"Sexual" clothing in fiction and real life

[Purple Rats]

And if two people find something they do to eachother not be disgusting, and enjoy it, then how could it be wrong?

I'm sure heroin addicts feel the same way about their dealer.

Heroin is unhealthy, and that's why I don't recommend it, but I don't think it's morally wrong to use heroin.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

The "ramifications" of people having sex arrrrrreeeee?
People experience pleasure? what?

If everyone had sex merely for pleasure, then this would result in many people having unsatisfying personal relationships as well as an undermining of social structures which ensure social stability (e.g. marriage).

Yeah uh I have plenty of satisfying personal relationships, both with my friends and family and with my partner. And also marriage as you are describing is a scam and not at all "stable."

[United Muscovite Nations]

If everyone had sex merely for pleasure, then this would result in many people having unsatisfying personal relationships as well as an undermining of social structures which ensure social stability (e.g. marriage).

Yeah uh I have plenty of satisfying personal relationships, both with my friends and family and with my partner. And also marriage as you are describing is a scam and not at all "stable."

I mean marriage as in an exclusive partnership intended to be life-long.

[Purple Rats]

I mean marriage as in an exclusive partnership intended to be life-long.

Some people are married, and have still sex with other people. (and I don't mean cheating)

[United Muscovite Nations]

I mean marriage as in an exclusive partnership intended to be life-long.

Some people are married, and have still sex with other people. (and I don't mean cheating)

Non-monogamy also violates the categorical imperative because it cannot be universally willed. It also violates Rule Utilitarian principles because if it were the rule rather than the exception, the result would produce more discontent than monogamy.

[Rojava Free State]

I mean marriage as in an exclusive partnership intended to be life-long.

Some people are married, and have still sex with other people. (and I don't mean cheating)

Hey, to each their own. As long as you're being careful, it's totally fine.

[Rojava Free State]

If everyone had sex merely for pleasure, then this would result in many people having unsatisfying personal relationships as well as an undermining of social structures which ensure social stability (e.g. marriage).

Yeah uh I have plenty of satisfying personal relationships, both with my friends and family and with my partner. And also marriage as you are describing is a scam and not at all "stable."

Thank you for being the first person to agree with me on the marriage issue.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

Yeah uh I have plenty of satisfying personal relationships, both with my friends and family and with my partner. And also marriage as you are describing is a scam and not at all "stable."

I mean marriage as in an exclusive partnership intended to be life-long.

Yeah but that doesn't happen. A lot of marriages end and will end in divorce. People don't just typically choose one person forever and then never fall out of love, get abused, or have irreconcilable differences. And I can very easily make the case that suggesting that is the only way someone should live is immoral in and of itself. Shaming people for not wanting to or ending up not in a singular relationship for their entire lives leads to people too afraid to leave abusive spouses, living in loveless marriages, and overall being unhappy and unproductive in their relationship. The fact of the matter is that it is better for everyone to NOT put expectations on other peoples relationships.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

Yeah uh I have plenty of satisfying personal relationships, both with my friends and family and with my partner. And also marriage as you are describing is a scam and not at all "stable."

Thank you for being the first person to agree with me on the marriage issue.

Dont get me wrong, I want to get married. But it's a kink thing, not a romance thing lmfao

[United Muscovite Nations]

I mean marriage as in an exclusive partnership intended to be life-long.

Yeah but that doesn't happen. A lot of marriages end and will end in divorce. People don't just typically choose one person forever and then never fall out of love, get abused, or have irreconcilable differences. And I can very easily make the case that suggesting that is the only way someone should live is immoral in and of itself. Shaming people for not wanting to or ending up not in a singular relationship for their entire lives leads to people too afraid to leave abusive spouses, living in loveless marriages, and overall being unhappy and unproductive in their relationship. The fact of the matter is that it is better for everyone to NOT put expectations on other peoples relationships.

I said "intended" not necessarily that it always is like that. But people shouldn't marry or get divorced for frivolous reasons. Clearly being abused is not a frivolous reason.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

Yeah but that doesn't happen. A lot of marriages end and will end in divorce. People don't just typically choose one person forever and then never fall out of love, get abused, or have irreconcilable differences. And I can very easily make the case that suggesting that is the only way someone should live is immoral in and of itself. Shaming people for not wanting to or ending up not in a singular relationship for their entire lives leads to people too afraid to leave abusive spouses, living in loveless marriages, and overall being unhappy and unproductive in their relationship. The fact of the matter is that it is better for everyone to NOT put expectations on other peoples relationships.

I said "intended" not necessarily that it always is like that. But people shouldn't marry or get divorced for frivolous reasons. Clearly being abused is not a frivolous reason.

