Sexual Fantasy vs. Sexual Morality

[Irony's Acolyte]

Sure we should have a line. But it should only turn the most depraved and fucked up acts off-limits. Everything else (and that would be alot) would be fine so long as its two consenting people.

First, if everyone involved is ok with it, why should we stop them? Second, why only 2?[/quote]
Well I've got nothing against more than 2 people going at it. Have all the orgies you want, the more the merrier. I just said "two consenting people" because its a common phrase I use for stuff like this. And when I say the most depraved and fucked up acts I generally mean non-consentual stuff like rape and pedophilia. I hesitate to put necrophilia only because while yes only one of them is consenting, the other isn't alive. Its just a dead body. Its like masterbating with a fleshlight. A fleshlight that used to be alive.

 

[JemothSkarii]

I don't REALLY care about what people do with sex; as long as it's with two (or more, personally I think 2 because I'm that romantic type) consenting partners, at least 13 and a reasonable distance apart from each other (about 2 years, but not below when they're 13-14).
Apart from that, and it's not like...Vore, I'm happy

 

[Jonluw]

The only limitation should be that it is consentual. So long as it's consentual, it's all good.

That, and non-lethal. Consensual and non-lethal = five by five.

Actually, I don't mind if consenting people want to kill eachother. I'm for euthanasia and stuff you see.
Unless they want to harm other people. Then that's bad. All parties involved need to consent.

 

[Jonluw]

Sure we should have a line. But it should only turn the most depraved and fucked up acts off-limits. Everything else (and that would be alot) would be fine so long as its two consenting people.

First, if everyone involved is ok with it, why should we stop them? Second, why only 2?

Well I've got nothing against more than 2 people going at it. Have all the orgies you want, the more the merrier. I just said "two consenting people" because its a common phrase I use for stuff like this. And when I say the most depraved and fucked up acts I generally mean non-consentual stuff like rape and pedophilia. I hesitate to put necrophilia only because while yes only one of them is consenting, the other isn't alive. Its just a dead body. Its like masterbating with a fleshlight. A fleshlight that used to be alive.

Spoiler: This is really all I have to say.

 

[Caliostro]

Nobody has morality. Morality isn't real. It's a concept we invented so we could put a social stranglehold on other people's lives. Morality exists no more than souls, or good and evil.

So you feel the need to rape and murder since you feel a social constrain by other people's "morality"?
If not then it is not as "natural"(I'll use the word common instead) as you say it is, and you share this personal value with most people, and that is what we call morality.

Morality is the common ground of personal views of many people.

You're confusing morals and values with morality.

(absurdly example, but follow me here)
Values = I was taught that burgers are bad. So I refuse to eat a McDonalds burger.
Morals = I don't think McDonalds burgers are a good thing. I think they're a terrible thing, so I refuse to eat at McDonalds.

Morality = I don't think McDonalds burger are a good thing, so NOBODY should eat at McDonalds.

And if rape is so natural, why does it not happen all the time with animals? We share common morality traits with many animals, because it is best for the species in most cases.

Because IT DOES.

 

[Caliostro]

Edit: Double posting isn't cool kids. Don't do it. Stay in school.

 

[Jonluw]

The only limitation should be that it is consentual. So long as it's consentual, it's all good.

That, and non-lethal. Consensual and non-lethal = five by five.

Actually, I don't mind if consenting people want to kill eachother. I'm for euthanasia and stuff you see.
Unless they want to harm other people. Then that's bad. All parties involved need to consent.

Ok, fair point. But still, that should be done with a doctor present, not during sex.

Yeah, doctors might be a good idea.

 

[TailsRodrigez]

There was a time when the only real and acceptable form of sex would be your typical vanilla sex between a married man and woman that you see (if you're into voyeurism) in any king sized bed across the land.

Before I answer your question, I would like to point out that so many forms of sex not considered "vanilla" have been around since the beginning of man (and were quite popular in many cultures, such as bestiality, necrophilia, gay/lesbian, orgies, sadism, etc.) and the vanilla type was a result of Judo-Christian beliefs influencing Europe, and therefore, the western world, and really the sexual revolution that took place was simply embracing what western culture repressed and called unacceptable. I don't believe you can draw a line because as the culture will change, so will their views of sex ( i don't think this gives anyone the right to have sex with anyone, like pedophilia or anything).

