Sure. I concede, my response misses that fact, though not intentionally. Sex is more the means by which those other things are sought, but sexual gratification still exists as part of the act.Well, probably a little about the sex.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Sex strike
- Thread starter Enoch07
- Start date
Yeah. My focus on the overwhelming negative drivers behind rape was not intended to marginalize the sexual nature of the act. Still, the motivation is not reproduction, communication or consideration of the other party.
Is that true? I have not heard that. It may mean that some rapists are more focused on their own pleasure over the other driving forces and achieving it alone is satisfactory.
If you have a link, I would be interested in seeing a study or two.
As a Christian, I can't do but applaud Georgia governor's decision...
After all....abortion could be avoided in so many ways.
Birth control is very effective. Some women are scared to take the pill...but it's just estradiol...nothing more.
I have to take 3 pills of estradiol every day ...of course collateral effects like nausea are inappetence are frequent..but a bit of sacrifice is necessary.
Women don't like sacrifice and abortion is not a contraceptive.
After all....abortion could be avoided in so many ways.
Birth control is very effective. Some women are scared to take the pill...but it's just estradiol...nothing more.
I have to take 3 pills of estradiol every day ...of course collateral effects like nausea are inappetence are frequent..but a bit of sacrifice is necessary.
Women don't like sacrifice and abortion is not a contraceptive.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
There are quite a few, but this one seemed legit:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...evidence-mounts-more-porn-less-sexual-assault
Thanks for that. I'll check it out.
Skwim
Veteran Member
So, what percentage of sexual encounters do you think people have just to make a baby? I couldn't find any reliable stats, but am willing to bet it's far less than 1%.
.
Last edited:
Alyssa Milano's sex strike is misguided. Here's what actually might work (opinion) - CNN
Hmmmm so she's encouraging women to not have sex to negate the risk of pregnancy?
Congratulations, you just backdoored your way into sexual morality!
I hope all liberal women join Alyssa Milano and support her sex strike. She might make moral people out of pro-choice supporters after all!
I fully support the new liberal selective breeding program, please continue.
Its irrelevant.
Could be 0% could be 100% and either way it doesn't change the fact the biological reason we have sexual organs and reproductive systems is to reproduce.
Thanks to the chemicals released during and after sex this encourages us to have more sex to increase the chance of reproduction.
Anyone remember the Junior Anti-Sex League from 1984? Is this what it's coming to?
An excerpt:
Sexual intercourse was to be looked on as a slightly disgusting minor operation, like having an enema. This again was never put into plain words, but in an indirect way it was rubbed into every Party member from childhood onwards. There were even organizations such as the Junior Anti-Sex League, which advocated complete celibacy for both sexes. All children were to be begotten by artificial insemination (ARTSEM, it was called in Newspeak) and brought up in public institutions. This, Winston was aware, was not meant altogether seriously, but somehow it fitted in with the general ideology of the Party. The Party was trying to kill the sex instinct, or, if it could not be killed, then to distort it and dirty it. He did not know why this was so, but it seemed natural that it should be so. And as far as the women were concerned, the Party’s efforts were largely successful.
An excerpt:
Sexual intercourse was to be looked on as a slightly disgusting minor operation, like having an enema. This again was never put into plain words, but in an indirect way it was rubbed into every Party member from childhood onwards. There were even organizations such as the Junior Anti-Sex League, which advocated complete celibacy for both sexes. All children were to be begotten by artificial insemination (ARTSEM, it was called in Newspeak) and brought up in public institutions. This, Winston was aware, was not meant altogether seriously, but somehow it fitted in with the general ideology of the Party. The Party was trying to kill the sex instinct, or, if it could not be killed, then to distort it and dirty it. He did not know why this was so, but it seemed natural that it should be so. And as far as the women were concerned, the Party’s efforts were largely successful.
I've seen radical feminist groups advocate for a system as such.
All the more reason for reasonable people to practice self discipline. So that they can't take control of their own sexual power instead of letting others have that power over them.
I haven't seen any radical feminist groups advocating for artificial insemination only and bringing children up in institutions. {This doesn't rule out any whacked-out individuals though. I'm specifically looking for groups/organizations here.} Do you have any sources? I'd like to take a gander at them. Thanks.
Twitter, I can't link because I deleted my Twitter. But yeah it's some scary stuff. Having hypothetical conversations about castrating men to use as manual slave labor, but keep the ones they saw fit as specimens to be caged and harvested for semen for artificial insemination. I'm not afraid of anything like this ever happening, but it is a giant red flag, from a psychological point of view, that people would even entertain the idea. Even if only on a hypothetical level considering how detailed they went into it.
Altfish
Veteran Member
Most contraceptives are reliable. We have two children, as planned, I can assure you my wife and I had sex more than twice.Because heterosexual sex has a risk of pregnancy. As a responsible adult you need to acknowledge and accept this risk everytime you have sex.
I won't argue against that. And you're in a loving committed relationship so by all means continue as is.
Altfish
Veteran Member
How do you know that?
LOL! It sounds like something from a post-apocalyptic sci-fi book--probably written by someone playing on Freudean castration anxiety.
Tell ya what, you have sex for reproduction, i will have sex because i enjoy sex. Is that fair enough?
A mans opinion of a womans body is superficial, that body belongs to the woman in the same way a mans body belongs to the man.
Uhmm ok. I never said you shouldn't enjoy sex. But regardless it doesn't change the fact that your body was created from the act of sex, to grow, and then create another person, to grow, and create another person etc.
This is the reason for sex. Fun is a cherry on top to encourage you to have lots of sex to increase the chance of pregnancy. This is not hyperbole. This is a biological fact.
Science denying liberals...sheesh!