Sexual history doesn't matter? Who would marry a porn star?

[Flint]

Originally Posted by Flint

My theory is that when the attempt to regulate morality comes into conflict with biological instincts, the inevitable drive of nature will find one way or another to assert it's dominance, in one possible scenario through the development of undesiarable deviant behavior.

I believe that pornography is just another symptom of our instincts over-compensating for the artificial behavioral barriers we've constructed.

[mrnoodle]

I don't long for the "good old days" or have a hissy fit if there's a butt on TV. The argument isn't that simplistic. Wondering if the hypersexualization of our society is a bad thing is not the same thing as saying "sex is dirty". I slightly resent having to waste my time explaining that, to be honest.

Lots of things were wrong in society in the 50s. Also the 40s, the 60s, the 90s, and so forth. But one of the things we seem to have lost is respect for our own bodies and those of others. What's wrong with a little mystery? What's wrong with modesty? What about salacious material is so worthy that we feel we must defend it from any criticism? For that matter, what is so unworthy about virginity that we mock it like some kind of mental illness?

I'm not in 6th grade, and I'm not Amish. I can say with some degree of certainty that I've almost seen it all. I'm just not all that impressed. Why is that viewpoint less enlightened somehow?

[Trilby]

Originally Posted by mrnoodle

... I slightly resent having to waste my time explaining that, to be honest.

What's wrong with a little mystery? What's wrong with modesty? What about salacious material is so worthy that we feel we must defend it from any criticism?

No offense intended, I assure you. I apologize if I have offended you.

There is NOTHING wrong with a little mystery--I, myself, ADORE mystery and glances and handshakes and little notes. Nothing wrong with modesty, either. I wish more girls at my University would practice a bit of it. Nipples and dicks are all I see. Salacious material is an accepted form of entertainment for adults who know better but still like it. I did say earlier that hardcore porn DOES degrade women. I guess you were too busy being pissed off to notice.

PS-you've not seen it all unless you've been intimate and tried to actually rehabilitate the lowest of the low. Child molesters, addicts of every stripe who sell their babies to
white slavers so they can get another hit. Child abusers...

I, personally, respect Christian attitude...right up till they tell me I'm a bad person 'coz I'm not exactly like them.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by marichiko

or the predator who lured and killed young women during the Chicago Worlds Fair at the turn of the last century (I think the book about him was called The White Death - I'll look it up if anyone cares).

H. H. Holmes, in "Devil in the White City". Good book.

It could make an interesting two movies; one about the fair, and the other about him, with odd little cameos connecting them.

[Trilby]

This is so easily solved. Look. Make sure she's a virgin so she won't laugh at your willy and will avert her pretty face instead of brazenly LOOKING at you while you're doing the nasty, vile 'deed' and you'll know she's ONLY doing it because it's her 'duty'; I'm sure she's thinking of England--that's how you know you've got a really good specimen and a worthy vessel for your sperm.

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

H. H. Holmes, in "Devil in the White City". Good book.

It could make an interesting two movies; one about the fair, and the other about him, with odd little cameos connecting them.

Thanks, HM. I knew it had "White" somewhere in the title. It WAS a good book, and it would make a true crime movie that would keep you looking over your shoulder for weeks!

[mrnoodle]

Originally Posted by Brianna

This is so easily solved. Look. Make sure she's a virgin so she won't laugh at your willy and will avert her pretty face instead of brazenly LOOKING at you while you're doing the nasty, vile 'deed' and you'll know she's ONLY doing it because it's her 'duty'; I'm sure she's thinking of England--that's how you know you've got a really good specimen and a worthy vessel for your sperm.

fapfapfapfapfapfapfapfap




fapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfap

[KinkyVixen]

My point of view is that it doesn't really matter to me what anyone thinks about my sexual history...it all depends on how I feel about it. Of course, I wouldn't want my husband or future husband or whatever to look down on me because of it, but i'm willing to bet unless he's perfect that he has mistakes, sexually or otherwise in his past that he wouldn't want me to judge either. For me, the past is the past, and unless he has a disease or a kid that i need to deal with because of it, it will remain his past and mine will remain my past...
there's nothing you can do to change the past, so why spend all your time worrying about it?

Originally Posted by marichiko

I was really trying to stay out of this, but, oh well.

I'm a million years old, and I still have plenty of opportunities. In my age bracket about the only people who don't have a sexual past are nuns or priests or someone who has something deeply emotionally wrong with them.

