NationStates Jolt Archive

This subject - while it might seem meant to troll, is not. What I'm going to ask may piss you off. So post your opinions on the topic, just try and stay respectful of others views.

The group of friends I hang around with are, for lack of better words, very sexually active. They all practice safe sex and all come from many walks of life. Personally, I've been taught (through sex ed in school) that sex is okay, as long as you're emotionally ready for it, and practice safe methods (condoms, etc.). But still, many of us are teased for it, called things like "sluts". I believe it's the person's choice what they do, and noone should bring them down for it. What are your opinions on so-called "sluts" or other people who sleep around? Is it attractive, or just gross?

I wish I was a slut :(

This subject - while it might seem meant to troll, is not. What I'm going to ask may piss you off. So post your opinions on the topic, just try and stay respectful of others views.

The group of friends I hang around with are, for lack of better words, very sexually active. They all practice safe sex and all come from many walks of life. Personally, I've been taught (through sex ed in school) that sex is okay, as long as you're emotionally ready for it, and practice safe methods (condoms, etc.). But still, many of us are teased for it, called things like "sluts". I believe it's the person's choice what they do, and noone should bring them down for it. What are your opinions on so-called "sluts" or other people who sleep around? Is it attractive, or just gross?
When you go against folkways and mores, you must be willing to take the inevitable heat. For example, I'm a scientific universalist in a fundmentalist Christian State. Even before I started saying that I wasn't a Christian fundamentalist and began having conversations about what my spiritual beliefs were, I knew I would be shunned, criticised, even ostracised.

If you and your group are responsible, use safe sex, are ok with it emotionally, and don't flaunt it in people's faces, I see no reason for you to be referred to as "sluts" or any other derogatory term.

This subject - while it might seem meant to troll, is not. What I'm going to ask may piss you off. So post your opinions on the topic, just try and stay respectful of others views.

The group of friends I hang around with are, for lack of better words, very sexually active. They all practice safe sex and all come from many walks of life. Personally, I've been taught (through sex ed in school) that sex is okay, as long as you're emotionally ready for it, and practice safe methods (condoms, etc.). But still, many of us are teased for it, called things like "sluts". I believe it's the person's choice what they do, and noone should bring them down for it. What are your opinions on so-called "sluts" or other people who sleep around? Is it attractive, or just gross?

If someone is responsible in their sexual activities, then that's ufine by me. However, if they just have sex with any person they meet, and/or are irresponsible, then I condone their behaviour. By responsible, I mean that they use not just a condom, but a pill as well, as well as being responsible enough to be willing to take STD test if their partner would like to know (and they should know of whatever their partner might have), and ask each new partner to take one in turn, as well as having a firm plan/belief of what to do in the event of an unexpected pregnancy (assuming the relationship is heterosexual).

However, if they just have sex with any person they meet, and/or are irresponsible, then I condone their behaviour.

'condone' or (more likely) 'condemn'?

If you have to ask then its not for you.......

If someone is responsible in their sexual activities, then that's ufine by me. However, if they just have sex with any person they meet, and/or are irresponsible, then I condone their behaviour. By responsible, I mean that they use not just a condom, but a pill as well, as well as being responsible enough to be willing to take STD test if their partner would like to know (and they should know of whatever their partner might have), and ask each new partner to take one in turn, as well as having a firm plan/belief of what to do in the event of an unexpected pregnancy (assuming the relationship is heterosexual).

The funny things is, about half my friends are bi-sexual, and a quarter are gay, but anyways, yes they practice all these things. I didn't mean screwing complete strangers, I just meant being willing to be sexually active with someone after a few months in a relationship.

Well, it depends on how old you are. If you're over 18 and on your own, I don't give a damn. But we can't have fifteen year olds f***ing everything that moves, now can we?

Are you male or female? What's that world that means male slut again? Oh yeah, I remember the word now - male.

I think whoever came up with the double standard wasn't very good at math.

Protected sex isn't so bad. It's the kissing that spreads cooties. Never understood why kissing isn't considered as bad as protected sex, you can get hepititus and other nasties from it. Of course, it's probably a bit hard to have sex with someone that you refuse to kiss.

Female.

My guy friends are, for the most part, left alone. I'll jokingly call them man-whores, but it's different coming from a friend who is obviously just teasing you.

This subject - while it might seem meant to troll, is not. What I'm going to ask may piss you off. So post your opinions on the topic, just try and stay respectful of others views.

