Sex strike

[Enoch07]

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.

It's not just men making the decisions, at least in the U.S. Maybe its that way in whatever backwater country you're from.

Here: In year of record midterm turnout, women continued to vote at higher rates than men

More women in the U.S vote than men. So it's not only men making these decisions. You do realize there is pro-life women right? Not all women are pro-choice.

 

[ChristineM]

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!

WTF??? Sheesh? How to state the blindingly obvious and claim victory, you must be far right conservative fun denier.

I made my points clear, probably with the same view of most people on here, sex is fun, sex is for reproduction. Fun far outweighs the representative aspect in time spent.

 

[ChristineM]

It's not just men making the decisions, at least in the U.S. Maybe its that way in whatever backwater country you're from.

Here: In year of record midterm turnout, women continued to vote at higher rates than men

More women in the U.S vote than men. So it's not only men making these decisions. You do realize there is pro-life women right? Not all women are pro-choice.

Womans body, womans decision what to do with that body. ,,NOT yours.

Backwater? More conservative ignorance, as expected of course. Fyi, without my backwater country america wouldn't exist so i suggest you get over your condiscending bullpoop

 

[Enoch07]

How to state the blindingly obvious and claim victory, you must be far right conservative fun denier.

Nope, center-left fact purveyor.

Your anxiety level is too high. You should go get ya some lovin' and relax a bit.

 

[Enoch07]

Womans body, womans decision what to do with that body. ,,NOT yours.

What a non-sensical response. I never suggested otherwise.

 

[ChristineM]

Nope, center-left fact purveyor.

Your anxiety level is too high. You should go get ya some lovin' and relax a bit.

American center left is far right by world standards

Just had some thanks, how about you... Ever?

 

[ChristineM]

What a non-sensical response. I never suggested otherwise.

It was a valid response to you condescending post,

 

[Enoch07]

American center left is far right by world standards

No wonder the world has gone to p00p!

 

[ChristineM]

No wonder the world has gone to p00p!

Not really, over the years america has tried to impose its will but fails every time.

And consider america is just 5% of the population. Not like you have a majority.

 

[Enoch07]

Not really, over the years america has tried to impose its will but fails every time.

And consider america is just 5% of the population. Not like you have a majority.

I don't know what that has to do with a sex strike in the U.S. but ok. I think you might be overreacting a bit there.

Anyways this is getting off topic so might as well end it here. Tschuss

 

[Polymath257]

I won't argue against that. And you're in a loving committed relationship so by all means continue as is.

Are you saying that committed, loving relationships should remain sexless if the people don't want children? What is there's an 'oops' and that would destroy the relationship?

 

[ChristineM]

I don't know what that has to do with a sex strike in the U.S. but ok. I think you might be overreacting a bit there.

Anyways this is getting off topic so might as well end it here. Tschuss

You began the mockery of 95% of the world, sorry of you dont like comeback

 

[Revoltingest]

Science denying liberals...sheesh!

I haven't noticed any science denial.
But I take issue with your using it to determine
morality, ie, that sex is strictly for reproduction.

 

[Enoch07]

Are you saying that committed, loving relationships should remain sexless if the people don't want children?

No

But let's say you are extremely poor and cannot afford to have/raise a child. Then perhaps avoiding penetrative sex is in your best interest. Yes?

I would want to avoid penetration at all cost in this situation because I don't want my wife to have to make the decision to abort or not.

Then after the tough period ends and we got our ducks in a row, life can return to normal and take our chances with regular contraceptives. And if a pregnancy does occur there, well then we have some discussion about what to do.

What is there's an 'oops' and that would destroy the relationship?

By "oops" do you mean an accidental pregnancy? I'll assume so.

If an "oops" destroys the relationship. Then it wasn't that strong to begin with.

If by "oops" you mean infidelity. The same applies. If they don't love you enough to go without sex, the relationship is false to begin with.

A strong relationship has a bond that goes beyond sex. That is the foundation to build upon, a strong friendship, trust, love, honor, respect, compromise, and for me faith.