Any man who expects me to have sat around waiting for him for forty years, singing "Someday my prince will come" has a screw loose.

You seem to believe that sex is inherently immoral unless its between a man and wife. Period. Most of us disagree with that. Why do you keep belaboring the same point over and over again? Much as you might wish it, we are not going back to the age when women wore chastity belts.

No, I probably wouldn't marry some aging porn star, but I seriously doubt if I'd marry you either.

Why don't you go and find yourself some nice girl who thinks like you do, marry her, and move on to the next topic? This one was getting old three threads ago.

I see the contradiction in your statements and I hope you do to.

I never implied that sex was immoral unless people where married. However, sex for sex sake is intemperate. It’s irresponsible. It cheapens the intimacy that is supposedly the purpose of sex.
It isn't about adult choice its about honesty. Would you engage in sexual intercourse if it was stated right up front that the episode was pure recreational and the pairing will dissolve immediately afterwards?

I think nobody would honestly say yes given those terms because you cannot abstract sex. The risk of pregnancy and the responsibility that comes with it, no matter how slight, plays in the background of your thoughts. I never met a person that engaged in sex without SOME emotional component, unless they where buying a hooker.

Its that emotional component that seeds the moral question.

Freedom means you are going to be around what others like... sometimes you may not like that. If you don't like freedom, and many cannot handle it, they should move to a dictatorship or theocracy.

Rape is about hatred of the opposite sex and self hate, porn can be a symptom of that because those with these illnesses can use it for that purpose. Just like alcohol can be misused, that does not mean it should be illegal any more than anything else that can be potentially be misused should be made to be illegal (see the owning of the antis in the gun threads and past tobacco threads) anti is anti freedom.

The analogy of cigarettes and heroin and alcoholism with porn and deviant behavior is accurate.

My wife and I have been together for over sixteen years, monogamous, porn is fun and exciting and spicy, nothing more. How you use it is up to the individual.... that is what freedom is about.

[Shawnee123]

Originally Posted by bmwmcaw

I never implied that sex was immoral unless people where married. However, sex for sex sake is intemperate. It’s irresponsible. It cheapens the intimacy that is supposedly the purpose of sex.
It isn't about adult choice its about honesty. Would you engage in sexual intercourse if it was stated right up front that the episode was pure recreational and the pairing will dissolve immediately afterwards?

I think nobody would honestly say yes given those terms because you cannot abstract sex. The risk of pregnancy and the responsibility that comes with it, no matter how slight, plays in the background of your thoughts. I never met a person that engaged in sex without SOME emotional component, unless they where buying a hooker.

Its that emotional component that seeds the moral question.

In a way I see what you mean. But, since the thread is about sexual "history" then your point is rather irrelevant.

A person may be all about the intimacy and love that makes sex wonderful; but you're saying that their history, which may have included some impetuous fancies of youth, should come into play in current relationships. Following up with that, that person who may have had some (delicious) youthful indiscretion, cannot be honest about it because this new person (who may be fulfilling in every other way) can't handle that truth.

We grow. We grow. We grow. The point isn't "where have you been?" The point is "where are you now?"

[Flint]

Originally Posted by bmwmcaw

I see the contradiction in your statements and I hope you do to.

I see the contradiction in your statements and I hope you do to. This ought to be productive.

As to whether it is degrading or celebrating the female and/or male form/sexuality depends on who is watching it.

[Undertoad]

Similarly,

I think nobody would honestly say yes given those terms because you cannot abstract sex.

Corrected:
I demand everybody else should honestly say yes thus accepting my principles given those terms because I cannot abstract sex.

The risk of pregnancy and the responsibility that comes with it, no matter how slight, plays in the background of your thoughts.

Corrected:
The risk of pregnancy and the responsibility that comes with it, no matter how slight, plays in the background of my thoughts because I need some secular basis for demanding a moral position, no matter how flimsy it is.

I never met a person that engaged in sex without SOME emotional component, unless they where buying a hooker.

Corrected:
You people are a bunch of lousy heathen, so I automatically win. The only problem is, I can't stop fantasizing about you.

[Trilby]

Originally Posted by mrnoodle

fapfapfapfapfapfapfapfap




fapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfap

Of all the posts I've ever read...THAT is the most eloquent.

And, BTW--WTF? Too hot in the kitchen for ya, Noodle?

S'ok. You can always run to Mama.