Male Sexual Behaviour

[Lordpendragon]

I wasn't implying that I think there isn't anything wrong with sexual freedom, only that a large amount of people fear that our civilzed society is falling apart little by little , with each change we make, and this is where I think the fear comes from.

You appraoch this issue, Mattmatt, from the other end of the question to me and others.

I would say that sexual freedom is an imperative, rather than that there is anything wrong with it. The blow jobs that you want your boys to enjoy, would be banned by some.

Those who would deny us our sexual freedom, would also deny us other freedoms. Hello Patriot Act.

You can't have a little bit of freedom and keep the rest of desire incarcerated for the sake of what you are socially comfortable with, because as you can see from the blow job point, one man's fish is another's poison.

I am guessing that your premise is that heterosexual monogamous marriage is the basis for a stable society. This is a very interesting topic, but I personally can not agree with it. It presumes that the individual must compromise for the perceived benefit of the majority. Institutionalised heterosexual monogamy, blessed by god. The divorce rate is running at 50% of recent marriages I think. I am not surprised. If it works for you then fine, but I can't see that it is generally compatible with male sexual behaviour and increasingly with liberated female sexual behaviour.

There are clearly lots of people who are brought up to believe that they can have a liberated sexual expression within a monogamous environment (and there are many I imagine who are brought up to think that this is not important), I would guess that the majority then find this not to be an absolute. Some can compromise, some can not. It is funny in a way to me that the biggest party most people have is when they sign away their freedoms.

 

[fortiesfun]

I wasn't implying that I think there is anything wrong with sexual freedom, only that a large amount of people fear that our civilzed society is falling apart little by little , with each change we make, and this is where I think the fear comes from.

And I, in turn, was not implying that you, personally, held the view that sexuality is the problem underlying society's ills, only that I agree with Pendragon on the wrongheadedness of that diagnosis.

I freely confess my own politics are such that I believe trying to stop change generally is the problem, not the solution. However, as it applies to this thread, my point is only that varied sexuality between consenting adults is not a symptom of society spinning out of control, but a sign of its health. I would submit that highly controlled sexuality, especially from theocracies, had led to the persecution and even widespread execution of women and members of sexual minorities for actions that were not hurting anyone without any noticeable improvements to society.

But, again, I am in danger of highjacking one of Pendragon's threads. This one is about male sexuality and not the new Puritanism. Apologies. Now back to our regularly scheduled program.

 

[dreamer20]

With no moral or ethical boundaries man is only an animal.
Man is above animals because we can reason and think.
Maintaining (by thinking and reasoning) our levels of society ( and its rules)give us our ethical boundaries between man and animal and enforces the fact that we are~, indeed above them.

IMO being human does not make us automatically superior to all animals. Other higher evolutionary creatures can also reason and think. Although some creatures display the same varied sexuality that we do and do not have written "moral and ethical" sexual boundaries they are living quite well by doing what their innate natures dictate. Our modern society on the otherhand smiles and accepts the promiscuity of the hetereosexual male whereas the homosexual is labelled as a pervert and condemned. The basis for this thinking is not at all rational but religious based. Specifically the dogma of religious leaders of the ancient Hebrew's tribe which thought that demons caused such things as diseases, menstration and the same sex desires of men.

Due to the afformentioned religious-based bias, many societies view same sex activities as being antisocial. Yet bisexuality has historically been a part of initimate relationships and social bonding in many ancient societies (*including the Hebrews, as indicated by both Testaments) and is still present as the norm in numerous primitive tribes e.g. of New Guinea and Indonesia.

Re: LP's promiscuity thread: as it relates to my society. The individual can choose to be promiscuous or not, but they had bettter not because of the possibilty of HIV infection, jealousy, fights and pregnancies. The pulpits of N.P. denounce homosexuality and sometimes endorse discrimination against gays. Yet the majority of church members are unmarried women with children for a number of men. The same scriptures that suggest they should be stoned and their children be kept out of the congregation for 10 generations were somehow overlooked by the same pastor who could see the scriptures pertaining to gay sex so clearly. Isn't that odd?

