Page 5 of 27

Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2002 9:18 pm
by VoodooDali
Originally posted by Sailor Saturn


No, that has never happened to me. Perhaps if you put less importance on things such as that and more importance on love, it wouldn't happen to you, either.
Sheesh...actually earlier in this thread in response to a lot of the males saying that sex became too infrequent/boring with marriage, I said this:
"Sex without love is merely healthy exercise."
-- Robert Heinlein
Re: sex. In any long relationship, frequency ebbs and flows, and frequency isn't everything--intensity IS. Look--if you sleep with a different person every night, but don't feel much inside emotionally other than the simple physical pleasure--it grows old.

I have to say though that the intensity I have with my partner wouldn't be there without the physical chemistry plus the skills we acquired through different previous sexual relationships. You can't force these things to exist, no matter how much you love someone.

Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2002 9:30 pm
by Sailor Saturn
Originally posted by Georgi


I'm not jumping to conclusions. You implied that VDali's experience was because she was prioritising sex over love. That is quite incredibly presumptuous of you, with absolutely no knowledge of the situation, and far less relevant experience by which to judge it. I find that offensive.
That is not what I was doing. You may have inferred that that is what I was saying, but you inferred wrong. I did not say she put sex above love. I said that if she put less emphasis on that and more on love(how much she currently puts on either being irrelevant to the point), she might not experience that.

Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2002 9:33 pm
by Sailor Saturn
Originally posted by Georgi


But you won't know that for sure until it happens.
Of course I won't. But I do know that it takes a lot to change my opinion and it's not likely my opinion will change in this matter.

Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2002 9:43 pm
by Sailor Saturn
Originally posted by VoodooDali
Sheesh...actually earlier in this thread in response to a lot of the males saying that sex became too infrequent/boring with marriage, I said this:
"Sex without love is merely healthy exercise."
-- Robert Heinlein
Re: sex. In any long relationship, frequency ebbs and flows, and frequency isn't everything--intensity IS. Look--if you sleep with a different person every night, but don't feel much inside emotionally other than the simple physical pleasure--it grows old.

I have to say though that the intensity I have with my partner wouldn't be there without the physical chemistry plus the skills we acquired through different previous sexual relationships. You can't force these things to exist, no matter how much you love someone.
I have to say, I'm not sure what this has to do with what you quoted me saying. :confused:

Someone said early in this topic that sex is a very personal and intimate thing. That is all the more reason for it to be something only shared with the one you truly love.

You quote Heinlein saying that sex without love is merely healthy excersize. In either Time Enough For Love or I Will Fear No Evil, the main char spoke of marriage(and love) as being the important thing, the 'cake,' and of sex as being the icing on the cake. Will you toss out a wonderful chocolate cake just because you don't like the icing it has?


[color=sky blue]I apologize if that statement I made offended you in anyway. That was not my intention. :( [/color]

Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2002 9:56 pm
by T'lainya
@ Everyone..
Please respect each others opinions and stay civil. I realize people have strong opinions on this but I'm sure we can all find a way to agree to disagree.

Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2002 10:41 pm
by C Elegans
Since Ysh, Voodoo and Georgi have posted much of my opinions already I will only add that I personally think that individual choice where the concerned parties are in agreement, is the preferred way to form partnerships/relationships and decide what rules should be followed. Regardless of whether an individual chooses to have many sexual relationships with or without love, or just one lifelong, with love and reproduction, I think the individual choice should be respected as long as it doesn't involve hurting others.
posted by Astafas
Maybe you should add that registred partnership is only an option for two persons of the same sex. Registred partners are equal to married couples in almost all aspects (adoption being the most notable exception). Then you have "normal" partnership: two persons living together as husband and wife while not being married. There are indeed some legal differences between partnership and marriage, and not all can be arranged by paperwork (although most can). Especially tax laws seem to favor the marriage.
You are of course right, I didn't know what to call Swedish concept "sambo" (ie partnership, meaning living together") in English, so I used "registred partnership" as a concept to cover both same sex relationships and partnership you describe. I actually didn't know there were any legal differences between registrered partnership for gay people and "sambo" for people who live together as if they were married. What legal issues differ between partnership and marriage? I only have personal experience in this area, and all of my non-married friends with children and mortages and all have just consulted a laywer and everything seems to be arranged equal to if they had been married.
posted by Sailor Saturn

