Netflix facing indictment from Texas grand jury over "Cuties"
- Thread starter Cicada 5
- Start date
Recommended Videos
- Status
USA
I don’t know. It could be any of hundreds of roles humans developed the capacity to fulfill. Humanity does not actually boil down (biologically) to fucking and being fucked.
Not a mistake, just not perpetuating some sort of unnecessary imperative. There really isn't any need for more kids in the world, but unfortunately most people have shitty bodies that are convinced otherwise.
I'm straight and I sure as heck won't be having kids, for a multitude of reasons, ranging from medical to societal.
But still, we shouldn't claim that a biological imperative exists, because we need to acknowledge it to move beyond it.
So gays are a mistake in scenarios where we need more kids? So, while I’m not a mistake now, I’d have been so in ancient Mesopotamia? Bullshit. I will not concede the argument here. The human animal is more complicated than fucking and being fucked. Our mutual survival is determined by more behaviors and roles than that.
Do you have sperm? Does the infertile have sperm?
I think you’re mistaking procreating for sperm. Just because you have sperm, doesn’t mean you have to use it for procreation, Just because your sperm is ineffective doesn’t make it not exist. How many billions sperms have I wasted and Ive only used two ‘properly’.And I’m the one ‘doing it right’
A better one to catch me on was transpeople
No one said it did. That was the point. Wait I take that back.. I think Spector was the ONLY one who thought that. Everyone else was pointing out that what he said was related to Biology:
1) Was not.
2) What was related to Biology was irrelevant to our societal purpose as a whole.
You missing this important bit here:
"But still, we shouldn't claim that a biological imperative exists, because we need to acknowledge it to move beyond it. "
I don’t think forcing people through the theoretical basis of “biology is meaningless” is necessary when alternative bio-determinisms exist to the social-Darwinian one.
Society as a whole has evolved beyond their hormones. Otherwise we could turn you straight or gay by adjusting your hormone levels alone. That is why we need to move beyond it.
Study: Science Can Change the Sexual Orientations of Mice
By altering serotonin in their brains, researchers caused female mice to prefer to mount and sniff the genitals of other females.
www.theatlantic.com
You fail to realize that the people who disagree with you on what your biological role is will not believe your empty argument that we have progressed beyond such needs without a fuckload more argument than you’re making.Society as a whole has evolved beyond their hormones. Otherwise we could turn you straight or gay by adjusting your hormone levels alone. That is why we need to move beyond it.
Study: Science Can Change the Sexual Orientations of Mice
By altering serotonin in their brains, researchers caused female mice to prefer to mount and sniff the genitals of other females.
Hey, I think the terms men and women are really stupid, as are homo/heterosexual. I’m just accounting for why some people have sperm and some don’t.
getting rid of the idea of thedestructiveness of the concept of the nuclear family is great. Pretending some parts of the race has sperm while others don’t isn’t.
Like, I should have been more careful with how I spoke earlier. Having sperm doesn’t make you a man at all, as per my transgender comment, Women can have sperm too.
That's why the original question was limited to JUST the biological perspective. There are more ways, however, to look at a human than from the biological perspective.
I think we all know that. I think we all know that looking at something from JUST one perspective is not going to give us the entire picture, right?
So conceding this point means nothing in the grand scheme of things.
Sure. I’m just saying I don’t think your argument leads there as smoothly as you’d like. That’s all.
Yes. And from that one perspective, humanity contains multitudes. While others are trying to leave these restrictions, I’ll stay in it and point that out. Biologically, human behavior is more than fucking and being fucked. Our survival and thriving involves dramatically more roles that we developed the biological capacity to thrive in than purely reproductive roles.
It was only like 10 years ago when anyone was free to shot gay people in the US. I understand why Revnak is touchy particularly when some Christian Conservatives want to demonise anything gay
- Nov 27, 2009
- 5,792
- 712
- 118
- Country
- The Dreamlands
- Gender
- Lose 1d20 sanity points.
He's not touchy, he's right, survival of the human species is far more complicated than just having or not having sex, even in primitive societies homosexuals played an important role, whether that was something like fulfilling any role between hunting, gathering or even early agriculture, as well as some forms of behaviour we can actually observe in Penguins, such as taking care of the young when their parents die or if they are abandoned for whatever reason.
Anyways, personally I dislike the whole idea of allowing biology to dictate a role, as even within animals this isn't really true and it's more something that forms around the social structure the animals have, if I may be the asshole that says this, but gender is a social construct and there's no point in trying to assign roles based on it, and if we go for sex instead, which would mean genitalia it still says nothing about the biological needs of humans or other animals, other than of course it's crucial for some of them to reproduce but biologically speaking there's no need for all of them to do so.
It isn't " failing to realize this" I very well can choose whether or not I put forth the effort to argue this extensively or not, but tbh, I feel that I have better things to waste my time on arguing about because Neurology has not even proven free will doesn't exist in the first place. That is me exercising my free will, similarly to me being extremely fertile and with a very high sex drive choosing then have my tubes tied rather than fulfill my biological role to make babies. Biology only impacts this up to a certain point, but then it is up to us. I can choose to be as predictable or as random as I want
No, it really isn't. Considering being a virgin or sexually active is irrelevant to dance. Even if she was an adult and liked to have intercourse 5 to 7 times a day, that too would be irrelevant to dance, because those two are not actually related in the first place. It is the relating intercourse to dance and projecting your views and thoughts on to the girls that is the problem, not the dancing as they are not even related. The girls want to dance regardless of puberty or other factors, as that has nothing to do with it at all really.
A girl being upset in the moment because she feels "babied" and and lashing out and taking a photo of her vulva, her butt or whatever also has nothing to do with Dancing or sex, it is just her lashing out. Kids do all sorts of stupid things when they lash out, that is just one of many things they might do in the heat of the moment of being angry and upset.
Last edited:
So should we as a society allow children to lash out by posting pictures of their genitals on the internet?
Come on, having a vagina clearly means you can only wear a dress
- Status