do you know nothing about the biological history of HIV? Does the term "bushmeat" mean anything to you?
quote:quote: Can't remember your own words, eh? Did you or did you not say the following:
Sticking you dinky in someones ass isn't exactly a clean thing to do Now, don't be disingenuous and claim that because the words "AIDS" or "HIV" did not appear in your post that it somehow means you weren't referring to them. And don't compound the problem by trying to claim that you weren't referring to male-male anal sex.
quote: Indeed, there are. You weren't referring to them, however. You don't think AIDS is a heterosexual disease. Therefore, in a discussion that is referring to HIV and to have you bring up "sticking you [sic] dinky in someones [sic] ass" is clearly indicative of you talking about male-male anal sex, not heterosexual anal sex.
quote: Right. That's why you talked about "sticking you [sic] dinky in someones [sic] ass isn't exactly a clean thing to do." If you weren't referring to HIV, what were you talking about? You haven't mentioned any other disease.
quote: Really? Why? You have yet to explicate any particular reason why anal sex is more problematic than any other form of sex. Just how, precisely, is anal sex "unhealthy," especially compared to any other form of sex? If you aren't referring to HIV, then you must be referring to such other things as herpes, syphillis, gonorrhea, chlamydia, HPV, etc. Most STDs are easily transmitted through oral and penis-vagina sex. So what is so special about anal sex that has your knickers in a twist? How is anal sex "unhealthy" in ways that oral or penis-vagina sex are not?
quote: But then why did you bring it up? If you weren't referring to male-male anal sex and HIV, why did you say, "Sticking you [sic] dinky in someones [sic] ass isn't exactly a clean thing to do"? You weren't talking about heterosexuals, you weren't talking about lesbians, and you weren't talking about any other form of sex than anal sex. The only thing left is male-male anal sex.
quote:quote: About as many as heterosexual males. The most common form of sex, after all, is oral sex. Are you implying that there is something about the Y-chromosome that prevents infection from the ingestion of vaginal fluids?
quote: Already done. You weren't talking about heterosexuals. You weren't talking about those who only engage in solo masturbation. You were referring specifically to male-male anal sex. As I said before, don't be disingenuous and try to claim that because the words "gay" or "AIDS" did not appear in your post, that that somehow means you weren't talking about them.
quote: Indeed...so why did you decide to focus on gay men having anal sex? Did you or did you not say, "Sticking you [sic] dinky in someones [sic] ass isn't exactly a clean thing to do"?
quote:quote: (*chuckle*) You really can't recall your own words, can you? I was quoting you directly. Did you or did you not say the following:
They want to live in a moral free society, where everything is ok if it really doesn't involve you. quote:quote: You seem to be fixated upon the sexual activity of people whom you will never meet, never have sex with, and never be affected by their sexual activity. If that is not a phobia and/or neurosis, what is? Why are you so obsessed about what is going on in other people's bedrooms?
quote: No, you just vote for laws that try to stop people from doing what they think is right when their actions have no effect upon you. Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
bkelly responds to me:
quote:quote: You do realize that those are two very different things? What you haven't done is defend your claim that the anus was not designed to receive a penis. Obviously it was or you wouldn't be able to do it. If you want to discuss if it is right to have anal sex, that's another question. Be warned, however, that it leads to some interesting stances that must be taken: Most anal sex is carried out by heterosexuals. In fact, there isn't really any sexual activity that gay couples engage in that straight couples don't (though docking comes to mind). You're going to have to deny everything except penis-vagina sex in order to maintain consistency.
quote: And as I pointed out, that wasn't such a bizarre response: There was no test, no way to tell who had it until they got sick, he wasn't sick, and someone must have given it to him.
quote:quote: (*sigh*) You and riVeRraT. So quick to retreat to literal mindedness when backed into a corner. Did you or did you not say the following:
In my estimation, when one has sex with so many so often, it will tend to be, shall we say, more enthusiastic with stronger motions and tend to cause more microtears than sex with fewer and maybe a single partner. Is it not true that a male who "has sex with so many so often" is often called a "stud"? Are you incapable of comprehending synonyms? Is English a second language for you?
quote: Don't you think that's a fairly foolish thing to do? What sort of justification can you possibly have for this claim other than personal stereotyping? That those who have sex with many must be careless, brutal people and who would be careless and brutal with the people with whom they have sex?
quote: Oh? Where have you been watching them from? Are you a peeping tom?
quote: Such as? I can't seem to find any indication that the sexual activity of gay men are any more brutal or even more promiscuous than those of heterosexual men.
quote: BWAHAHAHAHA! You really believe that, don't you? You really think that gay men are more violent than straight men? I love the complete disconnect this requires. Gay men are weaker, less physically capable, more emotional, more "womanly" than straight men, and yet, they are violent, powerful beasts who would just as soon rape you as say hello. Well, which is it? Are gay men weak or are they strong? Question: If gay men are so much more violent than straight men, why do we find that gay men are less likely to commit violent crime than straight men?
quote: (*chuckle*) And you're such a good and reliable observer. It's coming to my attention that you're trying to tell us something: Are you regularly dating men who don't treat you well? Have you considered the possibility that it isn't an issue with all of gay men but rather with the men you are dating? This is a common issue...we see the various afternoon talk shows and self-help books routinely talk about women who keep dating men who treat them badly.
quote: Were these longitudinal studies of valid cross sections of the community? And how does one define "violent"? I get the feeling that there is a double-standard going on. Recall the hypocrisy of trying to define gay men as both weak and predatory simultaneously...anything that would paint gay people in a poor light.
quote: Huh? "Never this level of problem in the heterosexual community"? Says who? There has always been a problem with breakage in penis-vagina sex. That's part of the reason why condoms, in typical use, have only an 80% or so rate of contraception effectiveness.
quote: No, it falls under the most basic of scrutiny. Here's another question for you to ponder: What sort of lubricant is being used?
quote: Incorrect. You are confusing the HIV outbreak in the West with the HIV outbreak in the world. Yes, in Western Europe and the United States, HIV was most commonly transferred between men who have sex with men. But HIV did not start with gay men nor has male-male sex ever been the most common vector for transmission as a whole. Yes, it was in the West, but the West contains only a tiny fraction of the total number of HIV cases. Approximately 1% of all people who have AIDS live in the US. A little less than that for Western Europe. While men who have sex with men have been the most common vector for most of the crisis (though Europe flipped to heterosexuals back in 1999 and about 56% of all new cases in Europe are through heterosexual sex), they represent only the tiniest fraction of cases of transmission.
quote: AVERT is a good place to start.
quote: You should reconsider your analytical abilities. Surely you have heard by now that anecdote is not evidence.
quote:quote: Huh? There is no "degrees of behavior" about it. Sex does not generate disease. You can rub your sexual organs anywhere you want: It will not generate HIV particles. People who do not have HIV can share all the bodily fluids they want in any way they can imagine and they will never, ever come down with HIV. Sexual activity does not create HIV out of thin air. It is an infectious disease caused by a virus and if the virus is not present, it cannot pop into existence.
quote: And there are no such things as prostitutes where heterosexual men can drive down the street and have sex with as many women as they wished. You seem to have a very selective memory about what sort of sexual activity takes place in the world. It's like the people who keep complaining about Pride Parades and how "there aren't any 'Straight Pride' parades" who are seemingly oblivious of Mardi Gras. I live in San Diego. The producers of Girls Gone Wild are from San Diego. They have made an awful lot of money simply by taking a Handicam and wandering around simply asking young women to lift their shirts and make out with each other.
quote: Of course. Bath houses still exist and there are still gay men who frequent them and have lots of sex with men they don't know and will never meet again. You act as if this is somehow peculiar to gay men and that straight people never engage in this sort of activity.