Here's a hypothetical question: Looking at things from the perspective that all religions have merely been fabrications of the human imagination for the purpose of explaining the unexplainable, why would humans create these religions saying that long-term monogamous marriage is the way things are supposed to be if the genetic/instinctive/whatever-you-want-to-call-it urging(?) is to have 4-year monogamous relationships multiple times in their life? :confused:
In that case, I think the long monogamous marriage instution go together with other organisation principles in society that became important, perhaps necessary, when man moved from the nomadic hunter/gatherer lifestyle, to agriculture, living in one place and created the concept of private property. When you start agricultural life, society need planning in another way since you don't move after the food. Agriculture and animal husbandry means planning in advance and waiting for months before your crop has grown. So it requires cooperation towards abstract, future goals which I believe requires a higher degree of structure in the society. The larger a community grows, the higher is probably the need for organisation, and different ways to create smaller groups. A core family would be such a group. It's interesting to note that many societies that has no concept of private property but instead have collective owership of everything, also often does not have core families but instead "family groups".
At the dawn of mankind, it is believed that we lived in groups much like chimps do. We were also nomadic. Still, most people today live at one place and in smaller family groups like a core family or a slightly extended family. So I imagine that even if we from the beginning were evolutionary "adapted" to have couple relationships in 4-years intervalls, we still do not have to follow this because we have created a society with a different cultural standard.
posted by Frogus
Do people really believe that the universe started 6000 years ago? what about the Egyptians?
Some people believe this, yes. I think they believe that the Egyptians and other cultures older than 6000 years is just incorrectly dated. I sent you a PM (private message) with a few links you can check out. If someone here on SYM holds this particular belief, that person might also be able to expain the view.

BTW my parents are divorced, and look how cynical and disenchanted I've turned out! That was actually a serious point, because I know that any bad effects that my parents divorce has had on me are the result of the breakdown of their love, not the dissolution of a religious/legal contract made many years ago. Love is so much more important than marriage as to make it seem meaningless.

I honestly believe that love is a 'byproduct' as we are putting it, and I honestly believe that love is great and powerful. There is no contradiction.
Heh, this is an interesting question. How do you define "love"? Human consciousness/self-wareness might be a by-product, but it may have evolved holding vital functions. :D
Personally, I believe that all love between humans (and other species too) is functional. Either it's part of the reproduction/offspring rasing process, or it's part of the group living. Man is a group animal, not a single living species. Bonding, or attachment between the members is crucial for the survival of the group. Do you know what oxytocin is, Frogus? It's a hormone that is belived to mediate attachment between people. It's released for instance while nursing your child, while having physical contact with people we like or by having sex. For therories regarding the function of love (between parents and children as well as passionate/romantic love), this hormone is quite interesting. One can make a comparison to the famous concept "imprinting", discovered by Nobel Prize Laurate Konrad Lorentz. You can check how imprinting is believed to be mediated and learned.

Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2002 10:41 pm
by VoodooDali
@T'lainya: Hope I didn't come across that way, but sorry if I did.

@SS: Actually, I don't want to change your mind, just explain my mind-set. I always value opinions such as yours, since they are interesting and different. Besides, any fan of Heinlein is a friend of mine!

Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2002 11:30 pm
by Ode to a Grasshopper
This thread has certainly generated some strong opinions, hasn't it? Cheers to T'lainya for cooling things down before it degenerated into a slagging-off match.

This is probably going to offend someone...

Speaking for myself, I see nothing wrong with pre-marital sex. I find that the only way to make an informed opinion on something is to experience it for yourself. However, I'm not at all religious, and am of the belief that religion clouds peoples' judgement in regard to certain issues, including pre-marital sex. SS's "God is Love" statement reveals that she obviously feels otherwise.
Here's a hypothetical question: Looking at things from the perspective that all religions have merely been fabrications of the human imagination for the purpose of explaining the unexplainable, why would humans create these religions saying that long-term monogamous marriage is the way things are supposed to be if the genetic/instinctive/whatever-you-want-to-call-it urging(?) is to have 4-year monogamous relationships multiple times in their life?


