Would necrophilia be okay under this circumstance?

[Mister Silver]

Not just "anything" can be done to a dead body though.

I respectfully disagree, but I'm going to graciously bow out at this point.

 

[Jesster]

I respectfully disagree, but I'm going to graciously bow out at this point.

Sure, no problem. I think we've both stated our stances and answered the poll. It's not like swatting each other over it is going to accomplish anything.

 

[Spiderman]

Not just "anything" can be done to a dead body though. We have laws saying what those limits are in order to protect people. Also, donating to science is helping society, so I see nothing wrong with that at all.

What if it was legal to help out someone you cherished in that way.... Let's say there's a guy that is just everything to you, he's everything you could ask for, only he's got one flaw, he's obsessed with necrophilia and he's had to go his whole life never being able to act out his sexuality...

Wouldn't it be charitable to give him the opportunity to act out the sexuality he's always been frustrated with?

 

[Spiderman]

I voted Yes to the question in the poll; not to the title of the thread.

"If legal under consent, would you say there was anything disordered with necrophilia?"

It's still ****ed up even if the person you're going to have sex with consents before they die.

By which authority do you go by when you make that judgement?

Are you the inerrant authority that determines whether somebody can act out on their sexuality?

If a person has a sexuality, should they have to go their whole life never acting out on it, even when their partner is totally okay with it?

Why should there be laws that say a person can't act out the sexuality they're given, if their partner or spouse is okay with it?

 

[Jesster]

What if it was legal to help out someone you cherished in that way.... Let's say there's a guy that is just everything to you, he's everything you could ask for, only he's got one flaw, he's obsessed with necrophilia and he's had to go his whole life never being able to act out his sexuality...

Wouldn't it be charitable to give him the opportunity to act out the sexuality he's always been frustrated with?

This does not negate my issue with being unable to properly give consent, so it's a red herring in regards to my argument.

 

[Spiderman]

I even just looked this up to be sure. At least in the USA, a contract cannot hold someone to sexual acts. You can always back out of sex no matter what, making a contract pointless.

But people can decide what they want to be done with their dead body... You can sign a contract to be kept in the freezer and legally mutilated or dismembered... How is it not an act of charity to let your corpse be owned by your beloved spouse for their delight, satisfaction, and physical and spiritual satiation?

Isn't that a way of still making love to them after you're dead... What if somebody wanted to practice a deeper form of intimacy with you by eating your flesh? Let's say you loved absolutely everything about this guy, but he had one flaw only, and that was that he always dreamed about eating you. If it was legal, could you really say there was something intrinsically wrong with satisfying your spouse's sexuality?

Some people like to bite their Partners, what's wrong with taking it a step further and eating their Partner as a form of Communion and becoming one flesh?

What is the rationale behind saying S&M is not disordered, but cannibalism and making love to your deceased loved one is?

 

[Spiderman]

This does not negate my issue with being unable to properly give consent, so it's a red herring in regards to my argument.

But a person gives consent for their corpse to be dissected... They can't give the consent while the dissecting is going on... But their consent still counts.

I'm not so sure how it's all of a sudden wrong because they gave the consent before they died... Why can't a person decide what happens to their corpse?

 

[Jesster]

But a person gives consent for their corpse to be dissected... They can't give the consent while the dissecting is going on... But their consent still counts.

I'm not so sure how it's all of a sudden wrong because they gave the consent before they died... Why can't a person decide what happens to their corpse?

Because sex can't be contractual. Consent has to be a constant thing at the start of sex and throughout the act. I've stated this already. An unconscious person cannot give consent. A person in a vegetative state cannot give consent. A corpse cannot give consent. Etc.

I'm going to "graciously bow out" as Silver put it because I feel like I'm treading water here.

 

[Spiderman]

Because sex can't be contractual. Consent has to be a constant thing at the start of sex and throughout the act. I've stated this already. An unconscious person cannot give consent. A person in a vegetative state cannot give consent. A corpse cannot give consent. Etc.

I'm going to "graciously bow out" as Silver put it because I feel like I'm treading water here.

Okay, I'm sorry for making you repeat yourself...

I was just trying to get to an explanation as to why sex cannot be contractual... But I thank you for your thoughtful answers and respect your decision to bow out

 

[Koldo]

Because sex can't be contractual. Consent has to be a constant thing at the start of sex and throughout the act. I've stated this already. An unconscious person cannot give consent. A person in a vegetative state cannot give consent. A corpse cannot give consent. Etc.

I'm going to "graciously bow out" as Silver put it because I feel like I'm treading water here.

