Create account

replied 2038d
TrashPosterInTheDark
Why should you get to decide who people can have that pleasure with and how?
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2038d
I don't but by definition doing so is definitely a perverted way of orienting pleasure meant for reproduction purpose.
Barricade
replied 2038d
No, that's religious bullshit, just moral judgment. Fortunately, freewill allows human being to have all kind of sex only for pleasure without caring about reproduction.
CryptoAnarchist
replied 2038d
"perverted" means To put to a wrong or improper use; misuse. Nothing to do with religion.
Barricade
replied 2038d
When you attribute perversion to someone or someone, you're doing a moral judgment, it cannot be inferred by any science field. Moral judgments comes from culture and religion.
replied 2033d
That requires you to first make the moral judgement that perverted is bad. Which someone could argue was not the case. Perverting the justice of an unjust law for example:P
CryptoAnarchist
replied 2038d
You can call it a "moral judgment", but its also objective fact. Putting penis in anus = eating through your nose.
Barricade
replied 2037d
Why are you assuming a reproductive purpose on sex? Are you comparing humans to animals, or enforcing people to have kids?
CryptoAnarchist
replied 2037d
That is like asking, "Why are you assuming a digestive purpose on eating?" Sex is for the purposes of reproduction - that's just fact. Keep your strawmans to yourself.
Barricade
replied 2036d
One thing human development has achieve is to split sex from reproduction. Humans will have sex for fun, it's human nature. You cannot go against it, religions have failed.
CryptoAnarchist
replied 2034d
That doesn't change what nature's intent for your organs is. You are free to engage in crimes against nature, but don't try to convince people its "normal".
Barricade
replied 2033d
Natural selection IS nature, you can't go against it unless you like eugenesia and reducing genetic pool. Again: crime is a moral judgement, not science.
Barricade
replied 2033d
Homosexuality has been always present in nature. It has a evolutionary advantage (paradox) because it has not been discarded by natural selection.
CryptoAnarchist
replied 2033d
Your premise fails basic logic. Homosexuality is discarded by natural selection by definition - it doesn't end in reproduction.
Barricade
replied 2031d
If homosexuality is discarded by natural selection, why it still exist? Are you assuming a Mendelian inheritance of homosexuality?
CryptoAnarchist
replied 2031d
"If homosexuality is discarded by natural selection, why it still exist? " I'm sure non-stop promotion in the media helps. Literally every TV show has gay character by the 2nd season.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2033d
Illnesses have been always present in nature. Contracting them is certainly not an advantage since your genes are being removed from the genpool (inability to procreate).
replied 2037d
"objective"
replied 2033d
My sense of humor is objectively shitty.
replied 2038d
Ok. But that makes the majority of heterosexual sex perverted in nature too, since most people have sexual relationships before marriage, and certainly intent to reproduce.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2038d
Indeed but mariage is only a social construct for the only purpose of keeping sex unperverted with more or less efficiency.
replied 2033d
Are you making the case against perverted sex in general? (Like out of marriage sex for fun?).
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2033d
In a way.
replied 2033d
Would you advocate voluntary celibacy and avoiding masturbation and/or sexual lusting/imagery in general? As a good way to live life (if not for other, then for yourself?)
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2033d
I would advocate masturbation being behavior trying to patch a biological need unsatisfied.
replied 2033d
The lesser of two evils? If a person is able to abstain from it and control themselves otherwise, then it is preferable in your view. Correct?
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2033d
I wouldn't says so. I know no biological organ or function that doesn't need stimulation to at least maintain or improve itself. Bones, muscles, brain and even the immunity system.
replied 2033d
In other words, If it is not medically necessary or beneficial to masturbate, and there was a way to know this for sure, then you would advocate for abstaining from masturbation.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2033d
*why would I
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2033d
If its not beneficial why I advocate for it?
replied 2033d
So if you found out that masturbation was not beneficial to you, would you stop masturbating?
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2033d
If I find out that it is detrimental, of course.
replied 2033d
What if it is not detrimental? (Not beneficial, not detrimental, neutral).
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2033d
I don't know. All I know is that I won't have any arguments for neither supporting the practice or the abstinence of it.
replied 2033d
The argument against it would be that it was perverted in the context of this thread. It is non-reproductive pleasure seeking done for sexual gratification.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2033d
The argument would depend if it is used in substitution or not.
replied 2033d
Substitution for what? Reproductive sex?
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2033d
Yes.
replied 2032d
So if it is not a substitution for reproductive sex, then masturbation would not be a perverted act? Did I understand that correctly.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2032d
Yes, in such an hypothetical scenario.
replied 2032d
In other words, if two men meet up and jerk each other off, as long as that is not as substitution for reproductive sex, then it is not perverted.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2032d
I'll let you be judge.
replied 2032d
You mentioned earlier in this topic that you found any activity that was done for sexual gratification outside of reproductive sex as being a mental illness or at least perverted.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2032d
Exactly. Yet I won't continue to speculate on a hypothetical scenario that is likely not based on reality.
replied 2032d
I think that any sexual act that is not reproductive is perverted, but that perverted acts are not a bad thing in themselves just because it is perverted.
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2032d
Yes, some illnesses have more dangerous consequences than others. It's a spectrum.
replied 2032d
You view masturbation to be on the spectrum of mental illnesses, but on the lower end of it. less bad than doing other sexual stuff that is worse on the scale. (Correct me if wrong)
TrashPosterInTheDark
replied 2032d
Pretty much unless it is to release unsatisfied biological urges.
replied 2032d
That exception makes no sense, acting on the urges with masturbation is the illness, not the urges themselves, they are meant to remain unsatisfied outside of reproductive sex.
replied 2030d
Your sexual organs need exercise to be healthy, just like every other part of your body. Ethics is more rational when we replace the Good vs Evil dichotomy with Healthy vs Unhealthy.
replied 2030d
There is no medical need for people to masturbate unless they have some form of sexual dysfunction which can be treated by it, it looks to be neutral in moderation.
replied 2027d
source?
replied 2027d
Each person can consult their doctor and ask them if it is medically necessary to masturbate if they do not feel like it. It is generally not.
replied 2027d
Masturbation is not necessary for the functioning of the body or the sexual organs of men in general, it is an optional personal choice they can make to do, not medical necessity.
replied 2030d
I am not making an ethical/moral/healthy claim, I was probing TrashPoster about his arguments about what he categorized as mental illness. I do not think that here needs to be any->
replied 2030d
-> reason, ethical or health related, to masturbate. It is just something that people do because they enjoy it, I am not making the claim that it is a mental illness or wrong either ->
replied 2030d
-> every person knows best what is best for themselves and they should be free to chose, there does not need to be a "health" or "ethics" justification for doing anything with your ->
replied 2030d
-> own body. But there is no need to do anything that is healthy unless one feels like it either, masturbation is just a personal choice a person can make without any justification.
replied 2033d
It seems that masturbation has a good effect on prostate cancer for those who masturbate AFTER they turn 50, but it has the opposite (negative) effect (very small) in 20s to 50s.
replied 2033d
But would that not be the case with sex between men and women as well? The male body regulates the penis with boners in sleep and nocturnal emissions. No need to masturbate.