|
Why is it fine? I mean, what is the value of abstinence?
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 13:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 15:43 |
|
|
Mu Zeta posted:Why is it fine? I mean, what is the value of abstinence? It's fine because abstinence itself is not harmful. People can promote it if they want to, regardless of whether or not I personally see any value in it. If it's promoted in a harmful way, as it often is, that's not fine.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 13:48
|
|
|
Pretty much. I agree that there is no inherent value to abstinence; it is just a viable choice that may fit some people in a period of their lives. Neither abstinence or being sexually active should be something to shame people for; there really doesn't need to be a moral dichotomy between people based on how sexually active they are.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 14:12
|
|
|
Wheat Loaf posted:Do you feel the same way about Islam or would that be racist? Exact same thing with Islam.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 15:26
|
|
|
hard counter posted:i think we're probably going to argue in circles again because the rcc is an organization like any other that has undergone change over time as their scholars produce new arguments from re-examining canons and developing new theological writings to better their perceived understanding of what the original dogma was and what its application to the current world is, they wouldn't see themselves as moving away from their original principles but rather moving closer to them when calls for reform/change arise; the extent to which real church reforms can still be called 'flawed from the bottom up' and better the further it gets from the original dogma is probably a matter of perspective that i don't think we're going to find common grounds on Well probably not if you think the superstition has any moral or empirical value. It doesn't. If the basis for a rule or procedure is "because we think god wants us to" then it falls apart under any kind of scrutiny or test. I also consider it even more problematic when thr church does poo poo like change rules becsuse its not a local non profit figuring out the best way to figure things out...they are rewriting the supposed word of god. Thats a Big Deal.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 15:31
|
|
|
pidan posted:It's fine because abstinence itself is not harmful. People can promote it if they want to, regardless of whether or not I personally see any value in it. Actually abstinence is harmful. Sexual frustration can lead to addiction, depression, and social isolation. People need to gently caress. This is part of why abstinence-only sex ed is terrible. It tends to include things like "condoms don't actually work all that well" so people start humping without them because good luck convincing people not to do it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 15:31
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:You can't be a Christian literalist (Assuming Christian literalist means someone who takes everything in the bible as literal word of god.)
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 15:41
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:Actually abstinence is harmful. Sexual frustration can lead to addiction, depression, and social isolation. People need to gently caress. This is part of why abstinence-only sex ed is terrible. It tends to include things like "condoms don't actually work all that well" so people start humping without them because good luck convincing people not to do it. Not ejaculating increases risk for prostate cancer (and all lesser prostate problems). I don't know if this American-style abstinence also means no wanking so 
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 15:43
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:Actually abstinence is harmful. Sexual frustration can lead to addiction, depression, and social isolation. People need to gently caress. This is part of why abstinence-only sex ed is terrible. It tends to include things like "condoms don't actually work all that well" so people start humping without them because good luck convincing people not to do it. I don't see anyone saying that abstinence-only sex ed, or spreading misinformation is good. It is obvious that any kind of repression can be unhealthy, but that doesn't mean that people who chose to not be sexually active, for a a period of their lives, are making a choice that can't be right for them. I realize that people who call themselves "incels" are pretty much insane, but that has little to do with abstinence as a choice, I think.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 15:50
|
|
|
Grandmother of Five posted:I don't see anyone saying that abstinence-only sex ed, or spreading misinformation is good. It is obvious that any kind of repression can be unhealthy, but that doesn't mean that people who chose to not be sexually active, for a a period of their lives, are making a choice that can't be right for them. Incel is short for involuntarily celibate. You might be thinking of volcels and men going their own way, who claim abstinence by choice but really just resent women.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 15:53
|
|
|
Henchman of Santa posted:Incel is short for involuntarily celibate. You might be thinking of volcels and men going their own way, who claim abstinence by choice but really just resent women. My impression is possibly tainted from only hearing of people calling themselves "incels" in the context of weird internet people who seem to be men who hate women, so they seem crazy in the same way to me. They seem to have a hate for women in common.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 15:58
|
|
|
Grandmother of Five posted:My impression is possibly tainted from only hearing of people calling themselves "incels" in the context of weird internet people who seem to be men who hate women, so they seem crazy in the same way to me. They seem to have a hate for women in common. Incels = "I can't get laid because women are evil" Volcels = "I choose not to get laid because women are evil and abstinence gives me strength also no one wants to gently caress me"
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 16:07
|
|
|
Grandmother of Five posted:I don't see anyone saying that abstinence-only sex ed, or spreading misinformation is good. It is obvious that any kind of repression can be unhealthy, but that doesn't mean that people who chose to not be sexually active, for a a period of their lives, are making a choice that can't be right for them. Relatively few people can successfully go without sex for long periods. They're rare. Most people have problems if they don't get laid enough. Part of it is not specific to sex itself but also revolves around physical intimacy. People like to touch and hold each other. Notice how many greetings involve touching somebody. Hand shakes, fist bumps, bumping elbows, and so forth. We're humans. It's what we do. Grandmother of Five posted:My impression is possibly tainted from only hearing of people calling themselves "incels" in the context of weird internet people who seem to be men who hate women, so they seem crazy in the same way to me. They seem to have a hate for women in common. They're often dreadful people yes but it isn't as simple as that. Some of them are Reddit-style MRAs but one of the ways those guys get more recruits is by offering emotional support to men that have been hurt by women. Our society sometimes encourages women to do terrible things in relationships (read the utterly psychotic information that's been printed as advice in Cosmo, for example) and some women are lovely people. You get men that have been in nasty relationships or that have gone through a bad breakup being offered that as another way out. But as I've said many times it's one of those "some legitimate points buried in a mountain of misogyny" things. Some women being bad people doesn't mean that all women are bad people. Guys that aren't horrible people that land there don't tend to hang around. Jerry Cotton posted:Not ejaculating increases risk for prostate cancer (and all lesser prostate problems). I don't know if this American-style abstinence also means no wanking so American-style abstinence comes from the religious right and yes they are against masturbating. They believe that sex is only for procreation so if you enjoy it too much (or if a woman enjoys it at all) or do it for fun rather than making babies then you are wrong. That's where pretty much all of the sexual repression in America comes from; they want sex to exist only within a marriage between a man and a woman and only for making babies. ToxicSlurpee has a new favorite as of 16:33 on Mar 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 16:23
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:American-style abstinence comes from the religious right and yes they are against masturbating. They believe that sex is only for procreation so if you enjoy it too much (or if a woman enjoys it at all) or do it for fun rather than making babies then you are wrong. That's where pretty much all of the sexual repression in America comes from; they want sex to exist only within a marriage between a man and a woman and only for making babies. I forgot about this shirt 
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 17:07
|
|
|
Jerry Cotton posted:I forgot about this shirt I'm glad to know someone's out there taking care of my ex.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 17:26
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:American-style abstinence comes from the religious right and yes they are against masturbating. They believe that sex is only for procreation so if you enjoy it too much (or if a woman enjoys it at all) or do it for fun rather than making babies then you are wrong. That's where pretty much all of the sexual repression in America comes from; they want sex to exist only within a marriage between a man and a woman and only for making babies. What comes across as a weird reaction against abstinence makes a lot of sense in the light of this, I feel. From my Foreign Country perspective, teaching abstinence is pretty much confined to dumb rear end teens needing to be made to feel that it is OK for them to not gently caress as much as their classmates are pretending they do because they've discovered porn, and to not feel pressured to do stuff they don't feel ready for, and abstinence applying to masturbation is just so absurd I'd think it was a joke. I mean, we have ton of idiot stuff, too, but stuff like super weird Chastity father/daughter balls/dances, and going to hell for masturbating is just so far removed from mainstream culture that I forget that it even exists.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 17:33
|
|
|
Grandmother of Five posted:What comes across as a weird reaction against abstinence makes a lot of sense in the light of this, I feel. Yup. It's fine to teach "abstinence is OK. You'll start loving when you're ready. Don't let others make that decision for you. Really you can go your whole life without loving if you want and nothing is wrong with you." In America it's "anything other than abstinence is wrong and bad. If you so much as think about premarital sex you'll get pregnant and contract every STD." Well, not everywhere; some places actually have decent, functional sex education but the religious right pushes their version super duper ultra hard and the redder the state the more likely they are to push abstinence-only. Even in purple to blue states you can get "yeah well condoms exist and work OK but you still shouldn't have sex before marriage." They have their stupid little metaphors like passing a piece of tape around the room to show that the more people that touch it the less it's good at being tape; insisting that the more partners you have the less desirable you are as a partner. We also value virginity to an absurd extent. The other one is that we're told that virginity is a priceless gem that you can only give away once. Once you give it away it's gone and you can never give something so special to anybody ever again so don't give it to somebody unless you're planning on marrying them. It is, of course, utter nonsense.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 17:54
|
|
|
I wasn't taught any of that. That poo poo only happens in the south.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 18:15
|
|
|
I'd be interested in hearing people's experiences with sex ed in the US, but it'd be a boring derail for most other people here, I think. I made an Ask/Tell thread about asking various dumb questions to people living in the states about how it is to live in giant hamburgers, so if anyone feel like they might have something to share there on US sex ed, please head by Ask/Tell & check it out if it'd interest you any.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 18:23
|
|
|
Mu Zeta posted:I wasn't taught any of that. That poo poo only happens in the south. I got taught that in rural PA. Pennsylvania is often described as "Pennsyltucky" or "Pittsburgh and Philadelphia with Alabama in between."