quote:quote: Incorrect. Who said you were even in the same room with me? You need to think creatively. Sex does not mean intercourse.
quote: Ahem. I DON'T EVEN NEED A CONDOM TO DO IT, EITHER. What do you think that means? It means I'm not even going to wear a condom. And even though I'm not wearing a condom, there will be absolutely zero risk of HIV transmission. Sex does not equal intercourse.
quote: (*sigh*) You don't know a thing about how condoms work, do you? When was the last time you read the package a condom comes in? "Each condom is individually electronically tested to help ensure reliability." Do you know what that means? It means that every single condom, not just a sample but rather every single one, is tested. They put the condom on an electrode. The condom-sheathed electrode is then put into an electrolytic solution and a current is run through. If any electricity pass across the condom, it is rejected. Do I need to indicate that electrons are even smaller than either sperm or HIV particles, yes? I should point out that condoms are also waterproof and water is smaller than HIV. HIV is incapable of travelling on its own. It must be carried through fluid. Since fluid cannot penetrate the condom, HIV cannot penetrate a condom. The reason why condoms are not perfect is not because of "holes in the condom." It's because the condom has broken, because there has been sexual activity without the condom (even though there was no penetration at the time, preseminal fluid can contain sperm and if penetration happens after, even with a condom, it can introduce sperm), or because care has not been taken when withdrawing and there is spillage. It isn't like the fluid can seep through the condom.
quote: I can. Sex does not mean intercourse. Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
bkelly responds to me:
quote:quote: Bingo! Give the man a prize. Yes, the brain must have been designed to do it because it can. If it weren't, then you couldn't. F'rinstance, a chicken's eggshell isn't designed to withstand being stepped on by an elephant. We can tell this because when an elephant steps on a chicken's egg, the shell shatters rather than withstanding the weight. Now think: Might this mean that you have a poor conception of what the word "designed" means? Might it be possible that I am trying to get you to rethink your claim about what the anus was "designed" to do? Here's some more questions to make you question your definition of "designed": If the anus were not a sexual organ, why does anal sex feel so good? It must, after all, since so many people engage in it. I'm not saying everybody likes it, but not everybody likes oral or vaginal sex, either. And having somebody else masturbate you never feels the same as you doing it yourself. It takes a very talented person to make it feel as good. Therefore, since a huge number of people find anal sex to be pleasurable, how can anybody possibly claim that the anus is not a sex organ? Oh, that's right..."it's an exit, not an entry!" But if that were the case, then the penis couldn't possibly be a sex organ, either, since it is the organ of urination and by the logic given above, no organ can possibly serve two functions. It is either a sex organ or an excretion organ. It can't possibly be both. On top of that, if the anus weren't supposed to be involved in sexual activity, why is it that the best and most effective way to stimulate the male prostate is through anal manipulation? Oh, you can try to get some stimulation through manipulation of the perineum, but its nothing compared to direct stimulation through the anal cavity. "But men hate going to the proctologist! It hurts!" Yeah, and women hate going to the gynecologist and it hurts them, too. The problem is not the mere act of penetration. It is the context in which it takes place: You're naked with someone whom you barely know who is prodding around inside of you like a carcass in the context of trying to find out if you have cancer and might die. You're nervous, the doctor is being clinical. No wonder it doesn't feel good. Combine that with heterosexual male paranoia (if the doc sticks his finger in my ass and it doesn't hurt like a mother, then that must mean I'm gay!) and you've got a scenario where the guy is doing everything he can to make it hurt. "But procreation requires penis-vagina sex, not anal sex!" Yes, but unless one is claiming that all sex outside of penis-vagina sex is unnatural and the organs involved in such sex were not designed for that, then one is being hypocritical in whining about anal sex but letting oral and manual sex off the hook. I warned you...you're going to have to contort yourself into knots in order to maintain consistency.
