Sex Education

quote:

---

He makes porn movies. I call that wild. But in the circle he runs in, that may be no big deal.

---

I don't make,watch or have any interest in "porn movies" - but to me what Holmes does is called "his right and none of my business". If i want to watch his pornos it's my business but otherwise what's it got to do with anyone else?Wild to me is various things but having sex with a willing person? natural.How does filming it change the inherent act?This message has been edited by CK, 09-Sep-2005 07:57 PM

Just to clear things up, I said my gf was in porn. I haven't said whether I make porn movies or not. I did admit that I was in a regular movie... it is definitely NOT porn (in fact it was sort of satirizing porn)... which was graphic enough to be hit by the latest laws related to porn.Over the course of my life I have done a lot of interesting and natural, and perhaps some "unnatural" (a gf once ate an entire KFC meal off my body) things. All in fun, and no one ever got hurt.The only time people ever got hurt, and it was usually me, was when emotions/relationships were involved. But then it wasn't sexual issues, only relationship issues that caused the feelings of pain and anger. You can feel betrayed by others and betray others beyond just the physical act of sleeping with someone else.But in any case, for those wondering, the last few years of my life have been pretty routine. My gf gets a lot of action, but I have not, except with guys (which I am getting tired of as I really prefer girls). I have been relatively monogamous for the last few years. Moving and a series of physical problems (nonsex related) have cut out any "action" for rather long periods.Believe it or not we really are like most people, just without the preconceptions and so hangups about what we can enjoy.Imagine how silly it might seem to you if you found a society which said no one can eat with more than one other person in their life, that eating desserts was sinful in any case (nutrition only), and cooking or eating for just onesself or more than one other person (especially of the same sex) was a mortal sin. In fact, displays of food or the mouth (especially the interior) are lascivious and forbidden.That is what most societies seem like to us. We don't have to constantly be doing wild things every moment. Just as you don't have to be eating ten courses of desserts with tons of others every moment. Its just that sometimes we can and do.Thankfully some well catered affairs may finally be peeking on the horizon for me.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This is a very interesting topic, and one I want to throw my opinion into. First of all it was brought up early in this topic (I don't recall who) that sex ed was something people didn’t want to teach. I would love to teach sex ed! My MS was in sexual biology (of shrimp, but shrimp are randy little bastards). I would love to teach a college level course on human sexual biology.I am completely in support of public sex education. I agree with dissidents that it isn’t being taught well, although for probably very different reasons. People need to know how their bodies work. That should be done in a very scientific and very graphic way. They should learn about disease prevention. They should learn about reproductive control. They should learn about gay, lesbian, bisexuality and transgender issues. They should also learn sexual dos and don’ts within our society. The number one aspect of the latter is respect for individuals in our societyYaro: Your adherence to the promiscuous thing might be considered intolerant to the poly/swing community. Since the early 90’s the swing community has prided itself on disease control and safe sex. The promiscuity definitions of randomness and lack of selection do not apply. A participant in a swinger party may anticipate promiscuous sex but the participants are select and disease free and wearing condoms.Robinrohan: You can search online for the statistics of teen pregnancies before and after the 1960’s. The pill doesn’t compensate for the numbers. Search for abortion rates in 1890. Search for drug addiction rates in 1920. Outside of popular press releases society has sucked (and been great) since it started.My 2-cents worth

I woiuld say it changes it drastically.

Never has for me. Actually, I only did it once. Turns out that unless you're willing to mug for the camera and adopt some rather uncomfortable, unenjoyable postures, you wind up with some rather boring footage.Oh, and lighting? Always crucial.

I think that the filming of endevours might be drifting from sex education onto sex and morality, but I suppose its a valid enough sub-topic. With that in mind, and tentatively awaiting a smackdown from the appropriate party: The question isn't 'to what magnitude does filming the act change things' but rather in what way does recording the act onto a ribbon of magnetized rust alter the act? To me it carries the implication of 'Does filming an act alter the morality of that act?'. I assume the next question would be 'Does selling the film of said act have a moral implication?'Not to my moral system, but it does to others since it could be viewed as a sort of prostitution. Still, I'd like to see your point of view on it - if you think it is suitably on topic.

Say what you will about porn, but it is always the for front of the technology knife. Porn establishes what can and can't be done with certain technology, it forges ahead creating new uses, pushing the envelope.The internet exploded because of porn
Internet buisness, banner ads, membership to sites, live streaming of video, downloadable video, high quality images - brought to you by porn
Video cameras, polaroid film - porn secured their place
900 numbers - pornIt may be "wrong" but sex is what drives our technology forward

Of course, the difference between sex and food is that the food you are eating doesn't have to agree to be consumed, doesn't walk away from the meal afterwords, doesn't have the potential to change their mind and have regrets, etc.

I'm not talking about morality. It changes it from a private act to a performance.

I think it compensates enormously.But I'm not a woman. Ask Schrafinator.

And what about swingers lol

Boy you totally missed the point of that analogy. You most certainly can, and I assume you have at some point in your life, walked away from a meal regretting that you ate with a certain person (or people), or that you chose to eat something you would rather not have. Perhaps feeling guilty about that extra glass of wine, or slice of dessert, or that you got to have that great meal while a friend couldn't make it because they were home sick.The point was not to analogize who you were having sex with to food that you might eat. The point was to analogize sex with any other behavior (in this case eating) which you can engage in and has a social dimension.Yeah, that analysis raised my eyebrows a bit.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

quote:

---

Believe it or not we really are like most people, just without the preconceptions and so hangups about what we can enjoy.

---

How do you know it isn't just a difference in taste (which you say you support) rather than people having "preconceptions" and "hangups"?I mean, if we didn't have cultural differences, there wouldn't be "preconceptions" or "hangups".It's when you use value-laden, vaguely condescending comments like the ones above that make me think that you believe that other people's tastes and cultural differences are not as valid or as good as yours.I wouldn't have brought this up if you hadn't vehemently denied my contention that you believe your tastes and values are superior to all others'.You have every right to believe that your lifestyle and personal philosophy is superior to everyone else's, and that everyone who doesn't share your taste is lacking in maturity or hasn't expanded their consciousness, or whatever, but I really just wish you would admit it.

Hey schraf, I didn't get this feeling at all from what holmes was saying. I would say that, in this case, they're the same thing.It's possible to have differences in taste without preconceptions and hangups, but it would mean actually examining and considering the alternatives critically, confronting our own cultural biases, and working through it. It's holmes' assumption that most people don't do that. I think that's a fair assumption.I mean, I once asked my girlfriend to "work through her biases" with me once (maybe using slightly different words), and all I got was a slap (and not a nice one on the ass, but a harsh one on the head). As I tried to motivate above, they're not the same thing, at least on an individual level. I doubt "culture" wouldn't work as a whole without preconceptions and hangups, but, on the individual level, it's not the same. You can participate in a culture and still confront the hangups and preconceptions. If you go live in a foreign country, you're forced to do it. It's hard. It also feels kind of liberating.Kind of. Mostly, it's just hard I think that's really unfairly harsh. I think you're the one reading into the words "preconception" and "hangup" as being negative. I don't think it's necessary to read what holmes wrote in that way at all.We all have preconceptions and hangups. If you work within them, you get certain results. If you work through them and outside of them, you get other results. Thus are the facts of life. There's no judgement in making the statement. Honestly I think in such cases the judgement is a reflection of the character of the reader.In a sense, it's like really great art. Well, only in that sense.What do you think?

Fantastic analysis. You understand exactly what I was trying to say.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)