NationStates

The 93rd Coalition wrote:

Czechanada wrote:
Such things can be objectively determined.

Really? How? There isn't any particular advantage to asexuality, it would just remove the love/pleasure element added in by partnered sexuality. If anything, it may have a adverse impact on our society by making us more apathetic to the needs of others.

Why can't we just treat sexuality as something that doesn't really matter. As something that is no more a measure of a person as an individual than race or colorblindness. We went from persecuting all non heterosexuals, to trying to find a new sexuality to place on top.

Czechanada wrote:

The 93rd Coalition wrote:How can there be a BEST kind of sexuality? It's like deciding the best type of foot, it's just THERE.

Such things can be objectively determined.

So after asexuality which is the best kind? I want to see a list ranking sexualities here, with an explanation for each one providing the objective basis for the ranking.

The Sotoan Union wrote:

The 93rd Coalition wrote:
Really? How? There isn't any particular advantage to asexuality, it would just remove the love/pleasure element added in by partnered sexuality. If anything, it may have a adverse impact on our society by making us more apathetic to the needs of others.

Why can't we just treat sexuality as something that doesn't really matter. As something that is no more a measure of a person as an individual than race or colorblindness. We went from persecuting all non heterosexuals, to trying to find a new sexuality to place on top.

We're just a silly, fickle species aren't we?

New haven america wrote:

Untaroicht wrote:Even as an Asexual AND Anti-Sexual, who dreams of a world without the sin of lust, I find this to be bonkers.

In a perfect world, people will realize that sex (IMO) is a crude, degenerative aspect of biology that should be weeded out through technology such as cloning (just as many diseases have found vaccines), but no human is "superior", and we sure as hell can't force the change if we don't want to appear to be nuts.

No

There's a reason I put the IMO there. I consider myself extremely devout, but one aspect of my religion I tend to disagree with is how "Marital sex between a man and a woman is a sacred, holy thing". When I hear or see it (outside of the excuse of procreation), I only see two rational-up-to-this-point people reduced to mindless drones as they barbarically give in to their base animalistic urges and dopamine addiction.

The Sotoan Union wrote:

The 93rd Coalition wrote:
Really? How? There isn't any particular advantage to asexuality, it would just remove the love/pleasure element added in by partnered sexuality. If anything, it may have a adverse impact on our society by making us more apathetic to the needs of others.

Why can't we just treat sexuality as something that doesn't really matter. As something that is no more a measure of a person as an individual than race or colorblindness. We went from persecuting all non heterosexuals, to trying to find a new sexuality to place on top.

Too sane.

The Sotoan Union wrote:

The 93rd Coalition wrote:
Really? How? There isn't any particular advantage to asexuality, it would just remove the love/pleasure element added in by partnered sexuality. If anything, it may have a adverse impact on our society by making us more apathetic to the needs of others.

Why can't we just treat sexuality as something that doesn't really matter. As something that is no more a measure of a person as an individual than race or colorblindness. We went from persecuting all non heterosexuals, to trying to find a new sexuality to place on top.

I wonder what we'll come up with next. No, I know. Humans only mating with animals! Yes, we shall start a debate.

Or, we could just stop making these relatively pointless threads.

Transhuman Proteus wrote:

The Sotoan Union wrote:Why can't we just treat sexuality as something that doesn't really matter. As something that is no more a measure of a person as an individual than race or colorblindness. We went from persecuting all non heterosexuals, to trying to find a new sexuality to place on top.

Too sane.

I can't wait until Skynet happens.

The Serbian Empire wrote:

The federal republic of Simonia wrote:That's a good one, now listen in our eyes we are civilized but what about a Wolf? In there eyes aren't they the civilized ones? It's very ignorant to say that we are above such primal instincts like the want need to reproduce to further our species

Now that might be stretching it with saying wolves are more civilized than people who oppose sex.

I'm not saying that I was pointing out that he says humans are more civilized then other animals, which really is only true by our opinion

OP, kudos though. You made me laugh with this one. I give you a 7/10.

There is no best kind of sexuality.

Nanatsu no Tsuki wrote:OP, kudos though. You made me laugh with this one. I give you a 7/10.

I think that was his intention from the start. It has to be.

Untaroicht wrote:

New haven america wrote: No

There's a reason I put the IMO there. I consider myself extremely devout, but one aspect of my religion I tend to disagree with is how "Marital sex between a man and a woman is a sacred, holy thing". When I hear or see it (outside of the excuse of procreation), I only see two rational-up-to-this-point people reduced to mindless drones as they barbarically give in to their base animalistic urges and dopamine addiction.

Or maybe, it's two people who love each other and want to be closer to each other(Or a one night stand, take your pick). Sex has also been proven to be healthy for people.

The federal republic of Simonia wrote:

The Serbian Empire wrote:Now that might be stretching it with saying wolves are more civilized than people who oppose sex.

I'm not saying that I was pointing out that he says humans are more civilized then other animals, which really is only true by our opinion

And by the definition of civilization. Which we came up with, being the only species on earth with the required blend of mental abilities to conceptualize such a thing.

I don't think most non-human animals have a concept of civilization, or even the idea that they are better in some way than other creatures.

Eastern Equestria wrote:

Nanatsu no Tsuki wrote:OP, kudos though. You made me laugh with this one. I give you a 7/10.

I think that was his intention from the start. It has to be.

Maybe it was, who knows. Sometimes is not easy to tell.

Untaroicht wrote:Even as an Asexual AND Anti-Sexual, who dreams of a world without the sin of lust, I find this to be bonkers.