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 18:23
|
|
|
The South, like religion, ruins everything.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 19:22
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:
The religious right doesn't agree on this. Seems like they are split 50/50. I remember my first sex ed was having to read a book by Dr. James Dobson (the focus on the family guy) and it said jacking off was fine and natural, which was a relief to m 13 yo self because I was jacking off pretty relentlessly at the time. Also, I don't think that sex is only for procreating is something most Christians believe. They are super weird about marriage though. The right seems to have somehow gotten even more prude since the 90's though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 19:45
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:I got taught that in rural PA. Pennsylvania is often described as "Pennsyltucky" or "Pittsburgh and Philadelphia with Alabama in between." Every state is like this outside of its biggest cities
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 19:47
|
|
|
Henchman of Santa posted:Every state is like this outside of its biggest cities Yup, in fact about 50 miles south of Chicago you can find people that shoot and eat squirrels on the reg.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 20:11
|
|
|
veni veni veni posted:The religious right doesn't agree on this. Seems like they are split 50/50. I remember my first sex ed was having to read a book by Dr. James Dobson (the focus on the family guy) and it said jacking off was fine and natural, which was a relief to m 13 yo self because I was jacking off pretty relentlessly at the time. Also, I don't think that sex is only for procreating is something most Christians believe. They are super weird about marriage though. Lay members might not always believe those things and you're right in that a majority of them don't but when it comes to hardcore fundies the leadership has been pushing that message something fierce. Some of it anyway and to be honest I'm quite surprised that Dobson is OK with jerking off.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
My 90's Canadian sex ed was really good. I don't know how much was down to the teacher or the official program, probably a lot more of the former because I've heard horror stories of people from small rural towns in the same province as me getting basically deep-south style fire and brimstone (and outright lies) sex-ed. But a few good highlights from what we learned: -Jerking it is good and normal even for ladies but if you don't that's ok too, just do what you want without shame or pressure. -Being gay is ok, experimenting is ok, go for it but be safe and aware of social pressures. -Use a loving condom, here's how you use them, everyone put a condom on this wooden cock. Use one if you don't want to get pregnant, don't buy any bullshit excuses against using them. -Ladies love to cum too, dudes don't forget about her when you're doing it. There's lots of ways to have a good time without P in V though so dudes don't feel like you're a failure if that isn't enough cause you gotta get at that bean. -Mostly just do what you want, have fun, but don't do things or not do things out of guilt or pressure. Don't think you have to do things because your friends are doing things. Sex is connected to a lot of deep emotions so be careful out there everyone and make sure you understand consent and safe sex. And we watched videos about safe sex and consent and mostly focused on the emotional angle. Teens feel forced into things to fit in or keep up with their boasting peers and so on. Breakups and just generally all the emotional poo poo teens deal with related to dating and loving. Yet a few cities away it was: -Condoms have microscopic holes which lets aids through -Don't gently caress you'll ruin your life you sluts Here is a shock video on STD's and how your life will be ruined if you ever have sex out of wedlock.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
My 90s teacher told us not do lick assholes because it's not a good time. We also had many people with AIDS come talk in our classes about how living with HIV or AIDS really sucks but it's possible. Scared the bejeezus out of me for like 4 years straight.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
Mu Zeta posted:My 90s teacher told us not do lick assholes because it's not a good time. We also had many people with AIDS come talk in our classes about how living with HIV or AIDS really sucks but it's possible. Scared the bejeezus out of me for like 4 years straight. So what made you decide "actually I think licking assholes might be a good time" after four years?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 20:45
|
|
|
Jerry Cotton posted:So what made you decide "actually I think licking assholes might be a good time" after four years? Experience, and wisdom.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
Jerry Cotton posted:So what made you decide "actually I think licking assholes might be a good time" after four years? Went to a Martin Ssempa sermon.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 20:57
|
|