So going back to you and how high a value you place on sex. I want to ask a hypothetical question if I may. Considering how high a value you say sex has.

If your wife/partner became disabled/mutilated or could no longer engage in sex for whatever reason. Is that a deal breaker for you? God forbid that ever happen. But would you stay with them for the rest of your life, forced to be without sex? Would you stay with them and just have sex outside the marriage? Or would you leave them behind, and find a new partner? (No judgment from me regardless of your answer)

If it was me in that situation. I would stay with her and live without sexual contact from anyone else, just Mary Palm and her 5 little friends if ya catch my drift. Because if I have decided to marry someone then I its because i love them, not for the sex, the sex is just a cherry on top, a bonus prize. The love shared is the grand prize.

 

[Polymath257]

So going back to you and how high a value you place on sex. I want to ask a hypothetical question if I may. Considering how high a value you say sex has.

If your wife/partner became disabled/mutilated or could no longer engage in sex for whatever reason. Is that a deal breaker for you? God forbid that ever happen. But would you stay with them for the rest of your life, forced to be without sex? Would you stay with them and just have sex outside the marriage? Or would you leave them behind, and find a new partner? (No judgment from me regardless of your answer)

Well, my wife and I have discussed this (we like to discuss possible futures). If my wife became severely disabled, I would masturbate (as we both do now), stay with her, and find someone else to have sex with. But then, we don't assume monogamy in our marriage. In fact, both of us have other partners currently.

If it was me in that situation. I would stay with her and live without sexual contact from anyone else, just Mary Palm and her 5 little friends if ya catch my drift. Because if I have decided to marry someone then I its because i love them, not for the sex, the sex is just a cherry on top, a bonus prize. The love shared is the grand prize.

OK, your choice.

 

[Enoch07]

morality, ie, that sex is strictly for reproduction.

I never said that.

All I said was the reason sex exist is to reproduce.

Fun is a byproduct, therefore the secondary purpose.

Now most people do have sex more for fun than reproduction. I never denied that or said it shouldn't be so.

But it does not negate the biological fact that sex is for reproduction, not fun.

 

[Polymath257]

Suppose that by eating pineapple, you expose yourself to the possibility that someone will attach themselves to your body, using your blood to feed them. Suppose also that you really like to eat pineapple. And suppose that if someone attches themselves to you in this way, they will die if you remove them. Suppose also that you can also eat oranges along with the pineapple and that reduces the chance that someone will attach themselves to you, but does not eliminate it.

1. Do you avoid eating pineapple?
2. Do you eat pineapple and also eat oranges?
3. Do you have the right to remove someone who attaches themselves to you? Even if they will die if you do?

 

[Revoltingest]

I never said that.

All I said was the reason sex exist is to reproduce.

Fun is a byproduct, therefore the secondary purpose.

Now most people do have sex more for fun than reproduction. I never denied that or said it shouldn't be so.

But it does not negate the biological fact that sex is for reproduction, not fun.

From the OP, you did say.....
"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! You shouldn't be having sex with anyone, your not prepared to have a child with!
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 underlined the portions which treat sex for fun as immoral.

 

[Enoch07]

Well, my wife and I have discussed this (we like to discuss possible futures). If my wife became severely disabled, I would masturbate (as we both do now), stay with her, and find someone else to have sex with. But then, we don't assume monogamy in our marriage. In fact, both of us have other partners currently.

Fair enough, I will hold to my promise.

That answer also answers my next few questions I had, so I don't need to ask now.

 

[ChristineM]

But let's say you are extremely poor and cannot afford to have/raise a child. Then perhaps avoiding penetrative sex is in your best interest.

Throughout history extremely poor families have had children, think yourself lucky they have, the human race has survived.

In many cases, a poor family has children to survive, the child growing to become a productive member of the family is the only method of survival. It also employes the human need to pass on their genes to future generations?

Remember, not all people live in the affluent west.