NationStates Jolt Archive

Some people think recreational sex (having sex with someone because it feels good) is OK. Some people think you should only have sex with someone you love. Others feel you should only have sex with your marriage partner. Then there are people who are asexual and could care less about sex while other people sex is dirty, filthy, and disgusting.

Where do you stand on sex?

Why should there be anything wrong with recreational sex? I enjoy that sometimes...
And why would it be anybody's business what goes on between two (or more) consenting adults?

Some people think recreational sex (having sex with someone because it feels good) is OK. Some people think you should only have sex with someone you love. Others feel you should only have sex with your marriage partner. Then there are people who are asexual and could care less about sex while other people sex is dirty, filthy, and disgusting.

Where do you stand on sex?
Personally, I think it's dirty, filthy and disgusting ... maybe that's why I feel so dirty all the time! :D

Why should there be anything wrong with recreational sex? I enjoy that sometimes...
And why would it be anybody's business what goes on between two (or more) consenting adults?
You already know the answer to those questions. Some people are taught that sex is some sort of quasi-religious rite that has to be hedged about with all sorts of strictures and controls.

I suspect the real reason so many societies, religions and what have you try to control sex, is that sex is a life-affirming act of rebellion against repression and control.

Just one old fart's take on the issue. :)

I think that I personally would have to love someone to have sex with them. However, I think people can do whatever they please (two or more consenting adults and all.) Nobody's business what happens.

Life-affirming? Everything in the world is a sham. Death is the only sincerity.

You already know the answer to those questions. Some people are taught that sex is some sort of quasi-religious rite that has to be hedged about with all sorts of strictures and controls.

I suspect the real reason so many societies, religions and what have you try to control sex, is that sex is a life-affirming act of rebellion against repression and control.

Just one old fart's take on the issue. :)

Yes, ok, right, in fairness, I do know that.
But that kind of attitude never fails to make me mad ;) I enjoy sex, and when, how, with whom and how often is nobody's business. I don't really like it if people ask the "Are you in love with the girl/guy?"-question, because I always have this weird feeling I have to justify myself if I'm not in love. I guess it's a lot easier if you're a guy, you don't get that bitch-reputation or those looks from your more conservative friends, you would actually get admiration if you did it with two girls...

But I like the idea about rebellion...

Everything in the world is a sham. Death is the only sincerity.

Been reading The Art of War or watching Samuri Lapin? ;)

Yes, ok, right, in fairness, I do know that.
But that kind of attitude never fails to make me mad ;) I enjoy sex, and when, how, with whom and how often is nobody's business. I don't really like it if people ask the "Are you in love with the girl/guy?"-question, because I always have this weird feeling I have to justify myself if I'm not in love. I guess it's a lot easier if you're a guy, you don't get that bitch-reputation or those looks from your more conservative friends, you would actually get admiration if you did it with two girls...

But I like the idea about rebellion...
LOL! I've always liked rebellious girls. :D

Yes, there's a kind of grudging admiration for guys who are sexually adventurous, and some segments of society tend to look down on what some still refer to as "loose women." But I have seen that begin to change considerably over the past 20 years or so, due at least in part to women struggling to take over more control of their lives.

I would like to see us get to the point where people are assessed strictly on their performance at work, their social contribution in their community, and their sexual performance when in bed with whomever they choose. :)

I say you should really know and trust the person you are having sex with. I would also lean more towards someone you love. The human being requires emotional, mental, and physical health. To sacrifice any of those because it feels good is irrational to me. To much sex for fun can lead to regrets and emtional scarring later in life. Furthermore if you don't know or trust the person very well, then you take the risk of contracting an STD.

Just play it safe and leave sex for someone you can really trust.

LOL! I've always liked rebellious girls. :D

Yes, there's a kind of grudging admiration for guys who are sexually adventurous, and some segments of society tend to look down on what some still refer to as "loose women." But I have seen that begin to change considerably over the past 20 years or so, due at least in part to women struggling to take over more control of their lives.


If this was 20 years ago, I doubt I would talk about it the way I do now ;)
Things definitely came a long way from those days when women were considered loose for having orgasms and even married couples slept in seperate beds. But it's still way from equal.

I would like to see us get to the point where people are assessed strictly on their performance at work, their social contribution in their community, and their sexual performance when in bed with whomever they choose. :)

Put intelligence and knowledge somewhere in that picture and it looks like my "perfect world" :D

I say you should really know and trust the person you are having sex with. I would also lean more towards someone you love. The human being requires emotional, mental, and physical health. To sacrifice any of those because it feels good is irrational to me. To much sex for fun can lead to regrets and emotional scarring later in life. Furthermore if you don't know or trust the person very well, then you take the risk of contracting an STD.

Just play it safe and leave sex for someone you can really trust.
It's definitely possible to have great sex with someone whom you trust to a degree and have affection for without any "emotional scarring." But just so we're on the same sheet of music, why not tell me what you mean by "love?" What is that ... specifically?

I say you should really know and trust the person you are having sex with. I would also lean more towards someone you love. The human being requires emotional, mental, and physical health. To sacrifice any of those because it feels good is irrational to me. To much sex for fun can lead to regrets and emtional scarring later in life. Furthermore if you don't know or trust the person very well, then you take the risk of contracting an STD.

Just play it safe and leave sex for someone you can really trust.

Have you ever considered that "love" and "love" can be very different things?
I wouldn't fancy having sex with a person I just met, I would have to know and like him/her quite a bit before considering that. But I don't believe in the "love for life" fairytale, and I find that sex is fun even if it's not with the person I want to spend my life with. Emotions are complex, some people can decide who they like and who they don't much faster than me, but I'm sure they have just as much fun. It's different for everybody, it's differen with everybody, that's what makes it so utterly enjoyable.

If this was 20 years ago, I doubt I would talk about it the way I do now ;)
Things definitely came a long way from those days when women were considered loose for having orgasms and even married couples slept in seperate beds. But it's still way from equal.

Put intelligence and knowledge somewhere in that picture and it looks like my "perfect world" :D
There have been many societies over the course of human history, including the Etruscan ( after which my NS nation is named ), where women enjoyed a level of freedom equal, or close to equal to that of men. Many historians see these societies as among the most stable and least stressful. With women being encouarged to be multi-orgasmic, I can well understand that! :D

There have been many societies over the course of human history, including the Etruscan ( after which my NS nation is named ), where women enjoyed a level of freedom equal, or close to equal to that of men. Many historians see these societies as among the most stable and least stressful. With women being encouarged to be multi-orgasmic, I can well understand that! :D

Pity those prudish Romans took over, really.
I don't know what's worse when it comes to the bedroom : Christian morality or the romanticised idea of eternal love? Most likely a mixture of the two.

I say you should really know and trust the person you are having sex with. I would also lean more towards someone you love. The human being requires emotional, mental, and physical health. To sacrifice any of those because it feels good is irrational to me. To much sex for fun can lead to regrets and emtional scarring later in life. Furthermore if you don't know or trust the person very well, then you take the risk of contracting an STD.

Just play it safe and leave sex for someone you can really trust.

I believe you are stating your views decently. But sex with someone you don't love is not sacrificing 'emotional, mental, and physical health'. As for people being scarred by 'casual' sex, just as many are wounded and hurt within marriage. Regretting is purely dependent on the person, I regret nothing, my wife, who enjoyed sex before we met, regrets nothing. We lived and live a healthy physical and emotional life. But you're right to a degree, we should all do what we feel is best for ourselves and others.

just do it!

Pity those prudish Romans took over, really.
I don't know what's worse when it comes to the bedroom : Christian morality or the romanticised idea of eternal love? Most likely a mixture of the two.
Kinda like a "double whammy," eh? Sigh.

Love is a decision we make, not two sets of hormones calling to each other. I can as easily decide to love one person as I can the next. As to being "in love," that's mostly a jumble of pheremones, simultaneous pupilary dilation, learned resposes to physical characteristics, and lust. It's fun, but it never lasts in the original form or intensity, usually morphing over time into something different.

Personally, I think it's dirty, filthy and disgusting ... maybe that's why I feel so dirty all the time! :D

At your age you should be ashamed of yourself for not telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. :D

At your age you should be ashamed of yourself for not telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. :D
LOL! And just what, pray tell, leads you to the conclusion that I DON'T?? :D

snip...you would actually get admiration if you did it with two girls...

Two girls...at the same time? Where? When? :D :D

To much sex for fun can lead to regrets and emtional scarring later in life.

How much sex is to much sex? I'm trying to figure out if I'm emotionally scarred or not.

LOL! And just what, pray tell, leads you to the conclusion that I DON'T?? :D

I know you Army guys. Always trying to "one up" the Air Force. :D

So long as no ones hurt people should be able to do whatever they want, whenever they want, wherever they want, regardless of the topic.

