What is your thought on marriage?

[Katganistan]

Apparently pedophiles are taking it upon themselves by creating the term "pedosexual" and trying to make it a legitimate sexual orientation.

IIRC, a few early LGBT movements did include pedophilia before they were kicked out of the movement by making the movement appear more extreme and less appealing.

And that has what to do with liberals?

[New haven america]

Holy Matrimony is sacred and incredibly important. Today however, liberals and atheists are desecrating the act, making it a "secular" institution in which two men and two women can marry. I will uphold the sacrament with my future wife, whether it's my current girlfriend or someone else!

Holy Matrimony and marriage aren't necessarily the same thing. One is religious, the other is legal, it always has been. (Which is why marriage licenses exist, you can get married in holy matrimony, but until you get a license, it's not official in the eyes of the law)

Hell, back before Christianity existed, marriage was mostly seen as a type of business deal.

[NeuPolska]

Mechs are an idea people have but go read through that recent mech thread and you'll quickly find things like the square cube law that, which is mathematical, make those fancy drawn-up ideas completely nonsensical. We can think up a lot of things but just because we can think it doesn't make it possible. Besides, sex with a machine would be pretty shallow and unfulfilling. It's just a more physical extension of porn no matter how realistic it may be, and porn is great if you're only concerned about sexual release. But there's a whole lot more to sex than just the raw mechanics of it.

Um, what's this to do with marriage?

Went off on a bit of tangent there against the whole "anything is possible" argument in terms of robots and marriage and sex and all that. It was in relation to robots and the future of marriage

[Katganistan]

[...]In fact MRA's aren't that vocal.

I'd beg to differ, considering my own interactions with some members of the group. There may not be as many vocal MRA 'manchildren' (to give this minority among the group a name) as there are vocal 'Feminazi's', but they're definitely as annoying.

Dear God, yes.

[United Muscovite Nations]

I'm fond of the economics of the Soviet system because of the control it gives the government over the goings-on of the country. It is very good for destroying the influence of the international cartels and bourgeoisie. But I disagree strongly with the notion that egalitarianism is good.

I'm not that type of socialist, infact I wouldn't consider the USSR socialist at all tbh. They had no democratic element to their production process hence it isn't socialist.

I'm a market socialist, and I am an egalitarian at least in the since that I believe that people should have as much equality of opportunity as the government can support. I'm much more authoritarian in the social sphere than the economic one, which I tend to be rather libertarian.

I just worry that economic freedom will lead to the erosion of social hierarchy.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Speaking of that, probably due to promiscuity, pretty much every year a new record for STD infections is made. both 2015 and 2016 were record years in the United States.

There's a fair argument to be had there. Perhaps reckless promiscuity is responsible for that, but I'd say the way to fix the issue isn't by telling people to stop having sex with others, but to teach people about STIs and the dangers and all that. I mean once you see some real fucked up looking penises or vaginas you realize you don't want that happening to you. So, get to know the person a bit before you fuck them. It's not smart to just bury yourself in anyone that's willing to let you do so. It's a risk, and if you take it, and you end up contracting something, you may not realize and continue to spread it around. That's when things can be dangerous.

So if you want to fuck a lot of people at least get to know them and if possible see if they've been tested. It's not fair to assume that every promiscuous person, or for that matter, anyone with more than just you as a partner throughout their life, has an STI. They're not THAT common.

Plenty of states teach students about the dangers of STI's. People don't listen, and still have sex.

[NeuPolska]

There's a fair argument to be had there. Perhaps reckless promiscuity is responsible for that, but I'd say the way to fix the issue isn't by telling people to stop having sex with others, but to teach people about STIs and the dangers and all that. I mean once you see some real fucked up looking penises or vaginas you realize you don't want that happening to you. So, get to know the person a bit before you fuck them. It's not smart to just bury yourself in anyone that's willing to let you do so. It's a risk, and if you take it, and you end up contracting something, you may not realize and continue to spread it around. That's when things can be dangerous.

So if you want to fuck a lot of people at least get to know them and if possible see if they've been tested. It's not fair to assume that every promiscuous person, or for that matter, anyone with more than just you as a partner throughout their life, has an STI. They're not THAT common.

Plenty of states teach students about the dangers of STI's. People don't listen, and still have sex.

That's on them, I'm afraid. Just be responsible is all I'm saying, promiscuity in itself isn't a bad thing, but spreading disease is.