In a perfect world, people will realize that sex (IMO) is a crude, degenerative aspect of biology that should be weeded out through technology such as cloning (just as many diseases have found vaccines), but no human is "superior", and we sure as hell can't force the change if we don't want to appear to be nuts.

Untaroicht wrote:

New haven america wrote: No

There's a reason I put the IMO there. I consider myself extremely devout, but one aspect of my religion I tend to disagree with is how "Marital sex between a man and a woman is a sacred, holy thing". When I hear or see it (outside of the excuse of procreation), I only see two rational-up-to-this-point people reduced to mindless drones as they barbarically give in to their base animalistic urges and dopamine addiction.

I... How do I put this...

http://youtu.be/kYg0lzERaEY

If you don't want to have sex, then don't have any. No need to butt into other people's lifestyle choices.

New haven america wrote:

Untaroicht wrote:
There's a reason I put the IMO there. I consider myself extremely devout, but one aspect of my religion I tend to disagree with is how "Marital sex between a man and a woman is a sacred, holy thing". When I hear or see it (outside of the excuse of procreation), I only see two rational-up-to-this-point people reduced to mindless drones as they barbarically give in to their base animalistic urges and dopamine addiction.

Or maybe, it's two people who love each other and want to be closer to each other(Or a one night stand, take your pick). Sex has also been proven to be healthy for people.

But then there is the issue of bars, and the awkwardness of flirting, and roofies, and such.

This is perhaps both the most ridiculous argument I have seen and the hardest to explain the ridiculousness of. Yes, the fact that cloning is near completion does mean that humanity really should cease to procreate through sex. No, this does not mean that sex as a physical activity should be eliminated. What needs to be done instead is the mass sterilization of humans (both genders) which have access to cloning (yes I understand this is incredibly authoritarian, but it's for a good reason). Because of this, concern over risks of pregnancy will be next to none, and the ability to control traits will (hopefully) lead to a new generation of humans which more intelligent, stronger, and (given the sort of things most people would like to see in their kids) more attractive than the previous generations.

After this, or possibly before, we will likely be able to finalize cures for many sexually-transmitted diseases, allowing for the actual realization of the Hippies' idea of free love.

Of course, this is just an alternative, not an explanation of why global asexuality would be insane. First off: assuming Freud was right, sexuality is a major part of human life. Carnal relationships are essentially the epitome of human social ability, and to eliminate them simply on the principle that "Sex is bad" cuts out a major part of how humans function. Second: Sex is a major cathartic factor for human function. While it may not immediately strike one as stress-relief, the human brain is built around the idea of sex. Removing that possibility will actually induce large amounts of stress in humans, and likely violent reactions from some.

In conclusion: Free Love > Asexuality.

Czechanada wrote:

New haven america wrote:Or maybe, it's two people who love each other and want to be closer to each other(Or a one night stand, take your pick). Sex has also been proven to be healthy for people.

But then there is the issue of bars, and the awkwardness of flirting, and roofies, and such.

1. Meh, don't go to a bar then.
2. If you think there's something wrong with your drink, get a new one.

Nazi Flower Power wrote:If you don't want to have sex, then don't have any. No need to butt into other people's lifestyle choices.

When the Nazi is telling you to loosen up and be less authoritarian...

The vagina is quite possibly the greatest thing bestowed upon earth (In my own opinion) and you think I'd give it up? Even if we no longer new to have sex to reproduce will still do it for the pleasure of sex regardless of wether or not we can reproduce. While yes people are Asexual in the same way people are Heterosexual and Homosexual (among others) that doesn't mean society will change just because one aspect of it is taken away.

Riiser-Larsen wrote:This is perhaps both the most ridiculous argument I have seen and the hardest to explain the ridiculousness of. Yes, the fact that cloning is near completion does mean that humanity really should cease to procreate through sex. No, this does not mean that sex as a physical activity should be eliminated. What needs to be done instead is the mass sterilization of humans (both genders) which have access to cloning (yes I understand this is incredibly authoritarian, but it's for a good reason). Because of this, concern over risks of pregnancy will be next to none, and the ability to control traits will (hopefully) lead to a new generation of humans which more intelligent, stronger, and (given the sort of things most people would like to see in their kids) more attractive than the previous generations.

After this, or possibly before, we will likely be able to finalize cures for many sexually-transmitted diseases, allowing for the actual realization of the Hippies' idea of free love.

Of course, this is just an alternative, not an explanation of why global asexuality would be insane. First off: assuming Freud was right, sexuality is a major part of human life. Carnal relationships are essentially the epitome of human social ability, and to eliminate them simply on the principle that "Sex is bad" cuts out a major part of how humans function. Second: Sex is a major cathartic factor for human function. While it may not immediately strike one as stress-relief, the human brain is built around the idea of sex. Removing that possibility will actually induce large amounts of stress in humans, and likely violent reactions from some.

In conclusion: Free Love > Asexuality.

I'd rather get a girl accidently pregnant then be forced to be sterile.

Chez...Did Four Sided Triangles posses you or what?

No. Just stop it already.

Sedikal wrote:The vagina is quite possibly the greatest thing bestowed upon earth and you think I'd give it up? Even if we no longer new to have sex to reproduce will still do it for the pleasure of sex regardless of wether or not we can reproduce. While yes people are Asexual in the same way people are Heterosexual and Homosexual (among others) that doesn't mean society will change just because one aspect of it is taken away.

It's not really the greatest thing in the Universe(Coming from someone with no sex-drive)