Personally I would have to trust someone before I could have sex with them, but what other people do is their buisness. If you wanna have a fling with the girl you just met 30 seconds ago, by all means be my guest. :fluffle:

That changes when your in a sustained relationship with someone, (that whole "in love" thing people were reffering to). In my view, in that situation you belong as much to the other person (or people as te case may be ;) ) as you do to your self, with everyone having veto power. Thus, IMHO "cheating" is immoral, whereas wild orgies are perfectly acceptable. Am I screwed up or what?

I think you should wait until you love the person you're going to have sex with. Casual sex leaves nothing but emotional scars. Would you rather have your first experience with someone you truly love, or with someone in the back seat of the car, who probably won't remember your name?

For me, sex is not a casual thing. I'm trying to wait until marriage, but the most important thing is that I'm with a woman I truly love. Oh, and it won't be for quite some tiem, either. Kids are having sex younger and younger. They did a poll back in middle school, and something like 37% were sexually active. 37% of 12, 13, and 14 year olds!

Just my take, though.

...As to being "in love," that's mostly a jumble of pheremones, simultaneous pupilary dilation, learned resposes to physical characteristics, and lust. It's fun, but it never lasts in the original form or intensity, usually morphing over time into something different.

Oh, how many times have I been hopelessly in love? Let's see Mary Jane, Jerry, Pat, what’s her name, etc...finally Rose. It hurt very much each time there was a breakup. The love Rose and I have for each other now is very different from the love we had for each other 38 years ago, but we are still in love. :fluffle:

I pick second choice.

Because rec sex = loose women.
And loose women = STDs

And I do not want STDs.
Though there's always birth control. But you get the idea.

who cares if a 13 year old gets laid? Kids are people to, neh? If God, (Allah, Zeus, Jupiter, Baal, or whatever other religious entity you may or may not beleive in) made the age for puberty to be 11-14, then thats when it is, and no amount of denial will change it.

Besides, whoever said age = wisdom would have to be just under 3 months by their own equation. I know 10 year old geniuses and 70 year old morons, theres no corilation.

I say we make birth control free and watch as crime, drug adiction, and clyincial insanity rates plumit. Can't smoke pot while having sex, right?

I know you Army guys. Always trying to "one up" the Air Force. :D
Ah yes ... the Air Farce. Know them well, do I. :D

who cares if a 13 year old gets laid? Kids are people to, neh? If God, (Allah, Zeus, Jupiter, Baal, or whatever other religious entity you may or may not beleive in) made the age for puberty to be 11-14, then thats when it is, and no amount of denial will change it.

Besides, whoever said age = wisdom would have to be just under 3 months by their own equation. I know 10 year old geniuses and 70 year old morons, theres no corilation.

I say we make birth control free and watch as crime, drug adiction, and clyincial insanity rates plumit. Can't smoke pot while having sex, right?

Most, if not all, 13 year olds are not emotionally ready for a physical relationship.

And I never said age = wisdom.

Most, if not all, 13 year olds are not emotionally ready for a physical relationship.

And I never said age = wisdom.

Ah, but you just did. Who, in you opinion, is qualified to determine exactly "when" someone is ready for a physical relationship, me, you, your mother perhaps?

Age does not = wisdome, maturity, or emotional readiness, or anything else for that matter, except perhaps your height, and whether or not you can legaly drink. Thats about it.

Some people think recreational sex (having sex with someone because it feels good) is OK. Some people think you should only have sex with someone you love. Others feel you should only have sex with your marriage partner. Then there are people who are asexual and could care less about sex while other people sex is dirty, filthy, and disgusting.

Where do you stand on sex?

How does restricting sex to someone you love or to someone you are married to rule out recreational sex? You can still do it just for fun with that person.

Meanwhile, is your poll "What do you believe is right for you?" or "What do you think is right for other people?"?

Unfortunately there was no category between #1 & #2, so I chose #1.

I've got absolutely no issues with RecSex as long as such action is not causal in another's pain - i.e. your (or partner's) current relationship could not stand the addition of a 3rd party or you are in a "RecSex = Betrayal" relationship.

Remember the sad sad song about "Bad, Bad Leroy Brown..."

Ah, but you just did. Who, in you opinion, is qualified to determine exactly "when" someone is ready for a physical relationship, me, you, your mother perhaps?

Age does not = wisdome, maturity, or emotional readiness, or anything else for that matter, except perhaps your height, and whether or not you can legaly drink. Thats about it.
Obviously, I'm bound ( probaby by law, as far as I know! ) to take issue with this, but have no desire to hijack this thread. I will say this, though ... changes are, as you get older, if you don't acquire a bit of wisdom, that's all the "older" you're going to get! :p

Ah, but you just did. Who, in you opinion, is qualified to determine exactly "when" someone is ready for a physical relationship, me, you, your mother perhaps?

Age does not = wisdome, maturity, or emotional readiness, or anything else for that matter, except perhaps your height, and whether or not you can legaly drink. Thats about it.

No, I did not. You put words in my mouth.

Parents are qualified to determine that, at least until you are 18.

The fact of the matter is someone just going into puberty is neither physically nor mentally ready for sex.

Can't smoke pot while having sex, right?

Yes you can, you just takes turn on giving the other part oral :D

Ah, but you just did. Who, in you opinion, is qualified to determine exactly "when" someone is ready for a physical relationship, me, you, your mother perhaps?

Age does not = wisdome, maturity, or emotional readiness, or anything else for that matter, except perhaps your height, and whether or not you can legaly drink. Thats about it.

Boy are you in for a supprise when you grow up. :D The older you get, the smarter your parents get.

Meanwhile, is your poll "What do you believe is right for you?" or "What do you think is right for other people?"?

You decide.

Obviously, I'm bound ( probaby by law, as far as I know! ) to take issue with this, but have no desire to hijack this thread. I will say this, though ... changes are, as you get older, if you don't acquire a bit of wisdom, that's all the "older" you're going to get! :p

You have my permission to take issue even if it means hijacking the thread. Hell, they never end up the way they started anyway
. :eek:

I have no problems with recreational sex, for other people. Call me a prude, but I'd prefer to do it with someone I love and care for over simple mindless rutting.

Contarary to popular beleif, not all parents are omnipitent, nor are they allways infinatly well prepared to be parents. To say that a persons parents have the right to make every decision for them is the same thing as saying that children are slaves of their parents. People need to make mistakes in order to develop. Any parent who tries to protect their child from this is a fool.

Therefore in order to properly "learn" about sex, people need to experiment, something that people start doing almost as soon as they can speak (the "I'll show you mine if you show me yours" age). Its a natural part of growing up and no matter what parents do to try to stop it it will still happen.

Now for a bit of history. The Roman age of maturity was 16,
the Japanese was 15, the Chinese had 14. People were married off, had sex, had kids, and held all the rights and responabilities of an adult at those ages in those cultures, and guess what. Japan is still there, China is still there, and were speaking in a Latin based language. It seemed to work just fine for them didnt it?

I pick second choice.

Because rec sex = loose women.
And loose women = STDs

And I do not want STDs.
Though there's always birth control. But you get the idea.I beg your pardon?
I have recreational sex. Lots of it. Lots and lots.
Lots and lots of safe, protected sex. I am STD-free, thank you very much, though that is no concern of yours, seeing as how men like you have no chance with me.
I'm not "loose", either, literally or figuratively.
Hoser.

Most, if not all, 13 year olds are not emotionally ready for a physical relationship. Why on earth do you think that emotional maturity is necessary for physical relationships?
I would have to say that emotional maturity is important for emotional relationships only, and many people do not object to their kids having wee little SOs at 13 or 14.

I have no problems with recreational sex, for other people. Call me a prude, but I'd prefer to do it with someone I love and care for over simple mindless rutting.
I never rut mindlessly. That's why I never drink to excess before having sex ... I want to make 100% sure I have all my wits about me so I can figure out what my partner wants and make sure I can provide it for her. :D

I beg your pardon?
I have recreational sex. Lots of it. Lots and lots.
Lots and lots of safe, protected sex. I am STD-free, thank you very much, though that is no concern of yours, seeing as how men like you have no chance with me.
I'm not "loose", either, literally or figuratively.
Hoser.
Sic 'em, babie! :D

I have lots of recreational sex too. Wanna compare notes? :D

True, 9 times outa 10 stds can be avoided if your carefull. That said loose men are just as likley to transmit stds as lose women.

And quite frankly no, the older I get the more scenile my parents, and everyone else for that matter, seem to get.

Of course I suppose that happens when you (God forbid) make up your own mind about something.

You decide.