The Mormon belief is that a man can have up to 4 wives. The Australian aborigines traditionally had both a senior wife and a junior wife. I'm just pointing out that not all religions, be they fabrications of the human imagination or not, agree on the issue of monogamy.

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2002 12:13 am
by Sailor Saturn
Originally posted by Ode to a Grasshopper
The Mormon belief is that a man can have up to 4 wives. The Australian aborigines traditionally had both a senior wife and a junior wife. I'm just pointing out that not all religions, be they fabrications of the human imagination or not, agree on the issue of monogamy.
I know that not all religions agree on the issue of monogamy. The point was that some do, which is all that mattered for the hypothetical question.

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2002 1:42 am
by frogus
Meaning, make a commitment to abstain from sex until we're married.
I never want to get married. Does that mean that I should never be allowed to have sex?
I sent you a PM (private message) with a few links you can check out.
where do PMs go? Is it in my email?
Personally, I believe that all love between humans (and other species too) is functional. Either it's part of the reproduction/offspring rasing process, or it's part of the group living. Man is a group animal, not a single living species. Bonding, or attachment between the members is crucial for the survival of the group. Do you know what oxytocin is, Frogus? It's a hormone that is belived to mediate attachment between people. It's released for instance while nursing your child, while having physical contact with people we like or by having sex. For therories regarding the function of love (between parents and children as well as passionate/romantic love), this hormone is quite interesting.
I am sure that that's where my opinion would have developed to if I'd known as much as you :) Yes I pretty much agree, but will have a look into the science for myself.

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2002 4:31 am
by Tamerlane
Originally posted by frogus
where do PMs go? Is it in my email?
If you allow it to. Check your 'user cp' in the top right hand corner, to find your private messages.

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2002 6:35 am
by Mr Sleep
I think one has to assume that their ideals and opinions will change over time, i can not say that my opinions will stay the same in 20 years after all those experiences :)

My personal opinion, in the end it comes down to ones choice, if you want to get married feel free, if you don't thne one shouldn't be disregarded for that, I see no point in limiting anyone.

There is a degree where one has to trust the responsibility of society, the trouble is that just doesn't seem possible.

Unprotected sex is the major problem, and to be honest education simply isn't enough to curb this particular problem, there was a recent study performed of men and women who go and holiday to Majorca(IIRC) a very large percentage ended up having unprotected sex with several of the opposite sex. They are for the most part eductated, and they all had access to condoms and protection. What does this suggest to you? It suggests to me that no matter how much you educate people they are still going to party and disregard all of your words in pursuit of hedonism.

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2002 6:44 am
by Beldin
and disregard all of your words in pursuit of hedonism. [/b]



...although there's nothing wrong with "party" and "hedonism" - as long as you don't leave your brain at home... ;)

No worries,

Beldin

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2002 8:29 am
by VoodooDali
Originally posted by Mr Sleep
Unprotected sex is the major problem, and to be honest education simply isn't enough to curb this particular problem, there was a recent study performed of men and women who go and holiday to Majorca(IIRC) a very large percentage ended up having unprotected sex with several of the opposite sex. They are for the most part eductated, and they all had access to condoms and protection. What does this suggest to you? It suggests to me that no matter how much you educate people they are still going to party and disregard all of your words in pursuit of hedonism.
Great point, Sleep. I'm not sure what causes this, but it made me think of this passage from Edgar Allen Poe's, The Black Cat:

Yet I am not more sure that my soul lives, than I am that perverseness is one of the primitive impulses of the human heart--one of the indivisible primary faculties, or sentiments, which give direction to the character of a Man. Who has not, a hundred times, found himself committing vile or a stupid action, for no other reason than because he knows he should not?

