Does Sex Have Limits?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-10-2013, 05:59 PM
RE: Does Sex Have Limits?
(21-10-2013 05:41 PM)Ohio Sky Wrote:  
(21-10-2013 05:25 PM)WimpyPete Wrote:  The responses to your original thread suggested that each person assigns their own meaning to sex in their lives, not that sex has no meaning. No one ever claimed that.

I guess how it makes sense to me is either that a thing contains meaning in itself or it is not meaningful itself but merely receives the meaning assigned to it by people. An example would be a thing, like a dog, and the separate thing the actual word "dog". Dogs have four legs and fur and all the rest, it isn't just whatever we say it is. The word "dog" however is different, before we assigned it to correlate to dogs it was just a random set of letters. I don't know if that makes sense or not. I'm saying if people are saying the meaning of sex is assigned then I take that to mean it is itself sort of formless or blank of meaning until someone applies meaning to it. Let me know if that makes sense or how you feel about it. Again this is all an attempt to state the views from the post only.



Someone in their teens or early 20s may assign way too much meaning to it and be very damaged when that relationship ends.

I think your right about the odd combination of demonization and glamorification in our culture, it is strange. My question with this particular statement is that you said we can assign "too much" meaning to sex. Well how does one determine what is too much or too little unless there is some standard of meaning? I can say that the face in the painting of my mom looks "too fat" only in comparison to her actual face. So to talk about a proper proportion of meaning seems to require something more than a purely subjective meaning for sex.

Now if you don't take the position of only a purely subjective meaning for sex that is fine, let me know what you think. But to me it seems that that is the view being affirmed by many so far.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-10-2013, 06:12 PM
RE: Does Sex Have Limits?
(21-10-2013 05:59 PM)WimpyPete Wrote:  
(21-10-2013 05:41 PM)Ohio Sky Wrote:  I guess how it makes sense to me is either that a thing contains meaning in itself or it is not meaningful itself but merely receives the meaning assigned to it by people. An example would be a thing, like a dog, and the separate thing the actual word "dog". Dogs have four legs and fur and all the rest, it isn't just whatever we say it is. The word "dog" however is different, before we assigned it to correlate to dogs it was just a random set of letters. I don't know if that makes sense or not. I'm saying if people are saying the meaning of sex is assigned then I take that to mean it is itself sort of formless or blank of meaning until someone applies meaning to it. Let me know if that makes sense or how you feel about it. Again this is all an attempt to state the views from the post only.



Someone in their teens or early 20s may assign way too much meaning to it and be very damaged when that relationship ends.

I think your right about the odd combination of demonization and glamorification in our culture, it is strange. My question with this particular statement is that you said we can assign "too much" meaning to sex. Well how does one determine what is too much or too little unless there is some standard of meaning? I can say that the face in the painting of my mom looks "too fat" only in comparison to her actual face. So to talk about a proper proportion of meaning seems to require something more than a purely subjective meaning for sex.

Now if you don't take the position of only a purely subjective meaning for sex that is fine, let me know what you think. But to me it seems that that is the view being affirmed by many so far.


No, I agree with the subjective aspect. But what a person thinks of sex before they have engaged in it themselves will be loaded with society's views and what others have taught them, whereas the conclusion someone reaches about what sex means to them after they have had more experience in the matter is going to be based mostly on their own experiences. So yes, there is a preconceived 'meaning' attached to sex in any society, but I think this view affects the younger or less experienced more than an older person with more experience, who has developed their own sexuality and worldview.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Ohio Sky's post
21-10-2013, 06:18 PM
RE: Does Sex Have Limits?
(21-10-2013 06:12 PM)Ohio Sky Wrote:  No, I agree with the subjective aspect. But what a person thinks of sex before they have engaged in it themselves will be loaded with society's views and what others have taught them, whereas the conclusion someone reaches about what sex means to them after they have had more experience in the matter is going to be based mostly on their own experiences. So yes, there is a preconceived 'meaning' attached to sex in any society, but I think this view affects the younger or less experienced more than an older person with more experience, who has developed their own sexuality and worldview.


That was nicely put. Yes

I guess one of the reasons why your previous thread was difficult for me to interpret WimpyPete (why chose a name that automatically makes me think of impotence?? xD) is because a baseline like this wasn't introduced.