quote: So you admit that you know nothing about the etiology of HIV nor the history of the epidemic. That's fine. Ignorance can be cured. But, the first step is admitting that you're ignorant. Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
bkelly writes:
quote: Ah, yes...the "political lesbians": Women who decided to be gay because they didn't like the patriarchy. And the narcissist men who felt women were beneath him and decided to have sex only with other men since only they could appreciate what a wonderful specimen of manhood he is. Right...there were about six of them. When society grants you all sorts of benefits from being heterosexual, why on earth would anybody "choose" to engage in sexual activity that they found physically repulsive and resulted in the worst social ostracism they could possibly find? "Hmmm...I hate the sex and everybody hates me for engaging in it. Sign me up!" Right. Pull the other. It has bells on. By the by: Gay relationships tend to last longer than straight ones...gay male ones the longest. If gay men were gay because they didn't want the love and commitment part of relationships, why would they be the ones that are best suited to commitment? Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
holmes responds to me:
quote: Then I suggest you simply aren't looking in the right places. Hint: One shouldn't try to compare the amount of promiscuity between gay and straight cultures by trying to find the straight bath houses. The reason for the existence of gay bath houses doesn't exist for the straight community. That doesn't mean there isn't plenty of anonymous, "free love" going on in the straight comunity. It simply means that it isn't taking place in the same way as it is in the gay community. In fact, the phrase "free love" was not invented to describe gay sexual activity. "Wife swapping" and "key parties" were not invented by gays. Spring Break and Mardi Gras and Winter Break were not developed by gay people. The fact that a couple of bozos in San Diego were capable of becoming millionaires simply by walking down the boardwalk with a video camera and merely asking the women to do what they do is fairly indicative of how free sex can be for straight people. No money, no request for favors, no contact at all beyond what it takes to get them in front of the camera.
quote: Trying to be as gentle as I can: Have you considered the possibility that the actual phrase is, "Most women in our culture simply will not with you"? Perhaps you're just not doing it right. Again, the reason for a gay bath house does not exist for the straight community. It is inappropriate to try to comare promiscuity rates between gays and straights by counting the number of bath houses. Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
purpledawn respond to me:
quote:quote: Ahem. By this logic, the vagina is an exit, not an entry, either. Everything about the female genital tract pushes outward. The egg is released to the Fallopian tubes which have cilia the push toward the uterus. The muscular contractions of the uterus push toward the vagina. Those muscles also push toward the outside. The connection between the vagina and uterus is blocked by a thick cervix with only a tiny opening in it. The pH of the vagina is hostile to sperm.
quote: Neither does the mouth. Does that mean the mouth isn't designed for sexual activity. Neither do the hands. Is masturbation verboten? Hand can only produce a minor amount of sweat.
quote: So? Do I need to again remind you that millions of people successfully have anal sex every single day? You seem to be heading down a road that there is some difficulty in having anal sex.
quote: No, not really. Everybody's body is different. You are forgetting that the organs inside can and do shift to accomodate. Not only do people have no trouble taking an erect penis beyond the 4cm you're so concerned about, they can take fists and forearms. Some talented people are able to take it up to the elbow and beyond. Yes, they are exceptions, but you seem to be going down the road of claiming that a penis simply doesn't fit in the rectum. The millions of people who have anal sex prove you wrong.
quote: (*blink!*) You did not just say that, did you? Have you been reading Paul Cameron? How many times do you need to be reminded that every day, millions of people around the world engage in anal sex before you consider the possibility that you're wrong? Next thing you know, you're going to talk about "gay bowel syndrome" as if that were an actual thing.
quote: (*chuckle*) You don't engage in anal sex, do you? Why do I get the feeling that the only way you could possibly be convinced that you've screwed up is to have it performed upon you? Repeat this over and over to yourself: Millions of people do it every day. If what you were saying is true, then they couldn't be doing it. Since they are, that must necessarily mean that what you are saying isn't true.