Alright, I'll tell you what's ok for me then.

I will only ever have sex with someone I am in love with and intend to spend the rest of my life with.

Of course, that doesn't stop sex from being recreational. =)

Why on earth do you think that emotional maturity is necessary for physical relationships?

For some, a physical relationship is inseparable from an emotional one.

Some, not all. And the only way to figure out is to go ahead and try. Or are you one of those people who hides under your bed and slowly weeps. No? didnt think so. :)

True, 9 times outa 10 stds can be avoided if your carefull. That said loose men are just as likley to transmit stds as lose women.

And quite frankly no, the older I get the more scenile my parents, and everyone else for that matter, seem to get.

Of course I suppose that happens when you (God forbid) make up your own mind about something.
How long have you noted this tendency to regard other people as either obstacles or superfluous? I recommend the services of a competent psychologist or psychiatrist. Tell them I advise starting out with the assumption that you're sociopathic with delusions of grandeur. :)

Alright, I'll tell you what's ok for me then.

I will only ever have sex with someone I am in love with and intend to spend the rest of my life with.

Of course, that doesn't stop sex from being recreational. =)
And how, pray tell, will you know when you're "in love" with them?

I never rut mindlessly. That's why I never drink to excess before having sex ...I never drink at all on a date. If a guy picks me up at the bar, of course I will have been drinking, but I much prefer sober sex too.
I want to make 100% sure I have all my wits about me so I can figure out what my partner wants and make sure I can provide it for her. :D>best "Joey" voice< How you doin'? ;)

Alright, I'll tell you what's ok for me then.

I will only ever have sex with someone I am in love with and intend to spend the rest of my life with.

Of course, that doesn't stop sex from being recreational. =)

Good post.

:eek: :eek: I actually agree with you?

So you think I'm psychopathic too!?!? YAY!!! I'm not alone!!!!! And the last psychiatrist I saw said I was a bitter slightly emotionaly disturbed person who was cruely deprived of a childhood. And people are only obstacles if they get in my way. :D

To be fair at least I'm not flaunting the notches in my belt like some other people out there.

And how, pray tell, will you know when you're "in love" with them?

It's something you just know. There are certainly components to it you can try and pick apart, but the components don't really add up to the whole if you do it that way. In the end, you just know.

So you think I'm psychopathic too!?!? YAY!!! I'm not alone!!!!! And the last psychiatrist I saw said I was a bitter slightly emotionaly disturbed person who was cruely deprived of a childhood. And people are only obstacles if they get in my way. :D

To be fair at least I'm not flaunting the notches in my belt like some other people out there.
Ah! Another malignant dwarf!

It's something you just know. There are certainly components to it you can try and pick apart, but the components don't really add up to the whole if you do it that way. In the end, you just know.
So this "love" of which you speak doesn't lend itself to logic, analysis, rational thought, scientific investigation, or even the ancient art of scrying? So how do you know it even exists then? Can you smell it, taste it, touch it, hear it, see it?

Hey! who are your calling a dwarf! I'll have you know I'm a foot and a half taller than the legal defination dwarf.

Hate to post so soon but I just have to answer this

So this "love" of which you speak doesn't lend itself to logic, analysis, rational thought, scientific investigation, or even the ancient art of scrying? So how do you know it even exists then? Can you smell it, taste it, touch it, hear it, see it?

On one hand no it doesent. Love is conceieved completely illogicaly. Still it undenyably exists, and the skilled "lover" can use logic. analysis, rational thought, and scientific investigation to further their ambitions within that "love". It also definatly exists, and it can be proven, but "it would be impossible to explain without a common point of referance".

BTW kudos to anyone who can tell me where I got that quote.

So this "love" of which you speak doesn't lend itself to logic, analysis, rational thought, scientific investigation, or even the ancient art of scrying? So how do you know it even exists then? Can you smell it, taste it, touch it, hear it, see it?You feel it.

Love does not exist, Sex should be only to one you are married to, there are too many STDs other diseases, accidental children, etc. in the world

If love does not exist, why marry? Or do you just want humanity extinct in a generation?

people do not always marry for love or have children for love

So this "love" of which you speak doesn't lend itself to logic, analysis, rational thought, scientific investigation, or even the ancient art of scrying? So how do you know it even exists then? Can you smell it, taste it, touch it, hear it, see it?

I know it exists because it is there, in much the same way that I know God exists.

The fact that I can't pick it apart and prove it to exist to someone else does not dull its existence.

true, but asuming your not the son or daughter of a noble marrying another daughter or son of another noble for political purposes, why?

money, citizenship, bloodlines, etc.

Doesn't having recreational sex make you feel like an animal? Seems to me all that mindless self indulgence (not the band, the band is cool) would kinda get to you after awhile, when your life becomes little more than the non-stop persuit of instant gratification. Just my thougts though. Personally, I choose the last one, probably because all women hate me and the moral and emotional confusion and the sexual frustration and yada-yada you get the picture.

Money: Greedy arn't we.

Citizenship: oh comeone just take the dam test.

Bloodlines: I'm glad you value your self enough to be humanitys breeding dog.

Comeon. If your going to marry someone your going to do it FOR LIFE. Thats where they got the phrase "till death do we part" So why make it unpleant?

Doesn't having recreational sex make you feel like an animal? Seems to me all that mindless self indulgence (not the band, the band is cool) would kinda get to you after awhile, when your life becomes little more than the non-stop persuit of instant gratification. Just my thougts though. Personally, I choose the last one, probably because all women hate me and the moral and emotional confusion and the sexual frustration and yada-yada you get the picture.I will refrain from rebuting your post, because, judging by the last sentence, all you need to do is jack off, and you'll be a much more agreeable person. Or would that be the "mindless self indulgence" and "pursuit of instant gratification" that you abhore so?

I don't believe in love and I won't marry for any of those reasons I have no intention of ever having sex but for those that wish to do those things then do them

And who ever said there was anything wrong with mindless self indulgence? So long as you pull your own weight in society you should be free to spend the rest of your time in all the mindless self indulgence you want.

Society is to blame for the other answers on the poll

not true, I regect society simply because its full of idiots. and I still agree with somewhere between#s 1 and 2. And might I also say your an even more morbit person than I am...

Anytime sex occurs out of love, (or any feeling of closeness for that matter), you're no better than an animal, giving into primal urges and desires. We are humans and we've got two nifty little things too few people are aware of, its called ethics and morality.

Sex is meant to strengthen the bond between a married couple, with greater intimacy and children.

Its a beautiful thing, but like everything in life, it has a place, and that place is marriage.

Last thing I read someone's post that say love doesn't exist. WTF?! What have you been smokin' man? You mean to tell me you've never had a crush on a pretty young woman? You've never gotten that tingly feeling when you walk by her?

Geeesh, and I thought I was weird.

You mean morbid right? I can't really tell... Learn to spell, you're opinions gain more respect when you do so

And that tingly feeling was stomach acid nothing more

Respectfully, in the famous words of me "your morality and ethics can go s***w themselves". Saying that sex is only to be used to strengthen the bond of marrage is like saying that a state of the art computer can only be used to surf the web. And to think, my lovley colection of computer games would go to waste.

Spelling is irrelivent. I'll spell check when my audiance is worth the effort.

You mean morbid right? I can't really tell... Learn to spell, you're opinions gain more respect when you do so

And that tingly feeling was stomach acid nothing moreStop criticizing people for their spelling errors (typos, I suspect), and either debate things civily, or don't debate at all. You will convince no one to see things your way by acting like a hoser.

Interesting... even in this small fourm seting I see politics at work. Yes typos happen. I think so fast that my fingers cant keep up. So shoot me!

I've already proved my point, I was merely suggesting something and also using insults to prove a point doesn't help either

You mean morbid right? I can't really tell... Learn to spell, you're opinions gain more respect when you do so

And that tingly feeling was stomach acid nothing more

What was that about using insults? So your a nitpicker *and* a hypocrate. I see...

Humans are animals. We are very complicated animals, but we are really nothing more than animals. We can have sex like animals if we want to. Anyone ever hear of 'doing it like they do on the Discovery Channel'?

LMAO good point. IF only we could lick our own balls too. *walks away laughing hystericaly*

It's something you just know. There are certainly components to it you can try and pick apart, but the components don't really add up to the whole if you do it that way. In the end, you just know.

I knew I was in love with Mary Jane. I knew I was in love with Jerry. I know I was in love with Pat. I knew I was in love with Patty name. I knew I was in love with what's her name. I knew I was in love with Rose and still am after 38 years. So, in the end you don't "just know."

I knew I was in love with Mary Jane. I knew I was in love with Jerry. I know I was in love with Pat. I knew I was in love with Patty name. I knew I was in love with what's her name. I knew I was in love with Rose and still am after 38 years. So, in the end you don't "just know."

