Create account

replied 2290d
Keep reading. This is only a part of it.
replied 2290d
Yeah, doing something unnatural or unacceptable. That's just your opinion, and a fucking shitty one at that.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2290d
Puting a penis in a vagina for reproduction in natural. No one can deny that unless you are deeply retarded.Unnatural is puting a penis in an anus to reproduce yourself. Not gonna work
replied 2290d
No gay is having anal sex thinking they are going to produce a child... They are doing it for their own pleasure.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2290d
Their perverted pleasure, yes.
replied 2290d
So why exactly is a gay guy having sex for pleasure some morally degenerate thing, but someone hooking up on Tinder with a girl for a one nighter somehow more acceptable?
CryptoAnarchist
replied 2290d
One is the normal sexual act, and one isn't.
replied 2289d
argumentum ad populum
replied 2285d
That sort of argument always wins over the crowds though, and we live in a democracy:P
replied 2284d
yeah... I know 😔
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2290d
I would argue that both are perverted but one is taking it a step further.
replied 2290d
I have no problem with either. Those are victimless actions and it really is no ones fucking business.
replied 2290d
Why should you get to decide who people can have that pleasure with and how?
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2290d
I don't but by definition doing so is definitely a perverted way of orienting pleasure meant for reproduction purpose.
Barricade
replied 2290d
No, that's religious bullshit, just moral judgment. Fortunately, freewill allows human being to have all kind of sex only for pleasure without caring about reproduction.
CryptoAnarchist
replied 2290d
"perverted" means To put to a wrong or improper use; misuse. Nothing to do with religion.
Barricade
replied 2290d
When you attribute perversion to someone or someone, you're doing a moral judgment, it cannot be inferred by any science field. Moral judgments comes from culture and religion.
replied 2285d
That requires you to first make the moral judgement that perverted is bad. Which someone could argue was not the case. Perverting the justice of an unjust law for example:P
CryptoAnarchist
replied 2289d
You can call it a "moral judgment", but its also objective fact. Putting penis in anus = eating through your nose.
Barricade
replied 2289d
Why are you assuming a reproductive purpose on sex? Are you comparing humans to animals, or enforcing people to have kids?
CryptoAnarchist
replied 2288d
That is like asking, "Why are you assuming a digestive purpose on eating?" Sex is for the purposes of reproduction - that's just fact. Keep your strawmans to yourself.
Barricade
replied 2288d
One thing human development has achieve is to split sex from reproduction. Humans will have sex for fun, it's human nature. You cannot go against it, religions have failed.
CryptoAnarchist
replied 2286d
That doesn't change what nature's intent for your organs is. You are free to engage in crimes against nature, but don't try to convince people its "normal".
Barricade
replied 2285d
Natural selection IS nature, you can't go against it unless you like eugenesia and reducing genetic pool. Again: crime is a moral judgement, not science.
Barricade
replied 2285d
Homosexuality has been always present in nature. It has a evolutionary advantage (paradox) because it has not been discarded by natural selection.
CryptoAnarchist
replied 2285d
Your premise fails basic logic. Homosexuality is discarded by natural selection by definition - it doesn't end in reproduction.
Barricade
replied 2283d
If homosexuality is discarded by natural selection, why it still exist? Are you assuming a Mendelian inheritance of homosexuality?
CryptoAnarchist
replied 2282d
"If homosexuality is discarded by natural selection, why it still exist? " I'm sure non-stop promotion in the media helps. Literally every TV show has gay character by the 2nd season.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2285d
Illnesses have been always present in nature. Contracting them is certainly not an advantage since your genes are being removed from the genpool (inability to procreate).
replied 2289d
"objective"
replied 2285d
My sense of humor is objectively shitty.
replied 2290d
Ok. But that makes the majority of heterosexual sex perverted in nature too, since most people have sexual relationships before marriage, and certainly intent to reproduce.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2290d
Indeed but mariage is only a social construct for the only purpose of keeping sex unperverted with more or less efficiency.
replied 2285d
Are you making the case against perverted sex in general? (Like out of marriage sex for fun?).
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2284d
In a way.
replied 2284d
Would you advocate voluntary celibacy and avoiding masturbation and/or sexual lusting/imagery in general? As a good way to live life (if not for other, then for yourself?)
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2284d
I would advocate masturbation being behavior trying to patch a biological need unsatisfied.
replied 2284d
The lesser of two evils? If a person is able to abstain from it and control themselves otherwise, then it is preferable in your view. Correct?
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2284d
I wouldn't says so. I know no biological organ or function that doesn't need stimulation to at least maintain or improve itself. Bones, muscles, brain and even the immunity system.
replied 2284d
In other words, If it is not medically necessary or beneficial to masturbate, and there was a way to know this for sure, then you would advocate for abstaining from masturbation.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2284d
*why would I
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2284d
If its not beneficial why I advocate for it?
replied 2284d
So if you found out that masturbation was not beneficial to you, would you stop masturbating?
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2284d
If I find out that it is detrimental, of course.
replied 2284d
What if it is not detrimental? (Not beneficial, not detrimental, neutral).
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2284d
I don't know. All I know is that I won't have any arguments for neither supporting the practice or the abstinence of it.
replied 2284d
The argument against it would be that it was perverted in the context of this thread. It is non-reproductive pleasure seeking done for sexual gratification.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2284d
The argument would depend if it is used in substitution or not.
replied 2284d
Substitution for what? Reproductive sex?
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2284d
Yes.
replied 2284d
So if it is not a substitution for reproductive sex, then masturbation would not be a perverted act? Did I understand that correctly.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2283d
Yes, in such an hypothetical scenario.
replied 2283d
In other words, if two men meet up and jerk each other off, as long as that is not as substitution for reproductive sex, then it is not perverted.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2283d
I'll let you be judge.
replied 2283d
You mentioned earlier in this topic that you found any activity that was done for sexual gratification outside of reproductive sex as being a mental illness or at least perverted.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2283d
Exactly. Yet I won't continue to speculate on a hypothetical scenario that is likely not based on reality.
replied 2283d
I think that any sexual act that is not reproductive is perverted, but that perverted acts are not a bad thing in themselves just because it is perverted.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2283d
Yes, some illnesses have more dangerous consequences than others. It's a spectrum.
replied 2283d
You view masturbation to be on the spectrum of mental illnesses, but on the lower end of it. less bad than doing other sexual stuff that is worse on the scale. (Correct me if wrong)
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2283d
Pretty much unless it is to release unsatisfied biological urges.
replied 2283d
That exception makes no sense, acting on the urges with masturbation is the illness, not the urges themselves, they are meant to remain unsatisfied outside of reproductive sex.
replied 2282d
Your sexual organs need exercise to be healthy, just like every other part of your body. Ethics is more rational when we replace the Good vs Evil dichotomy with Healthy vs Unhealthy.
replied 2282d
There is no medical need for people to masturbate unless they have some form of sexual dysfunction which can be treated by it, it looks to be neutral in moderation.
replied 2279d
source?
replied 2278d
Each person can consult their doctor and ask them if it is medically necessary to masturbate if they do not feel like it. It is generally not.
replied 2278d
Masturbation is not necessary for the functioning of the body or the sexual organs of men in general, it is an optional personal choice they can make to do, not medical necessity.
replied 2282d
I am not making an ethical/moral/healthy claim, I was probing TrashPoster about his arguments about what he categorized as mental illness. I do not think that here needs to be any->
replied 2282d
-> reason, ethical or health related, to masturbate. It is just something that people do because they enjoy it, I am not making the claim that it is a mental illness or wrong either ->
replied 2282d
-> every person knows best what is best for themselves and they should be free to chose, there does not need to be a "health" or "ethics" justification for doing anything with your ->
replied 2282d
-> own body. But there is no need to do anything that is healthy unless one feels like it either, masturbation is just a personal choice a person can make without any justification.
replied 2284d
It seems that masturbation has a good effect on prostate cancer for those who masturbate AFTER they turn 50, but it has the opposite (negative) effect (very small) in 20s to 50s.
replied 2284d
But would that not be the case with sex between men and women as well? The male body regulates the penis with boners in sleep and nocturnal emissions. No need to masturbate.
Leading zeros
replied 2289d
What if the seamen leaks out the anus(i.e. blowing bubbles) into the vagina? Could work in theory.
replied 2289d
In theory? People get impregnated by jizz-farts all the time...
replied 2285d
That is why the two holes are so close together, also part of the reason we fart, it is a very elegant solution.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2289d
Eating with your nose could also work, in theory.
replied 2285d
That is how they force feed hunger striking prisoners, tube through the nose.