quote: Huh? If you can relax it, then it is natural by definition. What are these bizarre definitions of "natural" and "design" that you harbor. By your logic, fellatio is "unnatural" since there is a gag reflex that is triggered if you go "too far." "Supposedly one can learn to suppress the reflex, but it doesn't naturally subside for vigorous entrance." So the mouth isn't designed for sex, either?
quote: Hint: This is indicative of your definition of "design" being inadequate. Remember, if it weren't designed to do it, then you wouldn't be able to do it. If you can do it, then it was designed to allow it.
quote: Right, because we drown if we try. Since we can't stay underwater, we weren't designed to live underwater. But since we can engage in anal sex, we were obviously designed to have it. We wouldn't be able to if we weren't.
quote: Right, because we die if we try to exist in vacuum. Since can't live in vacuum, we weren't designed to live in vacuum. But since we can engage in anal sex, we were obviously designed to have it. We wouldn't be able to if we weren't.
quote: Right, because we plummet to the ground when we try. Since we cannot maintain ourselves aloft, we weren't designed to fly. But since we can engage in anal sex, we were obviously designed to have it. We wouldn't be able to if we weren't.
quote: (*blink!*) You did not just say that, did you? What do you think food is if not chemicals? If you meant toxins, you should have said. In that case, you'd be right because our biological functions cease (to varying degrees) when those toxins are introduced. Since our biological functions don't behave when certain toxins are present, we weren't designed to live with those toxins present. But since we can engage in anal sex, we were obviously designed to have it. We wouldn't be able to if we weren't.
quote: (*blink!*) You did not just say that, did you? You make it sound like one needs to undergo major surgery in order to engage in anal sex. And you make it sound like penis-vagina sex is the most natural act in the world requiring no technique or practice at all. Ask the average woman what her first time was like and I think you'd be surprised at the response. You have to learn how to accept a penis vaginally just as much as you have to learn how to accept it anally. You've never done it before and you have to figure out what the feelings are, what angles should be used, etc. There are no design limitations. In fact, given that some people can take an arm all the way to the shoulder, I daresay that the anus is much more designed to take a penis than the vagina. With the vagina, you wind up hitting the cervix. For some men, this means no full penetration and for the women involved, hitting the cervix is painful. You can get a lot more into your rectum.
quote: (*chuckle*) You seem to be indicating that somebody gave it some thought. Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
holmes responds to me:
quote:quote: Elsewhere. I gave some examples in my post.
quote: And why wouldn't I? Think carefully, now.
quote: I know. I was contradicting you. There is just as much going on. It just isn't going on in the same way.
quote:quote: And thus there is just as much promiscuity going on in the straight community as the gay community. The average number of partners is pretty much the same for gay and straight males, for example.
quote: What does that have to do with anything? They're not being paid. They were recently sued because the women on the cover of the Snoop Doggy Dog version apparently did not agree to that. You can have a casting call and still get volunteers. Or have you never heard of "community theatre"?
quote: Then you're just not looking in the right places. To compare promiscuity rates between gays and straights, you cannot simply look for straight bath houses, find hardly any, and then throw up your hands and declare that gay people are so much more promiscuous. Straight people don't need bath houses to find each other when they want to have sex.
quote:quote: Did you or did you not say the following:
I move between the the hetero and homosexual worlds and my experience is that the amount of sex between the two, especially promiscuous or anonymous sex, simply does not compare. And in this very post of yours, did you or did not just say above:
Given that I am in the swinging community of heteros, and indeed am involved with pretty much all forms of online and real world types of hookups for heteros It would seem that you are basing your conclusion upon your own personal experience. Have you considered the possibility that your own personal experience is insufficient to extend to the greater population?
quote: And it doesn't occur to you that the reason might be you rather than them? Are you seriously claiming that your personal experience is a perfect minimodel of the world at large and can be used as a standard for comparison?