If you "knew" you were in love with all those women, then you were.

Or, it is possible that you mistook something for love, and it wasn't actually love. Of course, you would know that after the fact, when you truly were in love with someone.

Hate to post so soon but I just have to answer this



On one hand no it doesent. Love is conceieved completely illogicaly. Still it undenyably exists, and the skilled "lover" can use logic. analysis, rational thought, and scientific investigation to further their ambitions within that "love". It also definatly exists, and it can be proven, but "it would be impossible to explain without a common point of referance".

BTW kudos to anyone who can tell me where I got that quote.

Anyone in love is incapable of rational thought when it comes to the relationship between the lovers.

I will refrain from rebuting your post, because, judging by the last sentence, all you need to do is jack off, and you'll be a much more agreeable person. Or would that be the "mindless self indulgence" and "pursuit of instant gratification" that you abhore so?

Yup, exactly.
Either way, I never outright declared mindless self indulgence wrong, I just questioned your thoughts on it. It's your life do what you guys want.

Either way, a lot of good points have been made, but why do you guys have to be so angry about it, geez....

Anyone in love is incapable of rational thought when it comes to the relationship between the lovers.

Not if you're good enough. Example: I want X, I know the person I'm in love with and I know that Y is the way to get it. Therefore I will carry out Y and get X.

Simple, neh?

And in response to Dempublicents1, a rose by any other name...

And who ever said there was anything wrong with mindless self indulgence? So long as you pull your own weight in society you should be free to spend the rest of your time in all the mindless self indulgence you want.

Please quote the person you are responding to as it will make it much easier to follow the conversation. Thank you. Oh, if you are unsure how to do that, just click on the quote button instead of the reply button. Welcome to NS general forum, it's like living in an insane asylum. :D

Anyone in love is incapable of rational thought when it comes to the relationship between the lovers.

Not really. Rational thought is possible no matter what the situation. There are certain situations in which it may be more difficult to think rationally, and in which it may be very difficult to act rationally, but being in love doesn't make you completely irrational.

You mean morbid right? I can't really tell... Learn to spell, you're opinions gain more respect when you do so

And that tingly feeling was stomach acid nothing more

Ebery one maks typos although cutting and pasting to Word, doin a spel chek and pastin bak helps. :D

Please quote the person you are responding to as it will make it much easier to follow the conversation. Thank you. Oh, if you are unsure how to do that, just click on the quote button instead of the reply button. Welcome to NS general forum, it's like living in an insane asylum. :D

Ah home sweet home...

Please quote the person you are responding to as it will make it much easier to follow the conversation. Thank you. Oh, if you are unsure how to do that, just click on the quote button instead of the reply button. Welcome to NS general forum, it's like living in an insane asylum. :D

I believe he was quoting me, when I asked wheter or not constant sex made people feel like animals. Even though I never said anything was wrong with it, that's the expression people got from it.

Do as you wish as long as you take the proper precautions and are willing to take responsibility for the possible negative or positive consequences.

Sex hurts and is bad... All... ~10-16 times....

Interesting... even in this small fourm seting I see politics at work. Yes typos happen. I think so fast that my fingers cant keep up. So shoot me!

:sniper: :eek:

LMAO good point. IF only we could lick our own balls too. *walks away laughing hystericaly*

You might get run over if you do that in the middle of the street. :D

Sex hurts and is bad... All... ~10-16 times....

Only if your into that kinda stuff....

I think we need a new poll on wheter love exists or not

If you "knew" you were in love with all those women, then you were.

Or, it is possible that you mistook something for love, and it wasn't actually love.

Nope, it was love as there were others I was in lust with. Big difference between love and lust. One is irrational the other perfectly rational.

My personal ethic is I think sex is a beautiful thing between two people who are in love. i have done it with my boyfriend, and everytime I feel it is a beautiful way to show how much we love each other.

But really if you want to recreational sex that's fine by me. It isn't up for me to decide. Though I wouldn't ever do it.

Not if you're good enough. Example: I want X, I know the person I'm in love with and I know that Y is the way to get it. Therefore I will carry out Y and get X.

Simple, neh?

And in response to Dempublicents1, a rose by any other name...

When I was younger, I wish love was that simple. Sure would have saved a lot of heatache. :(

Not really. Rational thought is possible no matter what the situation. There are certain situations in which it may be more difficult to think rationally, and in which it may be very difficult to act rationally, but being in love doesn't make you completely irrational.

Have you ever been in love?

They say the average woman feels lust only 9 times a week...

That's me on a bad hair day! :eek:

Or maybe it's just because I'm permanently surrounded by lots of beautiful people. Who knows.

I suspect the real reason so many societies, religions and what have you try to control sex, is that sex is a life-affirming act of rebellion against repression and control.

Just one old fart's take on the issue. :)

Then again it may have something to do with the fact that random sex aids in the ability for horrendous STD's to spread unchecked, into epidemic proportions, killing, or disfiguring millions of people world wide. Of course they are probably just covering for all them evil religous people who want to control what thoughtful, progressive, more intelligent people do because they like it.

Liverbreath']Of course they are probably just covering for all them evil religous people who want to control what thoughtful, progressive, more intelligent people do because they like it.

Them evil religious people want to prevent people from using methods of birth control and condoms.

Ah organized religion "Your all going to hell, but make sure you give us your money first, and while your here make sure you leave lots of kids for us to abuse and take money from...." but thats another story.

Any thoughts on why religions hate sex? I'm sure they started controlling sex as a way to ensure that they could keep track of who their children were, but it seems to run a lot deeper than that. Did they get carried away with the whole anti-sex thing? Or do they fear its power?

I believe that sex is only moral within a loving, heterosexual marriage.
It is a decision I have made for myself. I honestly do not care what others do, or what they think of my opinion.

I don't have any idea why religions hate sex so much... or why the oppose birth control (specifically the catholic church).

I believe that sex is only moral within a loving, heterosexual marriage.

And a homosexual couple cannot be loving? :mad:

Nonesence, religions dont hate sex, they love it. But they want to control it so that you cant even get naked without thinking about religion. That way its imbeded in your psychie. Make babys, thank God. Its a way of ensuring loyalty, by using the most fundimental instinct of all. After all, he who makes babys, endures.

With that I'm out for tonight, dont post too much, Id hate to have to read 50 pages when I got up.

I believe that sex is only moral within a loving, heterosexual marriage.
It is a decision I have made for myself. I honestly do not care what others do, or what they think of my opinion.

I disagree, but at least you sound tolerant, unlike those who try to force their religious beliefs upon everyone else.

And a homosexual couple cannot be loving? :mad:

Let's not go there in this thread. If you go back to the original post I left the herto/gay debate out of it intentionaly.

Let's not go there in this thread. If you go back to the original post I left the herto/gay debate out of it intentionaly.

Well I think it would eventually get into that.

I'll dispute him big time. My boyfriend and I are very loving, and we do have sex. It is very moral in my eyes. And that is all I will say on the topic.

And a homosexual couple cannot be loving? :mad:
I don’t know how you could think that was what I meant.
The comma implies that the two adjectives are interchangeable and both describe the noun, though not exclusively and not dependently.

You feel it.
[ smile ] It is indeed a feeling. :)

I don’t’ know how you could think that was what I meant.
The comma implies that the two adjectives are interchangeable and both describe the noun, though not exclusively and not dependently.

Thanks for the Bill Clintonism (it depends on what the meaning of is "is").

I know it exists because it is there, in much the same way that I know God exists.

The fact that I can't pick it apart and prove it to exist to someone else does not dull its existence.
So you cannot prove it exists but "believe" that it does, yes?

I will refrain from rebuting your post, because, judging by the last sentence, all you need to do is jack off, and you'll be a much more agreeable person. Or would that be the "mindless self indulgence" and "pursuit of instant gratification" that you abhore so?
LOL! Well, I can't speak for anyone else, obviously, but I'm one hell of a lot more "agreeable" afterward! :D

Thanks for the Bill Clintonism (it depends on what the meaning of is "is").
What are you on about?
Are you one of those people that just looks for a chance to be offended?

What are you on about?
Are you one of those people that just looks for a chance to be offended?

I'm saying you didn't make too much sense in that response.

Anytime sex occurs out of love, (or any feeling of closeness for that matter), you're no better than an animal, giving into primal urges and desires. We are humans and we've got two nifty little things too few people are aware of, its called ethics and morality.

Sex is meant to strengthen the bond between a married couple, with greater intimacy and children.

Its a beautiful thing, but like everything in life, it has a place, and that place is marriage.