 

[baseball99]

IMO being human does not make us automatically superior to all animals. Other higher evolutionary creatures can also reason and think.

Yes some animals can reason and think, but the distinction is in the amount of reasoning.....there is a clear difference between humans and other animals in cerebral cortex and other "higher levels" of the brain. It's nice to think some animals may have high levels of reason but it just has not been demonstrated on nearly the same level as human (even lacking in chimpanzees, mans closest ancestor).

Although some creatures display the same varied sexuality that we do and do not have written "moral and ethical" sexual boundaries they are living quite well by doing what their innate natures dictate. Our modern society on the otherhand smiles and accepts the promiscuity of the hetereosexual male whereas the homosexual is labelled as a pervert and condemned. The basis for this thinking is not at all rational but religious based. Specifically the dogma of religious leaders of the ancient Hebrew's tribe which thought that demons caused such things as diseases, menstration and the same sex desires of men.

It has been documented that there are species of animals that kill and even eat homosexual members of their species.....

Due to the afformentioned religious-based bias, many societies view same sex activities as being antisocial. Yet bisexuality has historically been a part of initimate relationships and social bonding in many ancient societies (*including the Hebrews, as indicated by both Testaments) and is still present as the norm in numerous primitive tribes e.g. of New Guinea and Indonesia.

Morals are not the "evil of society" that some people on this thread (im not saying you) make them out to be. Its important to have morals, learned yourself, and to expect others to have common and basic morals for society to function. Remember that cannibalism was common, and is still practiced in some cultures but i think we all can agree its really not acceptable

 

[joyboytoy79]

... (even lacking in chimpanzees, mans closest ancestor).

Chimpanzees are not an ancestor of man. For that matter, they are not even our closest relative in the animal kingdom. Our closest relative is the Bonobo. Do a google search on them, they have some VERY interesting sexual habits, and also extremely complex social arrangements. They are, however, not a direct relation. Every ancestor of man is now dead... we just happen to share a very recent common ancestor with both Bonobos and Chimps.

It has been documented that there are species of animals that kill and even eat homosexual members of their species.....

Name some, please. :smile: I can name you several documented cases of homosexuality being common and accepted in the animal kingdom (not including humans): Bonobos, Storks, Penguins, Dolphins, Wolves, Lions, the list goes on.

Morals are not the "evil of society" that some people on this thread (im not saying you) make them out to be. Its important to have morals, learned yourself, and to expect others to have common and basic morals for society to function. Remember that cannibalism was common, and is still practiced in some cultures but i think we all can agree its really not acceptable

Sexual Liberation and Sexual Morality are not mutually exclusive terms. Sexual Morality does not need to equal "Sexual Opression." I honestly don't believe that society has much of a right to define consentual sexual moralites. If two (or more) legally defined adults find each other and both get off on the same thing, and it doesn't involve harming others, what buisiness is it of the others who are not being harmed? In fact, i think the only sociologically valid sexual moral is that the act DOESN'T harm anyone. Beyond that, i don't see how any sexual act could possibly lead to the downfall of western civilization.

 

[dreamer20]

Quote:
Originally Posted by baseball99
It has been documented that there are species of animals that kill and even eat homosexual members of their species.....

Name some, please. :smile: I can name you several documented cases of homosexuality being common and accepted in the animal kingdom ...

We're still waiting.:wink:

 

[baseball99]

Quote:
Originally Posted by baseball99
It has been documented that there are species of animals that kill and even eat homosexual members of their species.....





We're still waiting.:wink:

Sorry, I dont have the time to research it right now. I tried to google for the article i read but couldnt find it. I remember there wre results about whether they were killed due to homosexuality or bc they were far less aggressive than the other males.....but then again I really dont have much interest in the topic

also, i didnt mean chimps were mans closest ancestor.....i meant chimps are mans most closely genetic relative

 

[Lordpendragon]

Sorry, I dont have the time to research it right now. I tried to google for the article i read but couldnt find it. I remember there wre results about whether they were killed due to homosexuality or bc they were far less aggressive than the other males.....but then again I really dont have much interest in the topic

You do this all the time - I think it's out of order - throw in some shit mixed up with otherwise well researched stuff and it seems plausible by association.