quote: Did you or did you not say the following:
I move between the the hetero and homosexual worlds and my experience is that the amount of sex between the two, especially promiscuous or anonymous sex, simply does not compare. When you used the word "I" and the phrase "my experience," was there some other person to whom you were referring other than yourself? For you to somehow claim that you weren't discussing your own sex life is fairly disingenuous when you make comments such as "I am in the swinging community of heteros" and "I'm trying to figure out how you would know more about the hetero free sex community than I do." You were holding your own sex life up for examination. You don't get to be pissy when somebody bothers to examine it.
quote: I would think that statement to be self-contradictory. You are doing something wrong because you aren't getting laid.
quote: Even the pope? Every single male, no matter who, will agree to have sex with you?
quote: And those who study the sex lives of the population at large don't come to the same conclusions. What is it you know that they don't? Straight males have, on average, the same number of partners over a lifetime as gay males. Those straight men have to be having sex with someone and it isn't with each other.
quote:quote: It means that society is designed to couple heterosexuals together. To take a flippant example, how many dating shows have there been on television over the years? And how many times have those shows featured same-sex couples? From the time we are able to walk and recognize other people as individuals, we pair the boys and girls off.
quote: Huh? They don't need a bath house. They have the entire world upon which to meet other straight people in order to have sex.
quote: Obviously not or they wouldn't be having sex in all those places. Lovers Lane is not where the gay people hang out. All the stories we hear about sex in the elevator and in the copy room and in the broom closet are not stories about gay people.
quote: But as you know, it is inappropriate to try to compare promiscuity rates between gays and straights by counting the number of bath houses. Straight people have little need of bath houses.
quote: Incorrect. It tends to indicate that there is less need for known spot where people of the appropriate sex will be congregating with an itch to get laid. Straight people don't need bath houses.
quote: But it only proves my point: Gay people need them because there is no place for them in the greater society. Straight people, being so numerous and in control of society, don't need bath houses to accomplish the same end.
quote: Strange, I would say the inverse thing about you. Your argument is more fallacy prone as you are arguing from a supposition that gays must be more promiscuous than straight and then dismissing the counterevidence.
quote: (*blink!*) You did not just say that, did you? After giving you at least three different places to look for heterosexual free love, you then say that there is no evidence for it? Are you seriously arguing that the only place in which free love happens is at a bath house?
quote: I thought you weren't discussing your sex life. Make up your mind, will you? [example deleted for space] Question: Are you assuming that everybody that goes to a bath house is a unique individual? You do understand the perils of averages, yes?
quote: Then you aren't looking in the right places.
quote: How many times must it be pointed out to you before it sinks in? It is inappropriate to try to compare promiscuity rates between gays and straights by counting the number of bath houses. Straight people have little need of bath houses.
quote: I never said you weren't. I simply pointed out that you are not perhaps the best judge. Your personal experience is not generalizable.
quote: And why would you guess that? I know I've been very careful not to say either way whether I am gay, straight, or somewhere in between. I do not wish to have my comments interpreted in the haze of "You would say that...you're X."
quote: No, not at all. I used to live in Vegas, remember.
quote: Says who? You? Why should we believe you?
quote: What makes you think personal experience is ever sufficient evidence? Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
bkelly responds to me:
quote:quote: Hint: I wasn't being facetious. I am saying, sincerely and directly, the human brain is designed to stop a bullet precisely because it can. If it weren't, then it couldn't. Since it can, it is.
quote: Wow...my posts are both "precise and inoffensive" and "insulting" all at the same time. No accounting for taste, I guess. That said, I don't insult people. I point out how they have insulted the intelligence of those around them. I do not call them stupid. I merely point out where their arguments are going wrong. Many people take it as insulting, however, but usually because they are incapable of reconsidering their own behaviour.
quote: Well, I am bright. You seem to think that I should be ashamed of this. I do not need other people to tell me this nor do I need to lord it over others. Do not confuse the fact that I have spent time analyzing your argument with some sort of personal, emotional investment in you.
quote: My posts run the gamut. They start off polite and as the person with whom I am talking degenerates into ad hominem commentary, I turn it around on them. If you don't like the treatment you are getting, perhaps you should stop dishing it out.