Last thing I read someone's post that say love doesn't exist. WTF?! What have you been smokin' man? You mean to tell me you've never had a crush on a pretty young woman? You've never gotten that tingly feeling when you walk by her?

Geeesh, and I thought I was weird.
Um ... but I thought we were animals. [ confused look ] We're certainly not minerals or vegetables, are we???

If love does exist, I want you to define it for me and prove that it exists. Seriously. People toss this thing called "love" around almost like it was some sort of blisssful, drug-induced state, but they can never define it, probably because they have no idea what it actually IS!

Stop criticizing people for their spelling errors (typos, I suspect), and either debate things civily, or don't debate at all. You will convince no one to see things your way by acting like a hoser.
SIC 'em, Wonder Woman! :D

BTW ... did you notice the misspelling of "your're?" Incorrect word useage by one in the process of dissing another for spelling errors! ROFLMAO!

The premise of this poll is wrong.

Is recreational sex OK?

Yes. If it feels good, do it. -- True to a point, but with certain people it can become addictive and extremely dangerous. None of you would be surprised to realize that alot of people doing this could care less what happens to their current partner. If you want an example of this, hit the net and see what the numbers are for people that do not tell their partners they have AIDS. Now, that is one of many diseases out there so just imagine what else you do not know and they will not own up to.... But, in a private social group with select people who are not only safe & tested, but are also knowledgable of why they should be and how, you can greatly minimize the chances of something bad occuring.

No. You should be in love with the person. -- Love? If you are truly in love with a person, by definition, then you do not need sex, simply their companionship will do. As you can ascertain from this, Love is an incomplete term.

No. Only sex with your married partner is OK. -- Guess what people.... This is not safe either. Many a divorce has been over one partner contracting something from their husband or wife. Again this depends on the people and is so archaic a belief that not even Quakers trust it.

I'm asexual and don't care about sex. -- Show me an Asexual human so I can make a mint touring them around the world.

No. Sex is disgusting, dirty and filthy. Never have sex. -- Ah the major mind-@^(#. This is the classic sex is bad, but go out there and kill something attitude. When someone is enept, especially at parenting, there is no better fall back the home grown brainwashing or religion.

Basically what it comes down to is, "There is no lifeguard on duty, swim at your own risk. We are not responsible for any missing objects or harm to your person.". Now how is that for a load of governmental/corporate/parental/religious bull$#!%? You are responsible for yourself and no one else has the right to influnce that. No matter what your beliefs, or in many cases what you are told you beliefs are (people can be such the proverbial "Lemmings" at times), it will always come down to you and only you. If you are not in control of at least the basic parts of your life then you are incredibly handicapped or a moron. Whatever type of person you may be.... Life does not care and the penalties and benefits will always fall directly into your lap.

*<}:o) H-D

If you "knew" you were in love with all those women, then you were.

Or, it is possible that you mistook something for love, and it wasn't actually love. Of course, you would know that after the fact, when you truly were in love with someone.
ROFLMAO!! So you know you were in love after the fact because now you really and truly ARE in love with someone? WTF, Dude? Heh!

No. You should be in love with the person. -- Love? If you are truly in love with a person, by definition, then you do not need sex. Simply their companionship will do. As you can ascertain from this, Love is an incomplete term.

I know what love is, and yes it is a beautiful thing to have sex with the person you love. If you want to take every precautions get you and your partner tested.

I'm saying you didn't make too much sense in that response.
I was saying that homosexuality and love are not mutually exclusive.

Have you ever been in love?
I thought I was, several times, every one of which got me in trouble. Heh!

Liverbreath']Then again it may have something to do with the fact that random sex aids in the ability for horrendous STD's to spread unchecked, into epidemic proportions, killing, or disfiguring millions of people world wide. Of course they are probably just covering for all them evil religous people who want to control what thoughtful, progressive, more intelligent people do because they like it.
Jeeze. Next thing you'll be telling me is that STDs are God's way of punishing the wicked. :rolleyes:

Nope, it was love as there were others I was in lust with. Big difference between love and lust. One is irrational the other perfectly rational.

If you were in love, then you were in love - why did you argue earlier?

Have you ever been in love?

Yes, I have. Twice. The first time I was in love with my idea of the person, rather than the actual person. Unfortunately, he let me believe they were the same.

And currently. =)

I believe that sex is only moral within a loving, heterosexual marriage.
It is a decision I have made for myself. I honestly do not care what others do, or what they think of my opinion.
YES! Not to the "heterosexual marriage" angle there, but to the fact that love is a decision! It is! You are to be congratulated on your perceptiveness. :)

I know what love is, and yes it is a beautiful thing to have sex with the person you love. If you want to take every precautions get you and your partner tested.

Every precaution is to get tested?

I guess we all have a pretty good idea which category this person falls into....

*<}:o) H-D

So you cannot prove it exists but "believe" that it does, yes?

No. I know that it exists, but cannot prove it exists to another person.

Every precaution is to get tested?

I guess we all have a pretty good idea which category this person falls into....

*<}:o) H-D

Sorry there was a few typos made there.. I was on the phone at the time.

I know my partner and I are healthy.

Sorry there was a few typos made there.. I was on the phone at the time.

I know my partner and I are healthy.

Prove it Mesmerino.... You can NEVER know what another person is, most of the time they have no clue. And guess, what.... clean now can turn into unclean later in well under a minute. But, you are the all knowing Psychic know it all so you must be right.


*<}:o) H-D

ROFLMAO!! So you know you were in love after the fact because now you really and truly ARE in love with someone? WTF, Dude? Heh!

No, you can know that you weren't actually in love, but were actually only in lust, after the fact.

Much like many things, one can be mistaken for the other.

YES! Not to the "heterosexual marriage" angle there, but to the fact that love is a decision! It is! You are to be congratulated on your perceptiveness. :)
I believe you misunderstood. I was not saying love was a choice, I was saying that my decision about the perquisites for moral sex are a choice.
I think that sometimes one does not have a choice about who they fall in love with.

I’m a bit of a romantic and a Christian. I can only conclude that that makes you and Oxwana my arch-enemies.:p j/k of course

YES! Not to the "heterosexual marriage" angle there, but to the fact that love is a decision! It is! You are to be congratulated on your perceptiveness. :)

For it to be a decision, you would have to be able to look at any random person and say, "I will be in love with this person," and have it happen.

Much like attraction, it doesn't work that way.

Prove it Mesmerino.... You can NEVER know what another person is, most of the time they have no clue. And guess, what.... clean now can turn into unclean later in well under a minute. But, you are the all knowing Psychic know it all so you must be right.


*<}:o) H-D

I don't give a damn. I'll take my chances and not listen to fear mongers as yourself. My boyfriend is healthy. I can know about him, and guess what I do. He's healthy. Like me. You need a knock in the head.. something is loose.

Don't mock me either.

First of all, there's a perfectly good reason for society to push "restraints" on sex, because uncontrolled sex may mean lots and lots of babies that you'd have to take care of, and that's too much of a burden for anyone.

Now, having said that, I picked option No. 1, because I see no problem with people having lots and lots of sex (and casually) as long as they know what they're doing so that they don't get that burden. It's also a matter of choice, because my life won't change because someone else is having consensual but casual sex. Sex is an act, just like opening a door, and thus it means something different to different people. Therefore, saying "one side fits all" in this case would be to misunderstand the situation.

Personally, I don't have casual sex because I'm in a committed relationship, but I'm not going to be one of those people who says "everyone should do what I do" because, hey, not everyone will be me.

I don't give a damn. I'll take my chances and not listen to fear mongers as yourself. My boyfriend is healthy. I can know about him, and guess what I do. He's healthy. Like me. You need a knock in the head.. something is loose.

Don't mock me either.

That is not what you were saying before.... Hypocrite says what? :headbang:

As far as mocking you.... I do not even have to lift a finger for that nor would I. Especially since you have already done an excellent job of it already.

*<}:o) H-D

That is not what you were saying before.... Hypocrite says what? :headbang:

As far as mocking you.... I do not even have to lift a finger for that nor would I. Especially since you have already done an excellent job of it already.

*<}:o) H-D

This is the type of illogical rantings I don't respond to.. i don't think I care. So go on with your incoherent statements elsewhere. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Humans are animals. We are very complicated animals, but we are really nothing more than animals. We can have sex like animals if we want to. Anyone ever hear of 'doing it like they do on the Discovery Channel'?"Love.
The kind you clean up with a mop and bucket...
And then we'll do it doggy-style so we can both watch X-Files".
I love that song. It's on my playlist now.