Now, going on what Ohio Sky posted, I think I can now adequately answer your questions. Big Grin

[Image: 3d366d5c-72a0-4228-b835-f404c2970188_zps...1381867723]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-10-2013, 06:50 PM
RE: Does Sex Have Limits?
I know people who are into polyamory, I know people who have open relationships. I know people who engage in power exchange relationships. I know people who have had group sex.

Sex doesn't have to mean everything and it doesn't have to mean nothing. I find most people fall somewhere in between everything and nothing. That is based on nothing but their own emotions.

Does sex have limits? Of course all people have limits.

It all has to do with consent. If you want to try anal or oral sex and your partner doesn't....that becomes a limit. That person isn't willing for whatever reason to do that. You don't get to force the issue.

Having any kind of sexual relation with anyone unable to consent to the act is just wrong.

This includes and is not limited to adults who are mentally limited, dead people and animals.


God is a concept by which we measure our pain -- John Lennon

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Momsurroundedbyboys's post
21-10-2013, 08:31 PM
RE: Does Sex Have Limits?
(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"?

No it's much more than that. Even though sex has no intrinsic meaning that does not mean that any given non-adult person will not ascribe a particular meaning to sex when they become adults. It is because sexual intercourse can be assigned a plurality of meanings in adulthood that minors need to be protected. Raising children is partly about multiplying their (good) options as adults rather than reducing them. That is why we send our children to school even though they may not want to go. You woudln't be doing your children any favours if you left them illiterate and innumerate because they didn't want to go to school. Similarly you shouldn't mutilate the genitals of (male or female) children--you should defer that decision to them as adults. Loss of virginity may come to possess great meaning to the adult for whatever reason; perhaps the non-adult is unable to adequately assert themselves and reluctantly yields to requests for sex etc. These sorts of reasons are unrelated to STIs and pregnancy they are more to do with the agency of the minor, the minors' temporal horizon and that the identity of the minor is yet to gel.

Also, sexual intercourse is perhaps the most physically intimate of acts and that has the potential to introduce an emotional vulnerability that most non-adults are ill-equipped to deal with.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chippy's post
21-10-2013, 08:48 PM
RE: Does Sex Have Limits?
Thanks for spelling out some detailed responses I appreciate it
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-10-2013, 02:48 AM
RE: Does Sex Have Limits?
If the sexual act does NOT bring harm to another living thing, mentally or physically, then I've got no problem with it, and will not speak against it. That is the whole of my sexual morality.

Through profound pain comes profound knowledge.
Ridi, Pagliaccio, sul tuo amore infranto! Ridi del duol, che t'avvelena il cor!
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-10-2013, 02:51 AM
RE: Does Sex Have Limits?
(21-10-2013 06:50 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  This includes and is not limited to adults who are mentally limited, dead people and animals.

Dead people are no longer alive. As such, they are nothing more than objects. Consent is thus irrelevant.

It's gross, I'll agree, but that doesn't mean it's wrong.

Through profound pain comes profound knowledge.
Ridi, Pagliaccio, sul tuo amore infranto! Ridi del duol, che t'avvelena il cor!
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-10-2013, 02:53 AM
RE: Does Sex Have Limits?
(22-10-2013 02:51 AM)Misanthropik Wrote:  
(21-10-2013 06:50 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  This includes and is not limited to adults who are mentally limited, dead people and animals.

Dead people are no longer alive. As such, they are nothing more than objects. Consent is thus irrelevant.

It's gross, I'll agree, but that doesn't mean it's wrong.
Oh no . Its wrong. Its a whole truck load of wrong...

Theism is to believe what other people claim, Atheism is to ask "why should I".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-10-2013, 03:05 AM
RE: Does Sex Have Limits?
(22-10-2013 02:53 AM)sporehux Wrote:  
(22-10-2013 02:51 AM)Misanthropik Wrote:  Dead people are no longer alive. As such, they are nothing more than objects. Consent is thus irrelevant.

It's gross, I'll agree, but that doesn't mean it's wrong.
Oh no . Its wrong. Its a whole truck load of wrong...

For what reason? Personally, my idea of "wrong" means that another living thing has been harmed in some way. But a dead person's brain no longer functions in a manner which would allow for ANY conception of thought - let alone the concept of suffering. A dead person doesn't feel or think anything at all. They're dead.

So, why is it wrong to engage in an act of coitus with a mass of flesh which was once living?

Through profound pain comes profound knowledge.
Ridi, Pagliaccio, sul tuo amore infranto! Ridi del duol, che t'avvelena il cor!
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: