Does Sex Have Limits?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-10-2013, 03:47 PM
Does Sex Have Limits?
Hey guys,

This is something of a follow up to my previous post with some poll questions. I found the answers to the question, "what is your sexual morality" interesting and thought I might probe a bit more on this. Some people asked for clarification on the question so I narrowed it to ask simply are there any rules of engagement, are there good or bad practices, namely are there any sexual actions which people would consider immoral.
The general response was that anything goes so long as it is between consenting adults. I just wanted to question this response a bit by looking at it in conjunction with the response given to the question of, "what is the meaning of sex (for you)"? Most people said it only has the meaning that each person gives to it, which I would say results in saying that sex itself has no intrinsic meaning but only the meaning one would choose to associate with it. If that isn't correct let me know.
Now here is my new question. If sex has no meaning and is really just an act done for pleasure or in some cases love etc, what reasons do we give for forbidding non-adults from the act?
I agree with those who said that sex should remain between consenting adults, but I am just wondering if some of the people who answered that sex has no meaning in itself and is really just a pleasurable activity and also that it should be between adults only might care to comment as to the reasons why. I'll leave it at that for now and see what people come out with, thanks guys I look forward to hearing from you and talking a bit more.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-10-2013, 03:53 PM
RE: Does Sex Have Limits?
I'm not sure why this is the question that came to you after so many interesting comments, but okay.

It's simple. Only adults have the capacity to reason the risks and benefits of engaging in sex. The age where a person is emotionally mature enough to look at sex objectionably varies, but I think most of us could agree that your views on sex mature and evolve as you do. Teenagers are notorious for thinking of themselves as invincible and may not weigh all the possible outcomes of their behavior before acting.

Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who has said it- not even if I have said it- unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense. - Buddha
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Ohio Sky's post
21-10-2013, 04:15 PM
RE: Does Sex Have Limits?
(21-10-2013 03:53 PM)Ohio Sky Wrote:  I'm not sure why this is the question that came to you after so many interesting comments, but okay.

It's simple. Only adults have the capacity to reason the risks and benefits of engaging in sex. The age where a person is emotionally mature enough to look at sex objectionably varies, but I think most of us could agree that your views on sex mature and evolve as you do. Teenagers are notorious for thinking of themselves as invincible and may not weigh all the possible outcomes of their behavior before acting.

That makes sense. By risks I assume your speaking of the risk of disease and pregnancy, if that is so, what would you say if those were taken care of and things were made "safe"? Could it be permissible then, or, just for the hypothetical, what if there was a kind of parental consent like when parents give permission for their kids to do something dangerous like play hockey, and so safety according to these terms was taken care of, would this change anything?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-10-2013, 04:22 PM
RE: Does Sex Have Limits?
Bowing
(21-10-2013 04:15 PM)WimpyPete Wrote:  
(21-10-2013 03:53 PM)Ohio Sky Wrote:  I'm not sure why this is the question that came to you after so many interesting comments, but okay.

It's simple. Only adults have the capacity to reason the risks and benefits of engaging in sex. The age where a person is emotionally mature enough to look at sex objectionably varies, but I think most of us could agree that your views on sex mature and evolve as you do. Teenagers are notorious for thinking of themselves as invincible and may not weigh all the possible outcomes of their behavior before acting.

That makes sense. By risks I assume your speaking of the risk of disease and pregnancy, if that is so, what would you say if those were taken care of and things were made "safe"? Could it be permissible then, or, just for the hypothetical, what if there was a kind of parental consent like when parents give permission for their kids to do something dangerous like play hockey, and so safety according to these terms was taken care of, would this change anything?

No, because children are not able to recognize the implications of sex, they are too young to understand it and can end up permanently traumatized.

[Image: dobie.png]

Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Dom's post
21-10-2013, 04:26 PM
RE: Does Sex Have Limits?
(21-10-2013 03:47 PM)WimpyPete Wrote:  Hey guys,

This is something of a follow up to my previous post with some poll questions. I found the answers to the question, "what is your sexual morality" interesting and thought I might probe a bit more on this. Some people asked for clarification on the question so I narrowed it to ask simply are there any rules of engagement, are there good or bad practices, namely are there any sexual actions which people would consider immoral.
The general response was that anything goes so long as it is between consenting adults. I just wanted to question this response a bit by looking at it in conjunction with the response given to the question of, "what is the meaning of sex (for you)"? Most people said it only has the meaning that each person gives to it, which I would say results in saying that sex itself has no intrinsic meaning but only the meaning one would choose to associate with it. If that isn't correct let me know.
Now here is my new question. If sex has no meaning and is really just an act done for pleasure or in some cases love etc, what reasons do we give for forbidding non-adults from the act?
I agree with those who said that sex should remain between consenting adults, but I am just wondering if some of the people who answered that sex has no meaning in itself and is really just a pleasurable activity and also that it should be between adults only might care to comment as to the reasons why. I'll leave it at that for now and see what people come out with, thanks guys I look forward to hearing from you and talking a bit more.
How did you jump from "sex has no intrinsic meaning " to "if sex has no meaning..." ?
These are two completely different positions.

Secondly, I don't know where you live, but where I live sex between non-adults is not forbidden , only sex between an adult and a non-adult is.

. . . ................................ ......................................... . [Image: 2dsmnow.gif] Eat at Joe's
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Slowminded's post
21-10-2013, 04:27 PM
RE: Does Sex Have Limits?
I agree with ohio sky and Dom. Young children aren't able to give sex meaning in their life. They do not have the ability to "consent" and know what that means for them.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Smercury44's post
21-10-2013, 04:48 PM
RE: Does Sex Have Limits?
(21-10-2013 04:22 PM)Dom Wrote:  Bowing
(21-10-2013 04:15 PM)WimpyPete Wrote:  That makes sense. By risks I assume your speaking of the risk of disease and pregnancy, if that is so, what would you say if those were taken care of and things were made "safe"? Could it be permissible then, or, just for the hypothetical, what if there was a kind of parental consent like when parents give permission for their kids to do something dangerous like play hockey, and so safety according to these terms was taken care of, would this change anything?

No, because children are not able to recognize the implications of sex, they are too young to understand it and can end up permanently traumatized.

^^ exactly. Yes, there are the dangers of pregnancy and STDs, but there is also a very powerful emotional risk to engaging in sex before you are ready. A parent signing a waiver may take on the responsibility of educating their kids about the pregnancy and disease aspects of it and how to prevent those, but most parents wouldn't be OK with the feelings of guilt for having consented to their child engaging in acts that they weren't emotionally prepared for and which ultimately hurt them.

Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who has said it- not even if I have said it- unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense. - Buddha
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Ohio Sky's post
21-10-2013, 05:14 PM
RE: Does Sex Have Limits?
(21-10-2013 04:22 PM)Dom Wrote:  Bowing
(21-10-2013 04:15 PM)WimpyPete Wrote:  That makes sense. By risks I assume your speaking of the risk of disease and pregnancy, if that is so, what would you say if those were taken care of and things were made "safe"? Could it be permissible then, or, just for the hypothetical, what if there was a kind of parental consent like when parents give permission for their kids to do something dangerous like play hockey, and so safety according to these terms was taken care of, would this change anything?

No, because children are not able to recognize the implications of sex, they are too young to understand it and can end up permanently traumatized.
Hey Dom. I guess you are getting at part of what I am wondering about. Could you possibly clarify in regards to what "implications" you have in mind? Are you referring to the "safety" issues of pregnancy and disease that were mentioned in the previous post or do you have other aspects in mind?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-10-2013, 05:17 PM
RE: Does Sex Have Limits?
I participated in a similar discussion before. It was eventually banned. I still think it is a valid question.
The issue of understanding of risks is also valid. But their are dangers involved in sports, sugar consumption, crossing the road! Yet we let children do those things! I was allowed to handle a gun at a very young age!

I'm not saying sex with children is O.K.! And I haven't done that! I'm just saying it's a valid question.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-10-2013, 05:19 PM
RE: Does Sex Have Limits?
(21-10-2013 04:26 PM)Slowminded Wrote:  
(21-10-2013 03:47 PM)WimpyPete Wrote:  Hey guys,

This is something of a follow up to my previous post with some poll questions. I found the answers to the question, "what is your sexual morality" interesting and thought I might probe a bit more on this. Some people asked for clarification on the question so I narrowed it to ask simply are there any rules of engagement, are there good or bad practices, namely are there any sexual actions which people would consider immoral.
The general response was that anything goes so long as it is between consenting adults. I just wanted to question this response a bit by looking at it in conjunction with the response given to the question of, "what is the meaning of sex (for you)"? Most people said it only has the meaning that each person gives to it, which I would say results in saying that sex itself has no intrinsic meaning but only the meaning one would choose to associate with it. If that isn't correct let me know.
Now here is my new question. If sex has no meaning and is really just an act done for pleasure or in some cases love etc, what reasons do we give for forbidding non-adults from the act?
I agree with those who said that sex should remain between consenting adults, but I am just wondering if some of the people who answered that sex has no meaning in itself and is really just a pleasurable activity and also that it should be between adults only might care to comment as to the reasons why. I'll leave it at that for now and see what people come out with, thanks guys I look forward to hearing from you and talking a bit more.
How did you jump from "sex has no intrinsic meaning " to "if sex has no meaning..." ?
These are two completely different positions.

Secondly, I don't know where you live, but where I live sex between non-adults is not forbidden , only sex between an adult and a non-adult is.

Thanks slowminded. I didn't intend to make a distinction between "no intrinsic meaning" and "no meaning", when I used "no meaning" i meant it in the context of intrinsic meaning as mentioned originally. But as I mentioned the general answers I received were that sex does not have a meaning in itself except for the meaning that each individual finds in it. If the meaning is up to the individual then it is a subjective meaning given to the act by the person, rather than an objective meaning inherent in the act which the person receives and understands. Something akin to a word or a particular symbol which in itself is just a noise or scribble, but receives meaning when people assign it meaning. I don't know if you agree or not with that distinction or if that is how you feel about sex. Let me know.

Secondly I didn't come up with the "adults" only idea it was what seemed to be the genuine consensus from my previous post so that is what I was speaking to.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: