Does sex have a purpose?

[civilcynic]

That's why there is so much rape! Because sense gratification is made the primary purpose for sex.

What??!! Please provide me with some factual evidence that supports this claim.

Rape is not about sex...it is an act of violence and the resultant gratification a rapist gets is from his ability to control, humiliate, degradate his victim.

 

[Feathers in Hair]

I'm missing the boat? It's funny that you said that. I'm actually on the boat right now, literally...

Oh, dear. I hope you mean a literal boat, because if you're on the boat of this post... *shivers*

This is hilarious. You are assuming that God desires anything for Himself Personally,

*whispers* Or Herself. Which I only mention because it is a relevent point to this thread.

Beyond that, sex life is unimportant. Just because procreation is the main intent does not mean that God wants people to have more children than they can handle.

I agree that sex life is unimportant, especially when compared to the greater bonds that can be forged between humans, but I don't think anyone is in a position to judge what other peoples' views are on the topic.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

Please explain to me what is "spiritual".

Paraprakrti -

I truly don't mean to insult you, but you must be the most soulless person I've heard from in a long time. One question - is it possible for people that don't hold the same values as you to possibly have a legitimate point? Do you understand the concept of "room for reasonable minds to differ" or "agree to disagree"? Wow! :bonk:

A note to Babset -
I must say that I admire your reply earlier in this thread - it made me wish I was a lesbian. Then again, I guess I've always wished that.

TVOR

 

[The Voice of Reason]

I also wanted to go on record stating that, whatever it's purpose, I am in favor of sex. :jam:

TVOR

 

[Paraprakrti]

What??!! Please provide me with some factual evidence that supports this claim.

Rape is not about sex...it is an act of violence and the resultant gratification a rapist gets is from his ability to control, humiliate, degradate his victim.

Nonsense. The ability to control, humiliate and degradate his victim is gratification added to the orgasm. Also, these things you mention are also a form of sense gratification.
Nevertheless, your reply has nothing to do with the point I was trying to make.

Because sense gratification is the main purpose of sex we have sexual imagery being used all over the place. Now because of this the idea to rape has surfaced more. I am not saying that because of this rape is justified, I am only saying that if there wasn't so much sex being used to promote and sell things there would be less rapes going on. Rape is a resultant gratification of a loose, care-free, sexual society. This is how sense gratification being put at the forefront of sex life results in more rapist activity. This is plain and simple, 'if it was a snake it would have bitten you', evidence.

 

[Paraprakrti]

Oh, dear. I hope you mean a literal boat, because if you're on the boat of this post... *shivers*

I mean both.

*whispers* Or Herself. Which I only mention because it is a relevent point to this thread.

No, it is not relevant to this thread. Whether God is referred to as He or She makes no difference to the transcendental qualities of God. There was a purpose for me mentioning God that had to do with this thread topic. Furthermore, to debate gender qualities is irrelevant.

I agree that sex life is unimportant, especially when compared to the greater bonds that can be forged between humans, but I don't think anyone is in a position to judge what other peoples' views are on the topic.

You don't think that anyone is in a position to judge what other peoples' views are on the topic, and that is your judgement of "anyone's position".

My judgement is not going to alter anyone's views unless it sparks something in them that they identify with in some way. My only advice is to not sacrifice your intelligence to the propensity for sexual gratification.

 

[Paraprakrti]

Paraprakrti -

I truly don't mean to insult you, but you must be the most soulless person I've heard from in a long time. One question - is it possible for people that don't hold the same values as you to possibly have a legitimate point? Do you understand the concept of "room for reasonable minds to differ" or "agree to disagree"? Wow! :bonk:

I am only soulless to you because I am not telling you what you want to hear. The fact is, I am "soulless" because I promote the idea that there is something transcendental to sexual pleasure. I am "soulless" because I am explaining how the soul itself is transcendental to material sense gratification. This makes me soulless. While you are of course not soulless at all. You with your care-free, let's tell everyone what's pleasing to their rotting corpse gratifying propensities, love of the "soul", hippie philosophy.

I value intelligence over material indulgement. If anyone else here values material indulgement over intelligence then they are wasting their time posting in this thread. They should be finding something to rub their genitals on.

If I was truly soulless I would feed into your propensity for sexual pleasure.

 

[Feathers in Hair]

You don't think that anyone is in a position to judge what other peoples' views are on the topic, and that is your judgement of "anyone's position".

Exactly! Thank you for understanding! :jam:

 

[Bastet]

I am only soulless to you because I am not telling you what you want to hear. The fact is, I am "soulless" because I promote the idea that there is something transcendental to sexual pleasure. I am "soulless" because I am explaining how the soul itself is transcendental to material sense gratification. This makes me soulless. While you are of course not soulless at all. You with your care-free, let's tell everyone what's pleasing to their rotting corpse gratifying propensities, love of the "soul", hippie philosophy.

Hmm, not only soulless, but arrogant too.

I value intelligence over material indulgement. If anyone else here values material indulgement over intelligence then they are wasting their time posting in this thread. They should be finding something to rub their genitals on.

I don't have to choose between using, sharing, or expanding my intelligence, and finding something to rub my genitals on - I'm a woman, I can do more than one thing at once, and do them both well.

 

[Feathers in Hair]

Hmm, not only soulless, but arrogant too.

Don't you just dislike that combination?

I, and my judgemental self, do.

 

[civilcynic]

Nonsense. The ability to control, humiliate and degradate his victim is gratification added to the orgasm. Also, these things you mention are also a form of sense gratification.
Nevertheless, your reply has nothing to do with the point I was trying to make.

I am still waiting for the evidence to support your claims. Based on your statement, there should be no rape at all in countries which have strict moral and religious codes on sexuality. Are you suggesting that places like Afghanistan under the Taliban was virtually rape free?

My response has everything to do with your comments. This thread is about the purpose of sex and rape is not sex...it is an assault that uses sex as a vehicle for victimizing another human being. Do you think that the police officers in NY who sodomized a Haitian immigrant a fews ago, did so for sexual gratification or was it just sadism? Do you think that the stories about invading soldiers raping men meant that the soldiers were all homosexuals and were raping for sexual gratification or was it a means to demonstrate power and control through humiliation?

Frankly, I don't care what your views are about the purpose of sex but I do find your attempts to link the purpose of sex and the crime of rape extremely offensive. Unfortunately, debating this subject with you is like stringing beads without a Knot on the other end.........besides, I get no sense gratification doing it

 

[The Voice of Reason]

I am only soulless to you because I am not telling you what you want to hear. The fact is, I am "soulless" because I promote the idea that there is something transcendental to sexual pleasure. I am "soulless" because I am explaining how the soul itself is transcendental to material sense gratification. This makes me soulless. While you are of course not soulless at all. You with your care-free, let's tell everyone what's pleasing to their rotting corpse gratifying propensities, love of the "soul", hippie philosophy.

I value intelligence over material indulgement. If anyone else here values material indulgement over intelligence then they are wasting their time posting in this thread. They should be finding something to rub their genitals on.

Pap,
No, I'm pretty sure you're soulless because you would deny yourself (and others) the pleasures that come with life. You must be about a 9 on the "Tension Scale". The fact that you choose to alienate people with your "my way or the highway" attitude, simply makes you a pompous jerk. If you feel that I am being judgemental or condescending, I am. If you insist on telling others how wrong they are because they don't agree with you, I'll be more than happy to carry the banner in telling you how ignorant that makes you look. The vast majority of posters on here are to polite to take the low road - I am not. I prefer to debate a position on its rational value, but if you want to turn this into something else, I'm comfortable with that as well. As long as the moderators don't mind, I'll stoop as low as you would like.

As far as choosing intelligence over material indulgement, at this point I'd say you are woefully short in both categories. Rub your genitals on that (if you can find them).

Lastly, I'm probably as far from a hippie as you are (and I personally have nothing against hippies - whatever you choose for that label to mean). I learned as a child that bigotry is not a good thing. But, hey, don't let the chance to slander someone pass you by. Especially not when you can do it while claiming the moral high ground. You ol' stuffed shirt, you.

TVOR

 

[Sunstone]

Paraprakrti, your arguments might or might not have merit in and of themselves, but your attitude that (1) you are the only one who knows anything about life (and sex), and (2) that anyone who disagrees with you is a fool or worse has made your attitude more the topic of this thread than your arguments. Can you see that?

Perhaps you should ask yourself whether it's more important to you to get your point about sexuality across --- or more important to convey your belief that you possess a certain superiority of mind lacking in others.