|
Mu Zeta posted:I wasn't taught any of that. That poo poo only happens in the south. No, that poo poo happens in poorer areas of the United States, Canada, and Mexico, and does not happen in cities and well-to-do districts. Guaran-funcking-tee it happens more in Watertown, NY than in Birmingham, Pensacola, or Dallas. Triple guarantee it happens more in North Dakota than in Atlanta. It happens in east Oregon but not in Portland or Eugene. Huh. vintagepurple has a new favorite as of 23:24 on Mar 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 23:18
|
|
|
Did you choose Watertown at random? because I can probably confirm.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 23:49
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:My 90's Canadian sex ed was really good. I don't know how much was down to the teacher or the official program, probably a lot more of the former because I've heard horror stories of people from small rural towns in the same province as me getting basically deep-south style fire and brimstone (and outright lies) sex-ed. these were the ones we had at our early 00s Canadian sex ed class in a place on the edge of a rural area and a small town; except for a major section on consent, peer pressure, recognizing partner abuse, general advice about healthy relationships, etc it was extremely clinical to the point of knowing both details about regular and pregnant hormone cycles in women to being able to categorically recognize physical symptoms of an STI and knowing which protective methods, if any, are effective against them so teens could protect themselves if they see something suspicious; iirc the major point of the course was that the best way to protect yourself from pregnancy, infection, emotional/physical abuse, etc, was to stick to partners and contraceptive methods you know you can trust because there's a lot of ways to make a brutal, haunting mistake if you aren't picky about the people you have sex with, the quality of the relationship, obtaining explicit, sober consent or the contraceptive methods you use - it was pretty dry and didn't really say anything about the morality of any particular sex act except for pointing out abusive situations, i'm sure some differences like that come down to the individual personality of the teacher
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 00:15
|
|
|
hard counter and Grandmother of Five are a couple of the best posters in this thread. That's my opinion, and if it's unpopular, y'all are dumb.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 00:17
|
|
|
vintagepurple posted:No, that poo poo happens in poorer areas of the United States, Canada, and Mexico, and does not happen in cities and well-to-do districts. Guaran-funcking-tee it happens more in Watertown, NY than in Birmingham, Pensacola, or Dallas. Triple guarantee it happens more in North Dakota than in Atlanta. It happens in east Oregon but not in Portland or Eugene. Huh. As someone who has always lived in North Dakota I don't remember my sex ed being all that bad. And I certainly wasn't in one of the largest cities. But I do agree with you in that poor people are at fault. Poors are the worst.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 01:58
|
|
|
Wallace and Grommet isn't entertaining or funny it's just kind of irritating and the main dudes rictus grin creeps me out. I never understood even as a kid how it was so popular with people, it always felt like it was made for people with a completely different thought pattern than mine
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 03:28
|
|
|
Henchman of Santa posted:Incel is short for involuntarily celibate. You might be thinking of volcels and men going their own way, who claim abstinence by choice but really just resent women. I thought most mgtow were fine with loving women just not with being in relationships or treating them like human beings
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 03:32
|
|
|
Aesop Poprock posted:I thought most mgtow were fine with loving women just not with being in relationships or treating them like human beings It depends. IIRC a lot of them want to remove themselves from any female company
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 03:33
|
|
|
My American international school just had mind-numbingly dry and clinical sex ed. For some reason, the only thing I really remember is a video with very British woman narrating, "A young woman may wish to touch her genitals, because it feels good." I guess the necessity of including the second part struck me as goofy. Also it's cool being a lady 'cause my tremendously low sex drive won't destroy my body. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 04:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 15:43 |
|
|
Aesop Poprock posted:Wallace and Grommet isn't entertaining or funny it's just kind of irritating and the main dudes rictus grin creeps me out. I never understood even as a kid how it was so popular with people, it always felt like it was made for people with a completely different thought pattern than mine A Grand Day Out is good. The rest are mediocre to poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2017 04:36
|
|