 

[Verp]

As long as sex happens between two consenting adults or sufficiently close equivalents and it happens where it doesn't bother people (the streets, the office, etc.), it's none of my business.

I don't do sex, so I can't really comment on what makes one kind of sexual activity more pleasurable than the other.

Yet again, why 2?

*shrug*

Sometimes you just miss some important details while writing a post. I guess what I actually meant was "as long as it doesn't happen without consent from all the living participants (this doesn't include plants, fungi, lichen, bacteria, or other living organisms that lack a central nervous system or are otherwise a lot less aware of their surroundings than vertebrates are) or from the owner in case of property that lacks its own consciousness".

 

[swolf]

What people do behind closed doors is no concern of mine, and it should be of no concern to anyone else.

agreed, besides, who enforce the line?

 

[moretimethansense]

What's with all the sex related threads all of a sudden?

I am of the oppinion that almost every kind of sex should be legal and unrestricred, the obvious exceptions being child, animal and snuff.

As for porn, I think subtley different rules should apply if it's animated.

Basically if there aren't real children, animals or people in general being raped, beaten, tied up, violated by an octopus, mutilated and or eaten then why should anybody care, allow me to quote Disturbed's Ten Thousand Fist's here "if this disturbes you then walk awaaaaay", I komw I won't be looking for certain kinds of porn anytime soon.

 

[Boris Goodenough]

You're confusing morals and values with morality.

(absurdly example, but follow me here)
Values = I was taught that burgers are bad. So I refuse to eat a McDonalds burger.
Morals = I don't think McDonalds burgers are a good thing. I think they're a terrible thing, so I refuse to eat at McDonalds.

Morality = I don't think McDonalds burger are a good thing, so NOBODY should eat at McDonalds.

Answer my question.

Let me rephrese my original question: do you think others should go about raping and murdering people?

Morals can be taught, morals can be personal, they don't have to be what you think others SHOULD have to do but it would be nice.

Because IT DOES.

Give me proof of this, you have to prove that a significant portion of all animals are raped, not nessererely yourself but just someone. Until then you are making an assertion without any form of proof.

 

[kikon9]

If all parties are consenting, there aren't any problems.

 

[DuctTapeJedi]

Jesus said not to waste your time worrying about what your neighbor might be up to or judging them as lesser than yourself, and to worry about improving your own morality first.

So yeah, I'll roll with that.

 

[BabyRaptor]

What people do in their own bedroom, with consent, between adults (and every other legal "acceptability" I might have missed) is of no concern to me. Let them do what they want.

I don't go around sharing the weird things that I sometimes look at when being naughty with other people, and I don't really think anyone else should either, outside of the appropriate situations. That's what got us into this entire mess to begin with...People deciding that they should control everyone elses' sexual exploits.

 

[Verp]

Because IT DOES.

Give me proof of this, you have to prove that a significant portion of all animals are raped, not nessererely yourself but just someone. Until then you are making an assertion without any form of proof.

I can't give you statistics about something like that, but just... Have you ever watched animal documentaries? Read articles concerning animal mating behavior? Owned animals? Anything?

Anyway...

It shouldn't be rocket science that natural selection favours the genes that can pass themselves without discrimination from the one who's in the receiving end. There are whole species where rape is the most prevalent form of passing one's genes, or in some cases it would be if the receiving end didn't have precautions. Ducks, for example, have a whole genital warfare going on: the females have developed incredibly complex passageways in which to lose the male duck's penis in case of forced mating and the males have a specialised penis for handling the maze. Mating can go incredibly bad for the females anyway, though, because the males seek to tire them out so they can rape them a bit better and the females can drown while struggling. Bedbugs take the ducks' genital warfare a step further: they don't even use the proper passageways, the males try to stab the female through the abdomen to inject their seed directly and the females have decoy organs to fool them.

Dolphins don't even care whether you're female or even a dolphin -- they'll gang rape anyway you for shits and giggles.

 

[superbatranger]

Whatever happens in the bedroom, stays in the bedroom. For the most part, that is.