 

[Sunstone]

Dawn can be beautiful. I was watching the dawn this morning, and felt the crispness of the fall air in my nostrils as beauty, and saw the colors in the sky as beauty, and heard the birdsong as beauty. But none of that beauty seemed to me functional. None of it had anything to do wth food, clothing, or shelter. None of it had anything to do with making a living, nor with anything else that I could think of as functional. The beauty of the dawn this morning was in some sense pointless. And I got to thinking about this thread: "Are there ways in which sex, too, is pointless? Very beautiful, but very pointless, too?"

 

[The Voice of Reason]

Sunstone -

You may be on to something here. Your reference to food, shelter, and clothing may hold the key. I'm going to think about that for a little bit. Maybe anything (and everything) that doesn't address one of the three basic needs of man is superfluous - beautiful or hideous, but still superfluous. Without thinking it through yet, I would put sex into this category, and the implication that it then has no "purpose".
I want to reiterate my position from an earlier post - I'm still in favor of sex - regardless of its purpose (or non-purpose).
TVOR

 

[Paraprakrti]

Hmm, not only soulless, but arrogant too.

I am only seen arrogant because you are getting emotional about this. I promote the soul and yet I am labeled soulless. You simply do not like what I am saying. But try to be reasonable beyond the 'if it feels good, do it' philosophy.

I don't have to choose between using, sharing, or expanding my intelligence, and finding something to rub my genitals on - I'm a woman, I can do more than one thing at once, and do them both well.

Why do you waste intelligence defending the propensity for sexual gratification? I am sure you could be applying your intelligence in more important departments.

 

[Sunstone]

Without thinking it through yet, I would put sex into this category, and the implication that it then has no "purpose".

Is it possible, Voice, that sex can both have purpose and no purpose? On the face of it, that sounds like an impossible contradiction. But maybe the contradiction is merely semantic. In my experience, it has seemed that sex at times transcends purpose. And, like sex, beauty might be something that at times transcends purpose. At any rate, I know that some of the best sex I've had has felt pointless, purposeless. From a subjective standpoint, there was no more of an purpose or point to it than there is a point or purpose for the sunrise to be beautiful.

 

[Mister Emu]

Purpose of sex is procreation.

They are called reproductive organs for a reason, and it wasn't a spontaneous burst of words.

Sex is pleasurable so that we are more inclined to engage in the act, thus procreating more, thus ensuring human survival(If sex was excruciatingly(spelling) painful how many would have it?)

Also just because something is used in a certain manner does not mean that the manner is the intended purpose(whether the purpose comes from a creator or evolution). How society feels at a certain point about sex does not change that the entire reason we were created with/evolved reproductive organs is the continuation of the species.

..........

 

[Feathers in Hair]

Frankly, I don't care what your views are about the purpose of sex but I do find your attempts to link the purpose of sex and the crime of rape extremely offensive.

I'll agree with civilcynic. I'd tried debating in hopes of understanding where you were coming from, Paraprakrti, but the way you phrase your arguments and the way you condescend to those who disagree with you makes it difficult to continue to want to try to understand. Sunstone put it wonderfully-
"Perhaps you should ask yourself whether it's more important to you to get your point about sexuality across --- or more important to convey your belief that you possess a certain superiority of mind lacking in others." At this point, you can either continue to attempt to effectively argue what you believe to be true, or you can simply say "Me smart, you 'emotional' peons." If you do both, though, I doubt anyone will continue to try to understand you.

 

[Ceridwen018]

Paraprakrti,

I am only seen arrogant because you are getting emotional about this. I promote the soul and yet I am labeled soulless. You simply do not like what I am saying. But try to be reasonable beyond the 'if it feels good, do it' philosophy.

Listen, if you're 'soulless' it's only because souls don't exist....(sorry, I just had to!)

Seriously though--I'm not hearing anyone preach 'if it feels good, do it.' I think we all pretty much agree that sex is much much more than a physical act. What we don't agree with, is that sex is primarily for procreation.

Mister Emu,

How society feels at a certain point about sex does not change that the entire reason we were created with/evolved reproductive organs is the continuation of the species.

But we're not talking about WHY we evolved reproductive organs. We're talking about what we think of them in present terms. For cavemen, procreation was the primary use of sex, and a good thing too, or we might not be here. Today, however, we aren't struggling to populate the earth. It is okay to have sex without the intention of having children.

VOR,

You must be about a 9 on the "Tension Scale".

"The Burbs"! I love it!