quote: Yes. It's funny. It shows, through a humorous method, that some concepts that are being taken very seriously by the population at large are actually quite ridiculous. People are actually trying to say that we should leave the question of how life diversified on this planet to fourteen-year-olds as if they have the biological skills and experience necessary to determine if a piece of evidence is valid or not. Children who have never seen the inside of a professional lab. If I can get them to see the ridiculousness of their position through a humorous method, then that's a good thing. Of course, those who don't have a sense of humor will be offended. That isn't my problem. Those without a sense of humor will have a hard time being convinced that they need to reexamine their assumptions.
quote: The ability to show others that if they don't like when I do it to them, then they shouldn't have done it to me. Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
purpledawn responds to me:
quote: Nor you mine. I am trying to get you to reconsider your definition of what "design" means.
quote: Which means it is also designed to remove dandelions. If it weren't, then you would be physically incapable of doing it.
quote: Which means it is also designed to clean corrosion (it does contain acid, after all). If it weren't, then you would be physically incapable of doing it.
quote: Which means it's designed for that other fashion, too. Do not confuse conscious intent with design. Design refers to the physical construction. Your intentions in creating the object, however, are not transferred to the object and thus, you cannot tell another that it isn't "designed" to be used that way. If it works, obviously it was. You didn't mean for it to be used that way, but you designed an object that can.
quote: You've changed your criteria. Purpose is not design.
quote: Yes. Those who engage in anal sex will relax their anal muscles in order to accomodate what will be inserted. Just as those who engage in vaginal sex will relax their vagina muscles in order to accomodate what will be inserted. That's part of the way that you can tell if it was rape or not: If the person isn't willing, they tighten up and you have to force your way in. If they were willing, they relax.
quote: Have you never had anal sex?
quote: As was mine. The anus is much more capable of accepting large phallic objects than the vagina. And yes, I know full well that a baby comes through the vaginal opening, but it comes from the inside out after a great deal of hormonal work goes to loosen the cervix. Outside of pregnancy, the uterine cavity is sealed off by the cervix and some men will be incapable of full penetration. He'll have much greater success anally since there is no cap.
quote: And yet simple observation shows that claim to be wrong. People are having anal sex. With full insertion. By very well-endowed men. Do you need to have someone have anal sex in front of you before you consider the possibility that your claim is false?
quote: Yes, you did. You said it just above:
Since the anal path is not straight, it was not designed to receive a straight object. The erect penis is, for the most part, straight. Your claim is that the anal path is not straight. Therefore, anal sex should be extremely difficult. And yet, it is clear to all but the most casual observer that there is something wrong with such a claim: People keep having anal sex with absolutely no difficulty.
quote: Yes, it does. If it weren't, you wouldn't be able to do it. The fact that you can is proof positive that it was. Take, for example, some carnivorous plants. They have stiffened hairs in the tube that point in only one direction. As the insect enters the tube, travel can only happen in one direction: The spines prevent backwards motion and the insect is trapped. The anus is not like that. You can achieve insertion just as you can achieve insertion in the vagina. If the anus was not designed for penetration, then the vagina wasn't, either. So which is it?
quote: (*blink!*) You did not just say that, did you? I take it you've never had anal sex. Of course the anus provides lubrication. How do you think the fecal material moves down? Or is your diet so poor that you suffer from chronic diarrhea?
quote: Neither is the vagina, really. But that is neither here nor there as it is straightened during sexual activity. This is proven by simple observation of those having anal sex.
quote: (*blink!*) You did not just say that, did you? Do you really need to have people have anal sex in front of you before you consider the possibility that you are mistaken?
quote: And yet, the millions of people who are having anal sex right now are proving you wrong. Why do you persist in claiming that they are incapable of doing what they are doing right here and now? Remember, if it weren't designed for it, they wouldn't be able to do it. Since they can, it was. Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
holmes responds to me:
quote: Must...maintain...control...don't...laugh...no!