This is as arbitrary as it can get on your part. How can donating your organs not require consent through the act then ?
It's a fairly more invasive action.

 

[Jesster]

This is as arbitrary as it can get on your part. How can donating your organs not require consent through the act then ?
It's a fairly more invasive action.

Then all you are going to do is convince me that donating organs isn't okay either. You won't get me to budge on sexual consent. The other side topics aren't why I'm here anyway. I'm done arguing now though because of what I stated in my last post.

 

[Koldo]

So let's say the law permitted it, if a person left in their will that they wanted their partner to have sex with, dismember, mutilate, or eat their corpse after they died, would you see that as wrong?

After all, it is consensual...

I personally would want my partner to keep my severed skull... The Catholic Church does that sort of thing and it's considered sacred relics.

Necromancer's would argue that such a practice can better help a person commune with the person on the other side (keeping their relics)...

I sort of wish I had a girlfriend that wanted to hack me into pieces and distribute my bones to people... And in some countries the church legally does that...so, should that be legal?

If my partner wanted to make love to my corpse or practice cannibalism, I would personally find that lovely and Charming... Am I sick and disordered for feeling that way? In your opinion?

Thank you for your feedback and I hope you didn't find this disturbing... That honestly was not my intent... I've put a lot of thought into how I want to be treated after death.
View attachment 19069

If it is consensual, I wouldn't have a problem with it in principle.
However, I would still find it a disturbing practice. What kind of person would cut his/her loved one's body into pieces, and even eat it ?
It certainly sounds like a mental disorder is involved.

 

[Spiderman]

If it is consensual, I wouldn't have a problem with it in principle.
However, I would still find it a disturbing practice. What kind of person would cut his/her loved one's body into pieces, and even eat it ?
It certainly sounds like a mental disorder is involved.

There are cultures where that is part of the grieving process is to eat your loved one.... Perhaps for some people, part of the grieving process would be to make love to their loved one one last time

 

[Spiderman]

Singular accounts of necrophilia in history are sporadic, though written records suggest the practice was present within Ancient Egypt. Herodotus writes in The Histories that, to discourage intercourse with a corpse, ancient Egyptians left deceased beautiful women to decay for "three or four days" before giving them to the embalmers.[3][4][5] Herodotus also alluded to suggestions that Greek tyrant Periander had defiled the corpse of his wife, employing a metaphor: "Periander baked his bread in a cold oven."[6] Acts of necrophilia are depicted on ceramics from the Moche culture, which reigned in northern Peru from the first to eighth century CE.[7] A common theme in these artifacts is the masturbation of a male skeleton by a living woman.[8] Hittite law from the 16th century BC through to the 13th century BC explicitly permitted sex with the dead.[9]
Necrophilia - Wikipedia

 

[Spiderman]

Wikipedia:
Rosman and Resnick (1989) reviewed information from 34 cases of necrophilia describing the individuals' motivations for their behaviors: these individuals reported the desire to possess a non-resisting and non-rejecting partner (68%), reunions with a romantic partner (21%), sexual attraction to corpses (15%), comfort or overcoming feelings of isolation (15%), or seeking self-esteem

It's just sad that some people are afflicted with a sexuality that they can never act out on... It's really not their fault... Just like a person doesn't choose whether they're homosexual or heterosexual, a person doesn't choose to be a necrophiliac

 

[Spiderman]

Then all you are going to do is convince me that donating organs isn't okay either. You won't get me to budge on sexual consent. The other side topics aren't why I'm here anyway. I'm done arguing now though because of what I stated in my last post.

I respect your decision. Thank you for your feedback. Sorry if I irritated you

 

[David1967]

NO

I second that. No!!

 

[Spiderman]

I second that. No!!

I was just trying to find out if there's a sexuality that we can all agree is intrinsically wrong, even if it is an agreement between two consenting adults

 

[David1967]

What if it was legal to help out someone you cherished in that way.... Let's say there's a guy that is just everything to you, he's everything you could ask for, only he's got one flaw, he's obsessed with necrophilia and he's had to go his whole life never being able to act out his sexuality...

Wouldn't it be charitable to give him the opportunity to act out the sexuality he's always been frustrated with?

No. But it would be charitable to get him some psychiatric help to treat him for obsessing over such a thing.

 

[Jesster]

I was just trying to find out if there's a sexuality that we can all agree is intrinsically wrong, even if it is an agreement between two consenting adults

While I'm not ready to start arguing here again, I will point out that I never said anything about the sexuality itself. My point was only about consent. If there was a way for that level of consent to be given, I would have nothing to say about it other than "ick".