[New haven america]

There's a fair argument to be had there. Perhaps reckless promiscuity is responsible for that, but I'd say the way to fix the issue isn't by telling people to stop having sex with others, but to teach people about STIs and the dangers and all that. I mean once you see some real fucked up looking penises or vaginas you realize you don't want that happening to you. So, get to know the person a bit before you fuck them. It's not smart to just bury yourself in anyone that's willing to let you do so. It's a risk, and if you take it, and you end up contracting something, you may not realize and continue to spread it around. That's when things can be dangerous.

So if you want to fuck a lot of people at least get to know them and if possible see if they've been tested. It's not fair to assume that every promiscuous person, or for that matter, anyone with more than just you as a partner throughout their life, has an STI. They're not THAT common.

Plenty of states teach students about the dangers of STI's. People don't listen, and still have sex.

Plenty of states only teach people about the dangers of STI's, but not how to have safe sex or ensure that people are ready to have it, thus worsening the problem and ironically causing what they're supposed to be preventing.

Abstinence only sex ed is rubbish and needs to be destroyed.

[Katganistan]

Marriage is supposed be a symbol of true love, a union of two people who share a very special emotional connection and unique relationship.

Unfortunately nowadays it's just a fad for people who think with their genitals. It seems like nobody marries for love anymore, and that's quite depressing.

I think the problem is that people marry for love, but have no idea what marriage actually entails. It's a sharing of problems, space, and finances, and it's supporting one another emotionally as well.

People who can't adjust their attitude of "me" to "we" or who don't see a need to accommodate -- not be subsumed by! -- their partners needs as well are those who end up divorcing. An unrealitic "Love solves everything!" attitude is as to blame as anything else. It's work, for both partners, to keep each other happy and provide a stable environment.

[Aillyria]

IIRC, a few early LGBT movements did include pedophilia before they were kicked out of the movement by making the movement appear more extreme and less appealing.

And that has what to do with liberals?

To be fair, liberals were/are usually the ones to co-opt weird fringe social movements. And as predicted, liberals (though admittedly very fringe ones) are calling for pedophilia to be ruled a "sexual orientation". Hopefully, this thought doesn't become mainstream.

[Neanderthaland]

Marriage is supposed be a symbol of true love, a union of two people who share a very special emotional connection and unique relationship.

Unfortunately nowadays it's just a fad for people who think with their genitals. It seems like nobody marries for love anymore, and that's quite depressing.

Ah yes. Things were so much better in the mythical days of never.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Plenty of states teach students about the dangers of STI's. People don't listen, and still have sex.

Plenty of states only teach people about the dangers of STI's, but not how to have safe sex or ensure that people are ready to have it, thus worsening the problem and ironically causing what they're supposed to be preventing.

Abstinence only sex ed is rubbish and needs to be destroyed.

Some of the highest rates of STD infection are in liberal states. There's not much correlation between the approach to sex ed and the STI rate.

[Yagon]

I think the problem is that people marry for love, but have no idea what marriage actually entails. It's a sharing of problems, space, and finances, and it's supporting one another emotionally as well.

People who can't adjust their attitude of "me" to "we" or who don't see a need to accommodate -- not be subsumed by! -- their partners needs as well are those who end up divorcing. An unrealitic "Love solves everything!" attitude is as to blame as anything else. It's work, for both partners, to keep each other happy and provide a stable environment.

This seems pretty realistic, and recognizes that relationships, while powerful and beautiful, are also work and take care and cultivation.

Maybe prospective couples should first be required to be a buddy-cop team against a ruthless drug lord for two years to prove they can really stand by one another.

[Katganistan]

I don't. I treat women nicely. When there is no sexuality involved there is no reason to bash women or hate them. When everything remains non-romantic they can be friendly. I'm only into interesting discussions. And...I won't kick someone out due to their gender or race. If you like rationality like me we can get along well.

Congrats. How does it feel to be part of the minority? (For the most part, other than your weird view on sex)

Asexuality isn't weird. It may not be what you're used to, but there's nothing wrong with just not being interested in other people sexually.

[Yagon]

Asexuality isn't weird. It may not be what you're used to, but there's nothing wrong with just not being interested in other people sexually.

I think Tim Gunn is self-identified as asexual.

And I would follow that man into battle against a thousand sranc of the No-God.

[FelrikTheDeleted]

Well, sometimes it's nice to know you're not the only one thinking want you think, lol.

Are there more?

I generally agree with what you say.

[New haven america]

Congrats. How does it feel to be part of the minority? (For the most part, other than your weird view on sex)

Asexuality isn't weird. It may not be what you're used to, but there's nothing wrong with just not being interested in other people sexually.