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2002 9:03 am
by fable
Originally posted by Mr Sleep
Unprotected sex is the major problem, and to be honest education simply isn't enough to curb this particular problem, there was a recent study performed of men and women who go and holiday to Majorca(IIRC) a very large percentage ended up having unprotected sex with several of the opposite sex. They are for the most part eductated, and they all had access to condoms and protection. What does this suggest to you? It suggests to me that no matter how much you educate people they are still going to party and disregard all of your words in pursuit of hedonism.
A related phenomenon as noted by my wife and I during our three year stay in Miami. The large community of South Miami Beach has a reputation similar to that of the Castro district in San Francisco: it's the preferred area for gays seeking cultural acceptance and those with a similar lifestyle. However, SMB also has a deserved notoriety for possessing one of the highest incidences of AIDS and AIDS-related conditions outside of Africa. One of the physicians in the hospital where my wife worked did some research down there, and published a book about his findings. It appears that knowledge of safe sex and the common means of AIDS transmission *is* well known, but that there's a palpable community-fostered sense that "we're doomed anyway, so let's enjoy ourselves." This was voiced time and again on his surveys and in person, by people who were already infected, and by those who were quite healthy. It's hard to break through such a mutually reinforced cultural attitude, especially when you take into account that it removes the need for personal responsibility.

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2002 9:10 am
by Fezek
Originally posted by fable



. It's hard to break through such a mutually reinforced cultural attitude, especially when you take into account that it removes the need for personal responsibility.
Recently there was a Concert in England to help raise money for education purposes in Africa. The Concert was organised by a Nigerian Diva called Patti Boulais. One of the concerns she raised was that in many rural areas iof Nigeria, AIDS is not considered a disease but a curse and the only way for men to be purified was to have sex with a virgin. It made me speechless.

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2002 9:13 am
by EMINEM
Originally posted by frogus
I agree entirely. @SS...I might be opening up a can of vipers with this one, but what exactly is wrong with pre-marital sex?
I think the question "What is exactly riight with pre-marital sex?" needs to be answered adequately first, since it seems to be the majority opinion. In the meantime, allow me to put in my two cents worth into this disccussion. Well, not “my” two cents, but rather what other researchers have found regarding this topic. In summary, then:

1. Contrary to popular notions, premarital sexual intercourse may actually “hinder” intimacy. Indulging in sexual intercourse prematurely short-circuits the emotional bonding process. In a study of 100,000 women, a correlation was found between early sexual experience and dissatisfaction in marriages, unhappiness with the level of sexual intimacy, and a prevalence of low self-esteem

2. Sexual intercourse and extensive physical exploration early in a relationship do not reflect sex at its best. Of course there is sensual pleasure for those who engage in premarital sexual experiences, but they are missing out on the best route to marital happiness. Sex is an art that is learned best in the safe environment of marriage. When unrestrained physical intimacy dominates a relationship, other parts of that relationship suffer. In healthy marriages, sex takes its natural place beside the intellectual, emotional and practical aspects of life. Married couples spend less time in bed than they do in conversation, in problem solving, and in emotional communion. The lie that premarital sex prepares you for marriage denies the fact that sexual happiness grows only through years of intimate relationship. The height of sexual pleasure, psychologists tell us, usually comes after ten to twenty years of marriage.

3. Those who settle for short-term sexual relationships are settling for second-best sex. Journalist George Leonard observed that "casual recreational sex is hardly a feast-not even a good hearty sandwich. It is a diet of fast food served in plastic containers. Life's feast is available only to those who are willing and able to engage life on a deeply personal level, giving all, holding back nothing.” For a woman, particularly, sex can reveal hidden fears and lack of trust. Good sex-which can be a healing agent over time-requires trust, trust which grows best in the context of the life-long commitment of marriage.

4. Premature sex is bad for your emotional health. The February 1991 issue of the journal Pediatrics reported that researchers at Indiana University found that sexually active teenagers are more likely to be prone to alcohol abuse and illegal drugs, and are more likely to have trouble in school. They reported that sexually active girls were more likely to be depressed, have low self esteem, feel lonely or attempt suicide. Premarital sex may be bad for the emotional health of your future marriage. It lays the groundwork for comparisons, suspicions, and mistrust. "Am I as attractive (or as sexually stimulating) as his last partner?" "If she didn't wait for me before we were married, why do I think she will settle for only me now?" "If someone better comes along, will I be left in the dust?"

5. Premarital sex is also bad for your physical health. Sexually transmitted diseases have received abundant attention from the press in recent years. Equal time has not been given to the opinion held by many medical experts that extra-marital abstinence is without a doubt the best way to avoid these diseases.