The group of friends I hang around with are, for lack of better words, very sexually active. They all practice safe sex and all come from many walks of life. Personally, I've been taught (through sex ed in school) that sex is okay, as long as you're emotionally ready for it, and practice safe methods (condoms, etc.). But still, many of us are teased for it, called things like "sluts". I believe it's the person's choice what they do, and noone should bring them down for it. What are your opinions on so-called "sluts" or other people who sleep around? Is it attractive, or just gross?

I'm a conservative Catholic, I think that pretty much explains my stance...

This subject - while it might seem meant to troll, is not. What I'm going to ask may piss you off. So post your opinions on the topic, just try and stay respectful of others views.

The group of friends I hang around with are, for lack of better words, very sexually active. They all practice safe sex and all come from many walks of life. Personally, I've been taught (through sex ed in school) that sex is okay, as long as you're emotionally ready for it, and practice safe methods (condoms, etc.). But still, many of us are teased for it, called things like "sluts". I believe it's the person's choice what they do, and noone should bring them down for it. What are your opinions on so-called "sluts" or other people who sleep around? Is it attractive, or just gross?
Sex is fine and healthy, provided it is engaged in with respect and safe practices. It sounds like you and your friends are mature, responsible, and healthy young people, with very sane notions about sexuality. People who would tease or use words like "slut" for you or your friends are pathetic twits, and are beneath your contempt. Don't return their insults...they are handicapped enough as it is, seeing as how they are pathetic, ignorant, and arrogant, so they have enough problems of their own. Just pity them quietly.

I believe that sex is a perfectly natural occurance and the arrousal is a perfectly natural feeling. As for having multiple partners, I personally don't plan to have more than one partner at a time, but if it works for others...no harm to me.

I disapprove of anyone else having lots of casual sex, but it's generally OK for when I do.

What happened to the days when sex was a sacred and holy act of love between husband and wife?

Well, it depends on how old you are. If you're over 18 and on your own, I don't give a damn. But we can't have fifteen year olds f***ing everything that moves, now can we?
See, that's not cool. It should be the individual's choice as to whether they want to enter into consensual sexual relations with another person. Many 15 year olds are ready to make that decision. A lot of my friends were, and some earlier. Also, 18 is really arbitrary.

I disapprove of anyone else having lots of casual sex, but it's generally OK for when I do.
Selfish, greedy and all kinds of other nasty things! :D

What happened to the days when sex was a sacred and holy act of love between husband and wife?
They're gone. Hopefully, soon with the ideas that we can control the sexuality of other people.

See, that's not cool. It should be the individual's choice as to whether they want to enter into consensual sexual relations with another person. Many 15 year olds are ready to make that decision. A lot of my friends were, and some earlier. Also, 18 is really arbitrary.
You're right, 18 is arbitrary. A much more reasonable age would be about 15-16, since it is by that age that most of the adult structures for reasoning, morality, and judgment are in place. Before that age, the human brain is simply not capable of demonstrating what we classify as adult reasoning, so it would not be sensible to expect younger children to give adult consent. However, the evidence we have suggests that a 16 year old is as able to give adult consent as an 18 year old.

What happened to the days when sex was a sacred and holy act of love between husband and wife?
Happily, they are mostly behind us. With every step away from that ludicrous exageration of the importance of sex, human relationships improve by a factor of 10 :).

They're gone. Hopefully, soon with the ideas that we can control the sexuality of other people.

And so humanity marches inevitably towards Aldous Huxley's Brave New World...

And so humanity marches inevitably towards Aldous Huxley's Brave New World...Yup. Because every time people assert personal choice, individual values, and anything other than fundamentalist Christian morality we are heading toward the Brave New World...

What happened to the days when sex was a sacred and holy act of love between husband and wife?
It never existed, except in the minds of priests, monks and other assorted religious establishment types.

Happily, they are mostly behind us. With every step away from that ludicrous exageration of the importance of sex, human relationships improve by a factor of 10 :).
Read Stranger In A Strange land.

And so humanity marches inevitably towards Aldous Huxley's Brave New World...
not while the concervos are still in office, theyre not so keen towards science.

And so humanity marches inevitably towards Aldous Huxley's Brave New World...
Because sexual liberty totally implies control of breeding by the government...

I believe people should have complete freedom when it comes to sex (before anyone makes stupid comments, this does not allow rape, as rape removes the freedom of the victim to not have sex).

But we can't have fifteen year olds f***ing everything that moves, now can we?

Maybe not, but we can work towards it. If we can control disease and unwanted pregnancy, and some people's tendency to use or hurt other people, then it should be okay, providing the moving things consent to it.

It's possible to imagine a society where it is safe enough for fifteen year olds to drive cars, so the sex should be possible.