I never said asexuality was weird. I said the fact that they constantly had to claim that sexuality was irrational and that anyone who loves reason should lower it's impact (Their words, not mine) is a weird/distorted view of sex.

*sigh* Being ace doesn't excuse having distorted views on sex, neither does being straight, gay, bi, pan, etc... for that matter. I know and know of plenty of asexuals who understand that sex is normal and natural for humans, it's just that they're not into it and would rather not partake in it as they don't find it appealing (And that's perfectly fine, natural even), but they don't try to make it seem like some heinous act that needs to be gotten rid of in order to better human society. Do you see what I'm getting at?

[Katganistan]

If you're married, then don't cheat/be promiscuous. If you're not married, then being a single man who is promiscuous is fine, I think, so long as again, there is consent and some level of respect.

Like, don't be with someone and not establish what "it" is.

I don't mean promiscuity within marriage. Women with more premarital partners are more likely to have unstable marriages and divorce.

Perhaps because if their husband is not fulfilling needs they previously had fulfilled because he is not actually very good at sex/supporting them emotionally, they know the difference rather than thinking they're the problem?

There's also the double standard that a man can have as many partners as he wants and that makes him a player or a stud, but if a woman does, she's a slut.

[United Muscovite Nations]

I don't mean promiscuity within marriage. Women with more premarital partners are more likely to have unstable marriages and divorce.

Perhaps because if their husband is not fulfilling needs they previously had fulfilled because he is not actually very good at sex/supporting them emotionally, they know the difference rather than thinking they're the problem?

There's also the double standard that a man can have as many partners as he wants and that makes him a player or a stud, but if a woman does, she's a slut.

Don't accuse me of a double standard that I don't have. Not "having needs met" isn't an excuse for divorce, it's selfishness and excuses adultery.

[Katganistan]

Um, what's this to do with marriage?

Went off on a bit of tangent there against the whole "anything is possible" argument in terms of robots and marriage and sex and all that. It was in relation to robots and the future of marriage

Ah, ok, I was confused. Thanks for the explanation.

[New haven america]

If you're married, then don't cheat/be promiscuous. If you're not married, then being a single man who is promiscuous is fine, I think, so long as again, there is consent and some level of respect.

Like, don't be with someone and not establish what "it" is.

I don't mean promiscuity within marriage. Women with more premarital partners are more likely to have unstable marriages and divorce.

Or maybe they're being more promiscuous within marriage because their partners aren't putting out?

You do know one of the most common reasons people cheat is because they're not getting the emotional or sexual support from the partner that's supposed to be providing said support, right?

[Donut section]

I don't mean promiscuity within marriage. Women with more premarital partners are more likely to have unstable marriages and divorce.

Perhaps because if their husband is not fulfilling needs they previously had fulfilled because he is not actually very good at sex/supporting them emotionally, they know the difference rather than thinking they're the problem?

There's also the double standard that a man can have as many partners as he wants and that makes him a player or a stud, but if a woman does, she's a slut.

Classic example of women never do or are wrong.

And people wonder why we claim it's irrational to want to be in a relationship with them.

[Katganistan]

Plenty of states teach students about the dangers of STI's. People don't listen, and still have sex.

Plenty of states only teach people about the dangers of STI's, but not how to have safe sex or ensure that people are ready to have it, thus worsening the problem and ironically causing what they're supposed to be preventing.

Abstinence only sex ed is rubbish and needs to be destroyed.

Agreed. Women should insist on condoms (or use a female condom) in addition to whatever other birth control is being used. And if you're into oral, then use dental dams/other barriers to avoid infection being passed either way.

[New haven america]

Perhaps because if their husband is not fulfilling needs they previously had fulfilled because he is not actually very good at sex/supporting them emotionally, they know the difference rather than thinking they're the problem?

There's also the double standard that a man can have as many partners as he wants and that makes him a player or a stud, but if a woman does, she's a slut.

Don't accuse me of a double standard that I don't have. Not "having needs met" isn't an excuse for divorce, it's selfishness and excuses adultery.

Actually, both Judaism and Christianity believe that a partner not satisfying their partner's sexual needs is a perfectly valid reason for divorce.

[Costa Fierro]

No it doesn't.

Then why is it so hard for people to stop doing it when they want to stop?

Because masturbation is a biological thing. You crank one out when you feel like it, assuming of course you are alone and within the confines of your own house. It's no different to being horny.