quote: I never said it did. You seem to have the same trouble with the word "design" that bkelly and such do. You also seem to be stuck on the "only one use" schtick. As an owner of a penis, surely you are aware that an organ can be used for more than one thing.
quote: "Primary"? Says who? I don't recall getting a manual with this body that told me what the function of each fiddly bit was. I will handily agree with you that the digestive tract is most commonly used for digestion, but that hardly makes it "primary" in some sort of "designed" sense. Instead, the digestive tract is the most efficient method of taking in nutrients. It isn't the only way, however. And your example of the mouth doesn't even survive the concept of "most common" as a definition for "primary." You use your mouth much commonly for breathing and speaking than you do for eating. So what on earth is your definition of "primary"? And why does it even matter? Isn't that the point behind evolution? There is no such thing as "design" or "purpose" in any sort of sense of consciousness or intent. Instead, things happen due to efficiency. If an environmental challenge arises and a certain solution proves to be good enough, then that solution becomes more common and more efficient structures around that process are selected for.
quote: Huh? I should think that the baby coming out of it would claim it has an entirely different purpose. Or are you claiming that sex includes giving birth?
quote: Why not? Why is your conscious decision to use the vaginas you come across only in a certain way some sort of biological mandate and all other uses are "perverted"? When did you become god and in control of evolutionary processes?
quote: I never said it didn't. You have your arrow of implication backwards. Just because the anus doesn't react identically to the vagina when sexual activity is anticipated doesn't mean that the anus doesn't react at all. They do share some traits, however. Sexual arousal in someone anticipating anal sex is accompanied by a relaxing of the anal muscles just as sexual arousal in someone anticipating vaginal sex is accompanies by a relaxing of the vaginal muscles. For both anal and vaginal sex, someone who does not want to have sex will tense those muscles and it will be difficult to achieve penetration.
quote: Which is what I originally said: If it weren't "designed" for sex, why does anal sex feel so good? Why would so many people engage in it if it weren't "designed" for sexual activity? Don't people engage in sex in order to achieve sexual pleasure (among many other things)? Why would people engage in anal sex if it didn't provide sexual pleasure? They're all doing it out of a sense of duty? Politics? Art?
quote: Says who? You? Why should we believe you? Why should we believe your claim as opposed to the millions of people around the world who are engaging in anal sex right now? And not for the first time.
quote: Then why are they? Why should we consider your claim to be accurate when simple observation shows us millions of people having anal sex? Why does your claim of inability trump all the examples of actual anal sex?
quote: I never said they did. I simply said it was possible. The average penis, however, is nowhere near that size. Comparing what comes out of the anus to what is trying to be inserted, a penis is no trouble at all. Or are you claiming that most everybody goes through agony when having a bowel movement?
quote: I never said otherwise. What does that have to do with anything? You seem to be saying that if there is any trauma, then it must be a "perversion of design."
quote: Ah, and here we have it. The psychoanalyzing over the net. Because I have a strong opinion and defend it vigorously, that must mean I have an extremely personal stake in the issue. This is precisely why I don't talk about my sexual orientation. I want you to focus on the information being presented, not the person presenting it. Would my comments have their truth value change if I were gay? Straight? Bi? Asexual? Zoo? Kinky? Does the fact that I know about fisting mean I engage in it? Just what was your point in your comment above, holmes?
quote: Strange, I would say the opposite. Those that I am arguing with have to make everything worse rather than just showing it what it is. After all, I am not the one saying that anal sex violates some sort of "design." My argument is that it happens. A lot. And the people who engage in it seem to be extremely happy with it or they wouldn't be doing it over and over again. Therefore, this argument from "design" holds no water. There is no such thing as "design."
quote: Huh? Who said anything about "equal functions"? All I did was point out that anal sex happens and that it feels good according to those who engage in it. How does that lead one to claim that it is of "equal function" to vaginal sex? Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024