Check out Holland and some other countries for more relaxed attitudes towards sex.

But first things first. Proper sex education, distribution of condoms, educate young people to control impulses, etc.

And just to avoid any possible confusion, since I myself am over 15 I feel no urge to encourage young people to have sex, although I sympathise with the feelings of young people that do want to have sex.

And I still see fifteen year olds who refuse to wear helmets while riding their bikes, which is not a good sign as far as taking precautions go.

Yup. Because every time people assert personal choice, individual values, and anything other than fundamentalist Christian morality we are heading toward the Brave New World...

Sex has been, and continues to be, devalued. If we continue down that path it leads to a world where sex means absolutely nothing. I personally think that is an increadably bad thing.

I dont mean to tell you what to do, that is analogous to a Muslim saying no-one can drink alchohol. However, just as there would be significant merits to a world were no-one drank alchohol, there are massive, problems in a world where sex is something everyone does with everyone else. A perfect example of this is the AIDS issue...

Ye Gads what have I begun?

Because sexual liberty totally implies control of breeding by the government...

I was talking about sex, not parenthood...

Posted by me:
And I still see fifteen year olds who refuse to wear helmets while riding their bikes, which is not a good sign as far as taking precautions go.

Now I'm starting to sound like my grandmother.

I was talking about sex, not parenthood...
That's irrelevant to the justification you present.

If and only if sex is an activity that can be controlled by the government, then control of breeding is justified because then people's bodies become the domain of the government and a realm that can be regulated.

In a world where people's sexuality is their own domain, the government can't justify intervention in their personal sexual affairs. You're not going to win the argument that procreation isn't a sexual affair.

That's irrelevant to the justification you present.

If and only if sex is an activity that can be controlled by the government, then control of breeding is justified because then people's bodies become the domain of the government and a realm that can be regulated.

In a world where people's sexuality is their own domain, the government can't justify intervention in their personal sexual affairs. You're not going to win the argument that procreation isn't a sexual affair.

I DID NOT MENTION THE GOVERNMENT ONCE!

In A Brave New World, sex and relationships are without value. That is the analogy I was making. I said nothing about parenthood or government control of reproduction

Sex has been, and continues to be, devalued. If we continue down that path it leads to a world where sex means absolutely nothing. I personally think that is an increadably bad thing.

I dont mean to tell you what to do, that is analogous to a Muslim saying no-one can drink alchohol. However, just as there would be significant merits to a world were no-one drank alchohol, there are massive, problems in a world where sex is something everyone does with everyone else. A perfect example of this is the AIDS issue...

Ye Gads what have I begun?
Alcohol is much more dangerous than protected sex.

Sex did not cause AIDS, unprotected sex and backward attitudes toward homosexuality did.

In a society where you are free to do as you will, you must also be willing to accept the consequences, whatever they may be, of your actions. And in this case, suffer potential ostracism.

I'm not condemning or condoning anybody, I'm just being realist.

Alcohol is much more dangerous than protected sex.

Sex did not cause AIDS, unprotected sex and backward attitudes toward homosexuality did.

:rolleyes: Yet another victim of safe sex propaganda. The tried and true success rate for condoms, taking into account breakages due to impropper useage, is four in five. If your bungee broke one in five times would you call it safe?

Also, "safe sex" has encouraged an attitude of sex without responsibility and has cause massive increases in fornication and adultery. This in turn leads to people taking risks, leading to unwanted pregnancies, AIDS infections, abortions and, ultimately, divorces, depression and suicide.

That's why I believe artificial contraception to be one of the greatest social evil's in the modern world.

I DID NOT MENTION THE GOVERNMENT ONCE!

In A Brave New World, sex and relationships are without value. That is the analogy I was making. I said nothing about parenthood or government control of reproduction
In the book, they're without value not because sexual liberty is absolute, but because the government has taken over the role of sexual arbiter. Therefore, the analogy makes little sense. Sexual liberty will always give sex value as long as people continue to enjoy the exercise of that liberty.

The only possible way to regulate sexuality is through some sort of state or church authority. My criticism is equally applicable.

In the book, they're without value not because sexual liberty is absolute, but because the government has taken over the role of sexual arbiter. Therefore, the analogy makes little sense. Sexual liberty will always give sex value as long as people continue to enjoy the exercise of that liberty.

The only possible way to regulate sexuality is through some sort of state or church authority. My criticism is equally applicable.

... neither did I mention sexual regulation by church or state authorities. Stop putting words in my mouth. :mad:

:rolleyes: Yet another victim of safe sex propaganda. The tried and true success rate for condoms, taking into account breakages due to impropper useage, is four in five. If your bungee broke one in five times would you call it safe?

