Sex

[Paradox]

How did the demonization of sex occur with these religious idiots? Why did they decide to make sex seem bad and tell people to repress their sexuality? I mean was there a purpose to the idea when they thought it up? Were they trying to control population or something, what? Or was it just another one of their stupid ideas that they just happened to think up? I'm not saying for everyone to just go out and have sex like crazy, you do have to be careful because of STDs, and use protection to prevent those unwanted kids, but to say sex only in marriage, and that expression of sexuality is wrong, what the hell is that? It's part of being human. So how did these people come to think this way? What purpose, if any, could it serve?

[redstar2000]

There are several theories...and any or all of them might be true.

1. Heavily regulated sexual behavior may have served to reduce inter-personal tensions in small tribal groups.

2. Regulating sexual behavior may have served to reinforce "father right"...to convince him that his wife's child was "really his".

3. Controlling the reproductive capabilities of women was part of the "package" of women as male property in early patriarchal societies.

4. Controlling the sexual behavior of adolescents was "necessary" in order to secure "family alliances" through arranged marriages.

Since the social role of any religion is to reinforce the material relationships in the society from which it has emerged, the religion naturally includes cosmological sanction for those relationships.

It's not just a good idea, it's God's Law!

[apathy maybe]

Religions wish to have as many followers as possible, for this reason they outlaw un-productive sexual acts (anything that is not misonary position virtually). It also has to do with what redstar2000 had to say about who the father of the child is.

[Don't Change Your Name]

- Repressing males could defend the "alpha male"'s harem from being "questioned" (if it exists). Monogamy reduces sexual desire for other females through the idea of only having sex with one wife (maybe facing physical or even eternal punishment if one breaks that "rule"). Sexual repression also makes women weaker, and therefore they don't have sexual desires with other males either.
- Reduces undesired pregnancies (useful when there are few resources)
- Reduces venereal diseases
- Reduces waste of sperm
- Might be tied with even older beliefs (things like: 'women can only have few babies' or some shit like that, which might or might not exist in a certain society anymore)
- Makes the masses concentrate more on those things the ruling class wants them to
- Irrational beliefs about finding "a perfect match" or something like that

Just a couple of ideas. Note that there are many reasons why this exists: they all make sense from an "evolutionary" point of view. We wouldn't expect this if religious fundies are right.

[1936]

Maybe theres some sick kind of sense in repressing nookie, that these people who concucted the rules couldnt have known....which is creepy.

Ya' see in the time of yee great hairy ones. There were no STDs yet the act of repeated transfer of bodily fluids with numouros people (i cant spell numouros) is the reason we have STDs.

For example, 3000 years ago there was no way of people knowing of the possibilite of diseases and repocutions of there sexual actions. Yet in leviticus for some reason they outlawed beastilality, and its commonly known that the first human case of AIDs was when soldiers in the congo got jiggy with a monkey. So the restriction of sexual deviancies is sensible.....


.........

........but despite all this im still very much a big fan of free lovin and beastiality.....

[Don't Change Your Name]

Two more possibilities:
- to eliminate homosexuality (think about it: by only allowing heterosexual, post-marriage sex, they eliminate homosexual behaviours, and if homosexuality is genetical it won't matter to them since they didn't know about DNA and shit, as their ideas about "free will" show. By doing this they would control homosexuality from being "usual")
- to make people feel "low" when compared to the deity. This is a pretty normal one. Religious people wants us to believe that we must behave as if we were worthless pieces of shit since we are naturally sinners or some crap like that.

[t_wolves_fan]

Do any of you even need to worry about it?

[1936]

No need......

[Pawn Power]

Somewhat related

Sex Tips for Restless Youth

Do you experience sexual problems? Do you have trouble getting aroused, or having sex that is fulfilling, or simply meeting the right partners to share that aspect of your life? Chances are you do—just have a look at the magazine rack in any grocery store, and it's clear from all the advice columns and feature articles just how sexually lost and frustrated modern men and women are. Unfortunately, these magazines only offer symptomatic treatment (otherwise, they wouldn't have to run the same articles over and over every month&#33, no real, radical solutions. And to date, few people have really dared to be open about their troubles, thanks to the social pressures to be "successful" in all affairs. So, in keeping with our general program of providing aid wherever it is needed, we offer some tips:

--Stop trying to make your sexuality serve in your efforts to be a good citizen (responsive lover, macho man, etc.)—it won't, it will just go on strike. Better to serve it, if serving must be done.

--Stop trying to make your sex life (or romance, or anything else, for that matter), by itself, provide you with qualities that should be intrinsic to every moment of your life. It is not the role of your sexuality to be your sole source of excitement, or intimacy, or pleasure—it is the role of sex to be just that, to be sex. If you feel trapped or insecure or bored everywhere else, you will probably have a hard time shaking off those feelings in bed.