LOL! Well, I can't speak for anyone else, obviously, but I'm one hell of a lot more "agreeable" afterward! :DAs am I. People I hardly know ask me, "Is something wrong?" if I haven't done it yet that day. Apparently, I start acting weird.
Speaking of... I'll be back in 5 minutes. ;)

What are you on about?
Are you one of those people that just looks for a chance to be offended?Are you one of those people who likes to offend people? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume that the answer is no.
In that case, just fyi: people may get offended when you call them immoral.
Your definition of marriage is your own. If you chose not to acknowledge gay relationships, or to consider gays to be immoral, you have every right to express those opinions. But don't be surprised when you offend people. I am offended.

You already know the answer to those questions. Some people are taught that sex is some sort of quasi-religious rite that has to be hedged about with all sorts of strictures and controls.

I suspect the real reason so many societies, religions and what have you try to control sex, is that sex is a life-affirming act of rebellion against repression and control.

Just one old fart's take on the issue. :)

This would have to be a very good reason to control sex. Read George Orwell's 1984? It's creepy. First they get the party members to only have sex when they want to produce a child (after getting permission) and even then it's not SEX sex. Sigh, very sad. :(

Anyhoo, haven't read back the post yet, but it seems to get quite heated. Just to put my two cents in, none of the guys I've slept with have been guys I've been in love with. In fact, I've never been in love. I believe that is more precious than sex. And just to clarify, we were always consenting, yadda yadda. I think it's enough to like someone a lot, have a connection and be comfortable with the person, enough so to have sex.

I'm one for sex with your spouse, that you love.

I honestly don't give a damn. Different people should be allowed to do what they want, if they both consent.

Anytime sex occurs out of love, (or any feeling of closeness for that matter), you're no better than an animal, giving into primal urges and desires. We are humans and we've got two nifty little things too few people are aware of, its called ethics and morality.

Sex is meant to strengthen the bond between a married couple, with greater intimacy and children.

Its a beautiful thing, but like everything in life, it has a place, and that place is marriage.

Last thing I read someone's post that say love doesn't exist. WTF?! What have you been smokin' man? You mean to tell me you've never had a crush on a pretty young woman? You've never gotten that tingly feeling when you walk by her?

Geeesh, and I thought I was weird.

First off, we are animals. We're not better, if anything we are worse than most animals.
And if you think this "stying together for live" business was a human invention, I advise you to study parrotts at length.
Second, nobody said that mutual attraction doesn't exist. It does, and it's a nice hormon-based rush everytime. But there is no such thing as eternal love. You fall in love, you fall out of love, that's life. I can't stand this over-romanticised idea that there is one perfect person out there for you and you have to wait your whole life in moral abstinence just so you'll find him/her and then neither of you will really know what to do on your wedding night... sheesh

Anyhoo, haven't read back the post yet, but it seems to get quite heated. Just to put my two cents in, none of the guys I've slept with have been guys I've been in love with. In fact, I've never been in love.
... I think it's enough to like someone a lot, have a connection and be comfortable with the person, enough so to have sex.

I completely agree :)

In fact, I've never been in love. I believe that is more precious than sex. And just to clarify, we were always consenting, yadda yadda. I think it's enough to like someone a lot, have a connection and be comfortable with the person, enough so to have sex.True story. I don't get people who have been in multiple relationships where they acted like they were married and professed to love their SOs, but are "saving themselves".
The thing that I "saved" was my heart. Emotional intimacy is the truely special thing, the thing that I refuse to share with just anyone.

The best way to go about life is to maximize pleasure and fulfillment while minimizing pain. This is particularly true concerning sex. How too applie this ethic is best left however to the educated individual.

As for love, I don't believe it exists... I have thought long and hard about that subject and I have decided that what we know as love is simply a simplification of complex emotions and drives.

Why should there be anything wrong with recreational sex? I enjoy that sometimes...
And why would it be anybody's business what goes on between two (or more) consenting adults?Do you remember the Rothenburg Cannibal? That is what I'd call the law's business to intervene in...

Life-affirming? Everything in the world is a sham. Death is the only sincerity.

You missed taxes, death & taxes are the only certainties in life. :)

Um ... but I thought we were animals. [ confused look ] We're certainly not minerals or vegetables, are we???

If love does exist, I want you to define it for me and prove that it exists. Seriously. People toss this thing called "love" around almost like it was some sort of blisssful, drug-induced state, but they can never define it, probably because they have no idea what it actually IS!

That's sort of like saying "Prove Dark Matter". We know it's there, but we can't see it.

There IS NO definition for the word love. I believe that it is likely different for everyone. It isn't a blissful, drug induced state. (And I know blissful drug induced states! :P ) It's just something you KNOW. I just knew. I never felt the same way about any other man.

I've had plenty of recreational sex prior to meeting my husband, and there is a different bond other than the physical, when it comes to love. For us, it isn't the primal urge to have children either. We have none and are having none. (The primal urge to deal with two cats maybe.)

It sounds cryptic, but you just KNOW. For those not in love or in a relationship or whatever, recreational (I hate calling it that. It sounds like tennis or something.), sex, or as I like to refer to it as casual sex, or sex with someone you're not in love with is just fine. As a matter of fact it can be intensely gratifying to be with a new person. It's like the "honeymoon phase" of marriage. But you don't have to lose that phase. You just have to experiement and make an effort as time goes on. There is no doubt that sex is a little bit routine when you're married a while, unless you make an effort to make sure it's not. You can make it far less routine and more exciting than when you got married. And there are MANY ways to do that and have a great time. (Think non-vanilla ;D )

True story. I don't get people who have been in multiple relationships where they acted like they were married and professed to love their SOs, but are "saving themselves".
The thing that I "saved" was my heart. Emotional intimacy is the truely special thing, the thing that I refuse to share with just anyone.

Well said. And it's easy to tell the difference. Emotional intimacy IS different than casual sex. I've always separated sex and love anyway. Go figure.

Well said. And it's easy to tell the difference. Emotional intimacy IS different than casual sex. I've always separated sex and love anyway. Go figure.Sex, love, and companionship. All three are important (essential, IMO), but you don't need to get all three from one person. I love a lot of my friends, and can't stand some of them. I hang out with people who I don't care all that much about, but have fun with. And I have sex, too, but not necessarily with people I love (or even like that much). All my needs are fulfilled. It'd be nice to have one special person who did it all, but... meh. I had one. He stomped on my heart. I won't be doing it again. Hell if I'm never going to get laid again, though. :D

Sex, love, and companionship.
...
It'd be nice to have one special person who did it all, but... meh. I had one. He stomped on my heart. I won't be doing it again. Hell if I'm never going to get laid again, though. :DSounds like my last relationship. She didn't really "stomp" on my heart (at least not intentionally). I haven't really found anyone I can imagine to get laid by though...

Sounds like my last relationship. She didn't really "stomp" on my heart (at least not intentionally). I haven't really found anyone I can imagine to get laid by though...Mine refuses to talk to me. I'm still angsty over it. I'll TG you some very, very horrible poetry that I wrote to demonstrate. :p

Mine refuses to talk to me. I'm still angsty over it. I'll TG you some very, very horrible poetry that I wrote to demonstrate. :p
Hehe... I refuse to talk to her... Thanks for the poem... sounds a lot like what I felt in a different relationship...

But there is no such thing as eternal love. You fall in love, you fall out of love, that's life.

Not everyone falls out of love. It can happen, but does not always happen. When it does happen, it is often a result of one or both of the people involved deciding to stop working at the relationship. Successful relationships do involve effort, and if that effort isn't put in, there is a good chance that the two will grow apart, rather than together.

as long as no one gets hurt, why not?

Are the results of this poll simply stating that most people have liberal ideas here because I can't see this as being accurate with the population at large. I've always assumed Hollywood is emphasizing the "get pleasure now and damn the consequences" attitude. I suppose its possible that the majority of people actually have this belief for which I'll be very disappointed if true. People really should wait until marriage for sex but realistically this most likely won't happen so you should at the very least love the person. Casual sex can be dangerous to given what's out there in the world.

Did any of the people that were against sex defend their position? :confused:

Yes. If it feels good, do it but be wary of hurting others' feelings and, above all, be honest.

Are the results of this poll simply stating that most people have liberal ideas here because I can't see this as being accurate with the population at large. I've always assumed Hollywood is emphasizing the "get pleasure now and damn the consequences" attitude. I suppose its possible that the majority of people actually have this belief for which I'll be very disappointed if true. People really should wait until marriage for sex but realistically this most likely won't happen so you should at the very least love the person. Casual sex can be dangerous to given what's out there in the world.Actually, I've recently changed my mind that having sex early is much better. This is mainly because I'm having trouble getting over a relationship which happened to be my first time getting laid (at age 20). My therapist told me not to underestimate the bond that the first sexual intercourse forges. The earlier you have the experience the better you will cope with it.
I agree with your criticism of "pleasure now". Part of the fun is sharing the experience with someone that means a lot to you.