When you get pulled up for it - you don't have the time. Well I had a quick look and it gets discussed in those "lets spend all our efforts to prove that god wanted us to kill the homos and send them quickly to hell" sites.

Nice agenda.

 

[dreamer20]

Well said LP.

Curiosity: When a woman is carring a Y male baby, when already comes with bit of testosterone or as growing up inside mother, the ovariun gives the first dosages of testosterones to him?
How this XY baby keep growing inside a person that is XX ???

And when a woman is carring an girl XX does her hormones goes up to the roof because everything is female???

Wow..the body is amazing!

Gisella I will answer your question regarding the male embryo.

The male sex of the offspring is determined by the "SRY" gene of the father's male or "Y" sex chromosome. The mother's female or "X" chromosome's genetics do not dictate this development.
The SRY gene triggers testis development. Initially males start out as females in our embryonic stage. Hopefully the SRY gene will cause the ovaries of the foetus to descend and become testes and the penis will develop. But in some rare cases one testicle descends and that individual can possess a fully formed penis, a vagina and an ovary. This person is known as a hermaphrodite.
Sometimes the testes descend later in childhood and the penis subsequently develops, so that a child that was initially classified as a girl was not a girl at all. There was once a program that I saw on TV that dealt with this process which showed that it doesn't always go smoothly.

The Y chromosome is not as stable as the females X chromosome unfortunately. See the following link for further details.

http://www.societyandgenetics.ucla.edu/speaker05.htm

 

[baseball99]

You do this all the time - I think it's out of order - throw in some shit mixed up with otherwise well researched stuff and it seems plausible by association.

When you get pulled up for it - you don't have the time. Well I had a quick look and it gets discussed in those "lets spend all our efforts to prove that god wanted us to kill the homos and send them quickly to hell" sites.

Nice agenda.

right you have me all figured out.....cheers

i'll look when i have enough time.....in about 3 weeks

 

[dreamer20]

N.P.'s male sexual behaviour continued:
Due to the social stigma of being gay or bi many of these individuals would be of the closeted variety. In fact they may even be living "Double Lives"

http://www.lpsg.org/relationships-discrimination-and-jealousy/35312-double-lives.html

 

[Lordpendragon]

The irony is that many women will not be willing to give up a degree of their natural inclination of having that emotional connection in sex, utlimately making room for both partners to be unsatisfied in their sexual relationships.

it has nothing to do with morals or ethics, but everything to do with brain chemistry based on hormones.

equal rights you say...?

E

Irony makes my world go round - so I like this post very much Emu.

The big question is about the compromise - though I would not say that women don't enjoy raw sex per se, nor that guys don't enjoy the emotional relationship either - it is about understanding each other's limits - and that is easier said than done.

My presumption in the thread is that guys find this issue considerably less difficult in relationships of whatever kind with other guys.

If you were invloved with someone emotionally, would you want raw unemotional sex with them and is it even possible?

Could this be why people look elsewhere? The men for the raw sex and the women for the emotion? (with exceptions of course)

 

[dreamer20]

right you have me all figured out.....cheers

i'll look when i have enough time.....in about 3 weeks

The disinformation in this site is quite similar to your erroneous statement b-99. Solimero 's agenda is clearly stated in the title of this excerpt from his book :


[FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [FONT=verdana,arial]The Animal Homosexuality Myth

[/FONT] by Luiz Sérgio Solimeo The following article is adapted from the author's recently published book, Defending a Higher Law: Why We Must Resist Same Sex "Marriage" and the Homosexual Movement.
[/FONT]
http://www.narth.com/docs/animalmyth.html



NARTH is discussed in this thread:


http://www.lpsg.org/et-cetera-et-cetera/35202-narth.html