Also, "safe sex" has encouraged an attitude of sex without responsibility and has cause massive increases in fornication and adultery. This in turn leads to people taking risks, leading to unwanted pregnancies, AIDS infections, abortions and, ultimately, divorces, depression and suicide.

That's why I believe artificial contraception to be one of the greatest social evil's in the modern world.
Out of context and incorrect statistics.
Even if there are quality variations, improper use is probably a far more important factor. No large studies of user-related condom failure in disease prevention are available. But we do know that about 15 percent of couples who use condoms for birth control get pregnant within the first year, and only about 2 percent of those failures are the result of breakage.

By contrast, when people are well informed and highly motivated, condoms have been shown to be quite effective. Studies of couples where one partner has contracted the AIDS virus have shown that condoms can provide significant protection to the uninfected partner. People who don't use them are 7 to 10 times more likely to become infected.
Condom failures are almost always a result of user failure - i.e, people use two condoms, or put them on or take them off wrong.

The four out of 5 statistic is across the board, not accounting for variance in brand or education. The same website as above found that the best condoms (does not mean most expensive, means best made) are successful in over 99 percent in preventing pregancy.

Futher, the chance of pregnancy goes down to 1/20, even with your inaccurate generalization style of statistical analysis, when used with the morning after pill. Combined with birth control, that goes down to 1/20000.

The concept of "safe sex" makes your above argument an inherent fallacy. If the sex is in fact safe, then it doesn't matter if people have sex. In fact, safe sex education has caused a much larger reduction in disease by causing people to be wary about STDs, which they weren't otherwise.

Artificial contraception is much better than the alternative.

... neither did I mention sexual regulation by church or state authorities. Stop putting words in my mouth. :mad:
I explained an internal link between your argument and state control. It's not what you said, it's what you justified. Policy X may be a good idea on its own, but if it causes Policy Y, which is worse than Policy X on its own is good, then Policy X is a bad idea. We can't ignore the consequences of our actions.

When people call for regulation of sexual activity, the government is generally where they direct their efforts. There's ample proof for this; in the "good ole days" you refer to, there were laws banning sodomy and interracial marriage. Status quo examples are the Federal Marriage Amendment and laws protecting "conscience pharmacists."

When we denigrate the sexual practices of others, we open the door to this sort of regulatoin. That's bad.

Artificial contraception is much better than the alternative.

Much better than sex in a faithful loving relationship between a husband and wife?

We have fundamentally different moral values mate. All we're doing is, well, this:

:headbang:

I g2g.

I just think everyone needs to butt out of everyone elses business. If they want to fuck, let them fuck, as for what constitutes a "slut" in my opinion is someone (male or female) who engages in sexual activity with a multitude of people within a single week and considers that fact alone to be a sign that they are superior to virgins. If you have sex, good for you, just shut the fuck up about it and don't brag like you found a cure for cancer.

This subject - while it might seem meant to troll, is not. What I'm going to ask may piss you off. So post your opinions on the topic, just try and stay respectful of others views.

The group of friends I hang around with are, for lack of better words, very sexually active. They all practice safe sex and all come from many walks of life. Personally, I've been taught (through sex ed in school) that sex is okay, as long as you're emotionally ready for it, and practice safe methods (condoms, etc.). But still, many of us are teased for it, called things like "sluts". I believe it's the person's choice what they do, and noone should bring them down for it. What are your opinions on so-called "sluts" or other people who sleep around? Is it attractive, or just gross?

Slut in this case is probably being used as a colloquial expression for "someone who is having more sex than you." If that is the case, pay it no mind.

The real questions are 1) Have you developed your own code of conduct? 2) Are you living by that code of conduct?, and 3) Is that code of conduct in accord with what is right?

If you can answer all three, then you could tell me far better than I could whether or not the title of "slut" was applicable. If you can't, then you need to mull things over for a while.

Much better than sex in a faithful loving relationship between a husband and wife?

We have fundamentally different moral values mate. All we're doing is, well, this:

:headbang:

I g2g.
We do, I agree. Despite you being gone, one last riposte in the interests of continuing this discussion:

We can't create a world where everyone was in your "perfect" relationship. We have to deal with the imperfect world we live in, with adultery, people who don't like commitment, and *gasp* homosexuality.

Therefore, we have to do what we can in order to make this world better. Decrying a positive step such as birth control or a condom is blindness to the realities of the world.

The only ways to convince everyone to conform to your sexual standards are worse than disobeying those standards.

<I hope my sarcasm in the second paragraph was apparent enough.>