Ah noon, the time when all sane people wake up.

Now where was I....

For the sake of space I'll only include part of this post

The premise of this poll is wrong.

Is recreational sex OK?

No. You should be in love with the person. -- Love? If you are truly in love with a person, by definition, then you do not need sex, simply their companionship will do. As you can ascertain from this, Love is an incomplete term.

*<}:o) H-D

Yes in true love their conpanionship IS enough, but that doesen't mean that theirs no place for sex. For example, in order to stay healthy you need to eat a balanced diet (none of this Atkins stuff). However you can still eat other things (sweets for example) out of proportion and still be "healthy". Therfore, in a loving relationship, sex is "the icing on the cake". It makes it better, but is not nessissary.



This ones interestion...

YES! Not to the "heterosexual marriage" angle there, but to the fact that love is a decision! It is! You are to be congratulated on your perceptiveness. :)

If love is a decision then my mind works funny. I'm in a relationship that I made no "choice" about, I just blinked my eyes, stopped, and realised "I'm in love with this woman!", A eurika moment, if you will.

Another good one…

No, you can know that you weren't actually in love, but were actually only in lust, after the fact.

Much like many things, one can be mistaken for the other.

Actually, I have a very simple equation for love. Love = lust + love. It may seem strange at first, but remember love has about a billion different meanings. For example, you're supposed to love your parents, you're supposed to love your siblings, you're supposed to love your friends, and you're supposed to love your country. Each one of those is a different take on the word, but they all still contain one basic premise. To "love" someone in its most basic sense is to care for them and to want the best for them and so on. Lust is simply "Do I want this person in bed". Therfore and "Romantic Love" is simply carring for someone like you would for a close friend, but also wanting to have sex with them. But thats just my take on things.


And this one…

Are the results of this poll simply stating that most people have liberal ideas here because I can't see this as being accurate with the population at large. I've always assumed Hollywood is emphasizing the "get pleasure now and damn the consequences" attitude. I suppose its possible that the majority of people actually have this belief for which I'll be very disappointed if true. People really should wait until marriage for sex but realistically this most likely won't happen so you should at the very least love the person. Casual sex can be dangerous to given what's out there in the world.

And I suppose STDs are the wrath of God on the Liberal-Media-Controling-Jews-Who-Seceratly-Run-The-Country-And-Implant-Mind-Control-Devices-Into-Our-Heads-So-We-Have-To-Wear-Tin-Foil-Hats-For-Our-Own-Protection.....

Please, gimme a break, throwing around the word "Liberal" every time you see something that mildly displeases you is NOT the way to win an argument, or get people to like you for that matter...

mon dieu, that last post really raped the x-scrollbar.

I play netball because it makes me happy.
I watch, and play rugby because it makes me happy.
I watch movies because they make me happy. (most anyways)
I have friends because they make me happy. (and apparently I, them)
I post here because it makes me happy.

Why can't I have sex because it makes me happy?

Of course, I don't know if it WOULD make me happy, but I'm pretty sure it would. :D.

A very happy person arn't you.

And some people think that everyone has different opinions, and that all opinions are valid so long as they aren't trying to impose those opinions on others.

Myself, I only have had sex with a single woman, because I believe sex is something special and I wanted to save my first time for the "right girl". However, that doesn't mean I think that its wrong to have crazy tons of sex if that's how you feel about it personally, so long as you don't mislead your partner(s) into thinking it means more to you than it does, and everyone is responsible considering STDs and pregnancy possibilities.

Also, as to the poster above talking about love and whether or not it is a decision... the "in love" experience is not a decision on our part, you're right. One day it just happens. But after the infatuation wears off, after the "in love experience" has played itself out (it has been measured as averaging between one to three years), that's when love becomes a choice. That's when you finally start seeing this person for who they really are, and are no longer ignoring parts of the person that maybe aren't so great as you would like.

At that point, love becomes a choice. And that, in my opinion, is true love; what's so special about a chemical reaction in my brain telling me that this girl is amazing, beautiful, etc? Nothing. Its special when I no longer have an overwhelming chemical/psychological trip that helps me ignore a person's flaws, and yet I still *choose* to be with that person. That is love.

And so, love is both a choice and not a choice. =D

Actually, I have a very simple equation for love. Love = lust + love. It may seem strange at first, but remember love has about a billion different meanings.

That doesn't define the love in the second half of the equation, however.

Meanwhile, you are correct that the word has too many meanings. The Greeks had no less than six words that all translate to the single English word "love". I would say that there are probably more forms of love than we could ever come up with words for - and none of them are something you can really define, anymore than you can define "happy" - a word which truly means something different to everyone.

To "love" someone in its most basic sense is to care for them and to want the best for them and so on. Lust is simply "Do I want this person in bed". Therfore and "Romantic Love" is simply carring for someone like you would for a close friend, but also wanting to have sex with them. But thats just my take on things.

It is possible, however, especially for those who can't separate an emotional connection from a physical one, to mistake lust for love - or to convince yourself that the person you are lusting after is someone they are not - someone you can love. The human mind is complicated - and all sorts of things can happen.

A very happy person arn't you.

Who me?

Of course, I'm assuming once I get someone who's willing we'll ahve tons of mad-crazy sex to make me a very happy person.

until then it's just rugby, movies, netball and what not.

That doesn't define the love in the second half of the equation, however.


I tried to define love in the second half of the equation later. But basicaly, for me anyway, its the root feeling that all forms of love have in common.

Who me?

Of course, I'm assuming once I get someone who's willing we'll ahve tons of mad-crazy sex to make me a very happy person.

until then it's just rugby, movies, netball and what not.

*buys plane ticket to Hong Kong*

I think that you sould love the person and that it should be something special.

*buys plane ticket to Hong Kong*

Well that made me laugh, so I guess you're practically at the making-me-happy stage. ;)

Well that made me laugh, so I guess you're practically at the making-me-happy stage. ;)

I see. My work here is done!

*runs*

Also, as to the poster above talking about love and whether or not it is a decision... the "in love" experience is not a decision on our part, you're right. One day it just happens. But after the infatuation wears off, after the "in love experience" has played itself out (it has been measured as averaging between one to three years), that's when love becomes a choice. That's when you finally start seeing this person for who they really are, and are no longer ignoring parts of the person that maybe aren't so great as you would like.

At that point, love becomes a choice. And that, in my opinion, is true love; what's so special about a chemical reaction in my brain telling me that this girl is amazing, beautiful, etc? Nothing. Its special when I no longer have an overwhelming chemical/psychological trip that helps me ignore a person's flaws, and yet I still *choose* to be with that person. That is love.

And so, love is both a choice and not a choice. =D
Well, you got it half right anyway. :)

So "falling in love" is a process over which I, as a thinking human being, have absolutely no control? I just suddenly find myself "in love" and have no choice in the matter? If ever there was a prescription for becoming a "victim" this is it.

Well, you got it half right anyway. :)

So "falling in love" is a process over which I, as a thinking human being, have absolutely no control? I just suddenly find myself "in love" and have no choice in the matter? If ever there was a prescription for becoming a "victim" this is it.

Victim? You find yourself in love and you think your a victim??? Sure love can complecate matters a lot, but victim????? Love is a thing to be enjoyed, not feared.

Love is a thing to be enjoyed, not feared.

you're right, love shouldn't be feared. it's your LOVED ONES that should be :p

you're right, love shouldn't be feared. it's your LOVED ONES that should be :p

LOL too true. No one else has quite so much leverage over you.

When you fall for someone in addition to your heart you also give them a large sledge hammer to hit you with, and hope for the best, figuritavly of course.

Victim? You find yourself in love and you think your a victim??? Sure love can complecate matters a lot, but victim????? Love is a thing to be enjoyed, not feared.
Surely the language barrier isn't that big! Please read that post again and try to understand word order and emphasis. Nowhere did I indicate that I thought myself to be a victim of any sort. :p

Victim? You find yourself in love and you think your a victim??? Sure love can complecate matters a lot, but victim????? Love is a thing to be enjoyed, not feared.
Victim sounds about right…

Yes. If it feels good, do it but be wary of hurting others' feelings and, above all, be honest.Well said.