--If your idea of seventh heaven is having perfect sex with a beautiful partner, dispel it. Heaven cannot be an isolated moment of life; it has to be a complete way of living, or else it will be just another barren myth to denigrate and impoverish the moments of our real experience. Better that we find ways to make every moment of life as exciting as great sex can be (and believe me, it can be done&#33, considering that we can't have sex all the time—such a thing would get boring, anyway, since living has so many facets we must not neglect! You can feel and share passion as deeply while building puppets for street demonstrations together, sneaking onto rooftops for late night conversations, or stowing away on ferryboats. Most people just haven't had the chance to be free and wild together anywhere outside the bedroom yet—and consequently, it hardly comes naturally between the sheets.

--Rescue your sexuality from the definitions and delineations slipped around it like a noose by external forces: the leering billboards and romantic comedies, the expectations of your friends and parents and paramours, the television programs and other social programming devices that would dictate desire and limit the erotic to the strictly sexual. The powers that be have everything at stake in keeping your sexuality emaciated and confined to the specific act of physical intercourse, to one routine and one partner and one ghettoized category, so you won't discover in it the freedom that you could be living around the clock, outside their control, beyond their target markets. But one step outside the lines, and the world is yours.

--And that means throwing out your pornography. Pornography isn't obscene because it's sexual, but because it's not—replace the representation with the real, in every instance, for maximum possibility. Masturbation is a beautiful thing, but don't let the pornography industry buy out your libido. A two-dimensional woman, no matter how trangressively posed, will do exactly what you command her and no more: that means she can never challenge you with her own needs or perspectives, never open new doors to you, never assert her selfhood. That refusal to be challenged is a rejection of the vast expanses of freedom that can only be reached with others. We should be wary of giving our fantasies such slaves to rule over, lest we learn to fetishize the violence of domination implied by such one-sided sex;and end up living in the sterile, determinist world of control mania. Do you want to explore, to reach unimaginable climaxes, to try out things you've never seen in movies? Do it with other people—they are out there. Let them know you're ready.


Sexuality as art;now there's a start. But more art "about" sexuality? It's doubtful that the world of images will ever belong to us again . . . that's just another diversion of our attention to that domain from this world, where we should be practicing doing, being, feeling with one another, not with the dangerous safety of an object. Make love and speak about your best kept secrets, your blackest needs, the demands the culture of fear places on your sexuality, held hostage as it is (never fear, you're not the only one who thinks you have things to hide—your secret's safe with all of us&#33 . . . We can get out of here, together, but first we have to be honest to figure out where the fuck we are!

To find indulgences that simultaneously satisfy and subvert our programmed, poisonous desires, and thus remake ourselves; that is the key.

from getfreedropout.tk

[Aurora(inactive)]

Supposivly sex is a gift God gave to humans to show love for the person that they decided to spend the rest of their life with.

According to my sister and other married folk, sex is so much better when you are married.

By restricting sex, the world won't over populate, STD's won't spread as fast, and since women won't be poppin kids out right and left it won't feel like throwing a hot dog down a hallway.

[OleMarxco]

Homosexuals doesn't "further humanity's goals", that's why. I.e., in plain-spoken words: THEY CAN'T MAKE FUCKIN' BABIES OKAY. I have no idea why it's so important NOW, when we got like, 8 BILLION PEOPLE N'SHIT. So we can "afford" to fuckin' stop it now allready. Sterilize a few thousand people, I don't give a shit. And if they let wimen have they way, fully and purely, loose and ready with no restrinct, then they would fear that they would run off and be "free"...as they deserve to be, away from that oppressive "mother" role. Bah. Sure - If they had thought like this so before I have gotten born....I wouldn't have, that's fer'sho!

[1936]

Well a couple of guys not impregnating chicks wont end the world. And population increasing isnt the humanities only goal.

[STI]

Originally posted by t_wolves_fan@May 2 2005, 05:56 PM
Do any of you even need to worry about it?

Wow. I usually don't find you all that funny, but this was an absolute gem. My sincere congratulations on that burn. Well done.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by Aurora
According to my sister and other married folk, sex is so much better when you are married.

Um...don't they have to say that?

Imagine the opposite: Ever since I married Joe, my sex life is in the toilet!.

[guerillablack]

I don't think you could really blame this on religion.

[LSD]

I don't think you could really blame this on religion.

No, religion didn't invent sexism and sexual repression it just perpetuated it for thousands of years.

It's like how the US didn't invent slavery ...it just "went along" with it.

It doesn't mean it wasn't morally culpable.

[coda]

Absolutely, that is usually the case --- People stop having sex after they marry. Peaks in the beginning of relationships and after marriage takes a rapid plunge, especially after "multiplying the earth" with offspring.