6. Sexual promiscuity is even bad for the health of our civilization. One study of more than eighty societies ranging in development from ancient to primitive to more modern revealed an unvarying correlation between the degree of sexual restraints and the rate of social progress. Cultures that were more sexually permissive displayed less cultural energy, creativity, intellectual development and individualism, and a slower general cultural ascent . Why, then, do we-as individuals and as a society-trade our energy, creativity, and intellectual development for momentary sexual pleasure? Because we have believed a lie.

7. Premarital sex is hardly an expression of freedom. Young people who become sexually active in response to peer pressure to be sophisticated and independent are actually becoming victims of current public opinion. No one is really free who engages in any activity in order to impress the majority.

8. (BTW, outside a Biblical worldview absent of faith and trust in God, I think this last point will be difficult to understand) Scripture is clear that sexual intercourse outside the bonds of marriage is sin. Even if we had no other evidence, God's word makes it clear that intercourse outside of marriage is not only outside our best interests, but it is also wrong. God gave these rules NOT because he is a spoil-sport. Quite the contrary. Because God created us and because he loves us more than we can ever know, he has told us how to have the best, most satisfying sexual experiences: in marriage. Premarital abstinence and marital faithfulness is not a denial of an individual’s rights or pleasures. It is rather choosing to experience sex in the healthiest, happiest context.

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2002 9:18 am
by Mr Sleep
Originally posted by VoodooDali


Great point, Sleep. I'm not sure what causes this, but it made me think of this passage from Edgar Allen Poe's, The Black Cat:

Yet I am not more sure that my soul lives, than I am that perverseness is one of the primitive impulses of the human heart--one of the indivisible primary faculties, or sentiments, which give direction to the character of a Man. Who has not, a hundred times, found himself committing vile or a stupid action, for no other reason than because he knows he should not?
:cool: Nice pick :)

@Fable, very interesting, what is being done to combat this, or is it left alone by authorities?

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2002 9:38 am
by Beldin
Originally posted by EMINEM


I think the question "What is exactly riight with pre-marital sex?" needs to be answered adequately first, since it seems to be the majority opinion. In the meantime, allow me to put in my two cents worth into this disccussion. Well, not “my” two cents, but rather what other researchers have found regarding this topic. In summary, then:an expression of freedom. Young people who become sexually active in response to peer pressure to be sophisticated and independent are actually becoming victims of current public opinion. No one is really free who engages in any activity in order to impress the majority.
1.
2.
...
to
8.
(Shortened by me because of spaceing reasons.. Beldin.)
Great post Eminem. We could (and probably WILL) argue about that one for a long time - but since I'm in a hurry right NOW I'll keep it short. (Please don't be offended !)

According to your posted research I am:

1: Emotionally short-circuited.
2: Sexually unhappy.
3: Haveing bad sex.
4: Emotionally diseased.
5: Physically sick.
6: I have no cultural energy, creativity, intellectual development and individualism, and a slower general cultural ascent
7: Not free.
8: A sinner.
:cool:

Even if you might be right in the last one (If i was a believer, I could be counted as sinner.) I can not see myself in that list.

Time for discussion will come, no worries.

Beldin

Posted: Thu Mar 14, 2002 9:56 am
by EMINEM
Originally posted by Beldin

According to your posted research I am:

1:Emotionally short-circuited.
2:Sexually unhappy.
3:Haveing bad sex.
4: Emotionally diseased.
5: Physically sick.
6: I have no cultural energy, creativity, intellectual development and individualism, and a slower general cultural ascent
7: Not free.
8:A sinner.
:cool:

Even if you might be right in the last one (If i was a believer, I could be counted as sinner.) I can not see myself in that list.

Time for discussion will come, no worries.

Beldin
Let me clarify.

1. You're more likely to be emotionally short-circuited if you're promiscuous than if you choose to abstain from sex until marraige.

2. You would probably have a happier sex life if you wait a while longer.

3. Ditto

4. Same as 1. You are "more likely to be..." yadda, yadda, yadda.

5. The potential to become physically sick (or physically dead) from venereal disease is greater if you have pre-marital sex. Meanwhile, abstinance guarantees 100% immunity and +10 saving throws to boot. Are you really going to deny this?

6. You're becoming a regular poster at SYM. Need I say more? :)

7. Re-read the last statement.

8. Look at it this way: we're all in the same boat. "... For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God."


No worries, EMINEM. :)