I know some people do not believe love exists. I take no issue with that. What I do take issue with is the practice of people on this board sometimes stating their disbelief in love in a way that says "Love has no foundation, so those who believe in it are idiots." Noone has actually said this, to my knowledge, but I've been feeling it between the lines.
I'm pretty sure everyone here believes in gravity, to the extent that we rely on it to continue working the way it has so that our day-to-day lives don't get really messed up. However, gravity cannot be proven. Noone has discovered the bits and peices of gravity and put them under a microscope; very few people understand how gravity is even supposed to work. People have merely looked at the way things are happening in the universe, and tried to figure out what's causing some of it. They have no hard evidence, though - only circumstantial. They may very well be wrong. Yet we base our lives upon their unproven theory.
A person who lives their life depending on the unproven force Gravity has no business criticizing someone for believing in the unproven force Love.
If someone who simply stated that love does not exist is offended because they feel that I am being unfair to them, I will apologize. If someone wants to debate my point with me, I will be happy to; it's hard to get everything in one post and I'm sure I left holes. (Both these things depend on my remembering to return to this forum; apologies to all if I forget.) Insulting me for my views, however, will get you nowhere, so please save your fingers the work.
Respectfully,
-Will

Well said.
Thanks. :) I should also have added that it really pays to get your talking in early, if you get what I mean. Don't assume exclusivity (or the opposite), make sure you know!

Oh, and 'fuck buddies' are temporary. Something will change the dynamic, usually in the short term.

Mrf. I'm probably the last person who ought to hand out advice...

I've never participated in recreational sex and don't intend to until I find the woman I'll spend the rest of my life with, but I can see the appeal in it and am not about to try to prevent anyone from doing it, so I voted yes.

gravity cannot be proven.

Really? Allow me to try, this is a class activity so you can all participate. Pick something up. Stand up. Release whatever you picked up. You have all just proved gravity, unless your in space.

Love is equally proveable, but you need a common referance point. Its possible to prove gravity to somone standing on an object with mass. But impossible to prove it to someone who's lived their entire life in a weightless enviornment. Gravity determines our sense of "up and down" therefore, if you've never known gravity, you've never known down, and nothing can "fall down". Similarly if you've never known affection, then its impossible to prove love to you, and I pity you.

If you still insist that gravity is unproveable, then prove my existance. I can, but you cant. There is only one thing that can "truely" be proven, your own existance. "I think therefore I am", although this cannot be said of everyone...

Siting here at my keyboard my entire life could have been "a dream within a dream" (kudos to anyone who can provide me with the source of that quote) but nonetheless I exist, even if nothing here or any of you even exist.

-snip-

I totally agree. You said it better than I could have.
And it's Poe.

??? when did I say -snip- and I havent yet quoted poe.

good try tho...

I totally agree. You said it better than I could have.
And it's Poe.

If you're referring to the "I think therefore I am" bit, that was actually Rene Descartes...

Yes thats right but I asumed that was common knowlage.

I wanted people to find sources for "a dream within a dream" and "without a common repherance point it would be impossible to explain"

If you're referring to the "I think therefore I am" bit, that was actually Rene Descartes...There were two famous quotes in the post I replied to. I was refering to the one that the author asked for a source for, obviously.
"A dream within a dream", from a poem of the same name, by Edgar Allan Poe.

Nice try, but Poe stole it, I want the ORIGIONAL author, dont think so western...

Nice try, but Poe stole it, I want the ORIGIONAL author, dont think so western...I am Western, therefore I think Western. You did not specify that there was a lesser known original author, or I would have looked into it.

The poem of which you speak was Poes work, but "A dream within a dream" was the last line of Toyotomi Hideyoshi's death poem

My life
came like dew
disappears like dew.
All of Naniwa
is a dream within a dream.

I'm western too, but I'm still capable of thinking in an Asian fashion, it can be quite usefull to think in circles instead of lines.

The poem of which you speak was Poes work, but "A dream within a dream" was the last line of Toyotomi Hideyoshi's death poem

My life
came like dew
disappears like dew.
All of Naniwa
is a dream within a dream.

I'm western too, but I'm still capable of thinking in an Asian fashion, it can be quite usefull to think in circles instead of lines.Having heard that poem before has nothing to do with the way you think.

Victim sounds about right…

My love has flew
She did me dirt
Him did not know
She was a flirt

To those in love
Let I forbid
Lest the be dod
Like I was did.

Ode to Jerry by me circa 1962

I know some people do not believe love exists. I take no issue with that.

Love is like God. You know it exists but you can't prove it, you can only know of it's existence because you can feel it.

Siting here at my keyboard my entire life could have been "a dream within a dream" (kudos to anyone who can provide me with the source of that quote) but nonetheless I exist, even if nothing here or any of you even exist.

Sounds remarkably like a conversation I had with my friends in the barracks at Chanute AFB in Rantoul, Illinois in 1962. We didn't solve it then and no one since has found an answer? :(

Love is like God. You know it exists but you can't prove it, you can only know of it's existence because you can feel it.

Actually I'm much more certain that love exists than God exists. In fact I'm quite sure that either. A. God doesent exist, or B. God (or some other religious entity(s) do exist but are completely apathetic. If they wanted us to worship them, why not make us.

What right does one have in determining whether two consenting adults can engage in a private activity that they both deem enjoyable and which has no negative impact upon the community? One must either force their own beliefs upon the millions who partake in a harmless activity in and of itself, or bring up the argument that sex spreads STD's. And that leads to an entirely different subject.

I'd prefer keeping my :fluffle:

Nice try, but Poe stole it, I want the ORIGIONAL author, dont think so western...

Are you refering to the American Indians 'A Dream Within A Dream Catcher'?

Anyway, it's ridiculous to even question whether love exists. It doesn't matter if it's the result of chemical reactions or Zeus's left testicle quivering. I know I love my wife, my children, my parents. I know I love some of my friends. I love my cat. All these are different forms of one feeling, that I don't want to consider life without them. That's love.

Are you refering to the American Indians 'A Dream Within A Dream Catcher'?

No, Toyotomi Hideyoshi's Death Poem, poested in a previous post

No, Toyotomi Hideyoshi's Death Poem, poested in a previous post

Ah, sorry. Thanks.

Well, you got it half right anyway. :)

So "falling in love" is a process over which I, as a thinking human being, have absolutely no control? I just suddenly find myself "in love" and have no choice in the matter? If ever there was a prescription for becoming a "victim" this is it.

When you begin developing an affection for someone, you can choose not to see them again. You're not really going to fall in love at that point. However, you can't choose to or not to fall in love if you persue the relationship. It either happens or it doesn't.

Really? Allow me to try, this is a class activity so you can all participate. Pick something up. Stand up. Release whatever you picked up. You have all just proved gravity, unless your in space.

Incorrect, as you cannot say with absolute certainity that the next time you pick that object up, it won't float or go upwards.

You can be pretty darn sure it won't, since it never has before, but you cannot prove that it never will, because you can't keep dropping it until the end of time to see.

Incorrect, as you cannot say with absolute certainity that the next time you pick that object up, it won't float or go upwards.

You can be pretty darn sure it won't, since it never has before, but you cannot prove that it never will, because you can't keep dropping it until the end of time to see.

True, but I can say that it will fall the with equal certanty as I can say that when I type the word "that" on my keyboard the word "that" will appear on the computer screen. Or that the sun will rise tomorrow, or that when I touch a wall, it will be solid.

The only thing that can be concretely proven is your own existance. We "presume" other things exist because we percieve that they do. I pick up the soda bottle next to me. I drop it. I see it fall. I hear it hit the ground. Its entirely possible that the soda bottle did not ever drop, but I perceived that it did, therefore, in my reality, gravity exists, the walls are solid, "that" came out correctly, and to me, love exists.

That was a nice bit of referencing, Wei-Yuan; I myself have a hard time remembering who wrote the meaningful things that I've read. I liked the poem, too.

I agree with you; the only thing a person can concretely prove is that they exist. Everything else, including the existence of Love, is uncertain.

This means that the vast majority of all our lives is based on belief, which has no base except for circumstantial evidence and the irrational feelings of our minds (and possibly, our Souls - another thing which people debate about). Thus, a person cannot rightly feel that they are smarter or more correct than another person, because that person is as much a fool as the one they are belittling.

It is, however, good for a person to discuss their beliefs with another person, especially if the other person has differing beliefs. Discussing helps both people to question their beliefs, so that they remain closely in tune with each person's irrational feelings - ensuring that they do what they want to do deep down, and thus feel that they are living their lives the right way.

Of course, getting into beliefs, a person who is sure of their belief must act upon it; it would be making us hypocrites if we secretly believed one thing but did another. For example; if you believe it is right to have sex as much as possible, you should do so. Some beliefs may conflict in a person at times; it is up to that person to determine which belief takes precedence.

Just living one's life according to one's beliefs, and discussing them with others in order to question them, is enough. That way, those around a person will be influenced by what they can see is really there, rather than by what that person tries to show them is there. Of course, you hope that you've been true enough to your beliefs that what they see and what you see are the same.
Respectfully,
-Will