Any reason that boils down to "I am unhappy and it is not reconcilable" is a non-frivolous issue. No one is getting married or divorced "frivolously" except the ultra-wealthy, who have the money and time to burn.

[Purple Rats]

Marriage seems such a weird thing. I understand the romantical dream, but most people dont marry because of romance.

And all this "monogamy with that one true person until death" seems such a bollocks, to be honest. How many animals in nature are monogamous? It doesn't even give anything to the "save our species" thinking.

And emotionally? It's great while it lasts, but normally it does not really last long. And lot of people say they are monogamous, and then still go and cheat their partners.

I personally know that I could not be in open relationships, as I am quite jealous, but it's my personal problem. I think non-monogamous relationships are way better.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Marriage seems such a weird thing. I understand the romantical dream, but most people dont marry because of romance.

And all this "monogamy with that one true person until death" seems such a bollocks, to be honest. How many animals in nature are monogamous? It doesn't even give anything to the "save our species" thinking.

And emotionally? It's great while it lasts, but normally it does not really last long. And lot of people say they are monogamous, and then still go and cheat their partners.

I personally know that I could not be in open relationships, as I am quite jealous, but it's my personal problem. I think non-monogamous relationships are way better.

They are not way better. From both a Kantian and Rule Utilitarian standpoint, they suffer from serious deficiencies.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

Marriage seems such a weird thing. I understand the romantical dream, but most people dont marry because of romance.

And all this "monogamy with that one true person until death" seems such a bollocks, to be honest. How many animals in nature are monogamous? It doesn't even give anything to the "save our species" thinking.

And emotionally? It's great while it lasts, but normally it does not really last long. And lot of people say they are monogamous, and then still go and cheat their partners.

I personally know that I could not be in open relationships, as I am quite jealous, but it's my personal problem. I think non-monogamous relationships are way better.

I think that some people are honestly monogamous, either by nature or nurture I don't know. I grew up thinking I'd be monogamous, but here I am, polyam as fuck and trying to gay my life away.

[Moscareinas]

Marriage seems such a weird thing. I understand the romantical dream, but most people dont marry because of romance.

And all this "monogamy with that one true person until death" seems such a bollocks, to be honest. How many animals in nature are monogamous? It doesn't even give anything to the "save our species" thinking.

And emotionally? It's great while it lasts, but normally it does not really last long. And lot of people say they are monogamous, and then still go and cheat their partners.

I personally know that I could not be in open relationships, as I am quite jealous, but it's my personal problem. I think non-monogamous relationships are way better.

They are not way better. From both a Kantian and Rule Utilitarian standpoint, they suffer from serious deficiencies.

such as?

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

Marriage seems such a weird thing. I understand the romantical dream, but most people dont marry because of romance.

And all this "monogamy with that one true person until death" seems such a bollocks, to be honest. How many animals in nature are monogamous? It doesn't even give anything to the "save our species" thinking.

And emotionally? It's great while it lasts, but normally it does not really last long. And lot of people say they are monogamous, and then still go and cheat their partners.

I personally know that I could not be in open relationships, as I am quite jealous, but it's my personal problem. I think non-monogamous relationships are way better.

They are not way better. From both a Kantian and Rule Utilitarian standpoint, they suffer from serious deficiencies.

No one cares about Kants philosophy or "rule utilitarian," those are irrelevant.

[Purple Rats]

Marriage seems such a weird thing. I understand the romantical dream, but most people dont marry because of romance.

And all this "monogamy with that one true person until death" seems such a bollocks, to be honest. How many animals in nature are monogamous? It doesn't even give anything to the "save our species" thinking.

And emotionally? It's great while it lasts, but normally it does not really last long. And lot of people say they are monogamous, and then still go and cheat their partners.

I personally know that I could not be in open relationships, as I am quite jealous, but it's my personal problem. I think non-monogamous relationships are way better.

They are not way better. From both a Kantian and Rule Utilitarian standpoint, they suffer from serious deficiencies.

We can read theories, and we can see what actually is going on. I see monogamous relationships, and I see open relationships, and there is lot of bullshit going on in first ones.

[United Muscovite Nations]

They are not way better. From both a Kantian and Rule Utilitarian standpoint, they suffer from serious deficiencies.

such as?

Both moral systems judge actions based on their results when universally applied (i.e. if they were the norm). And the result is clearly that, since more people are monogamous than would prefer a polygamous relationship, then fewer people would be happy with the results of polygamy universally applied (because it would necessarily require people who are monogamous to seek polygamous relationships in order to find partners were it the norm).

[United Muscovite Nations]

They are not way better. From both a Kantian and Rule Utilitarian standpoint, they suffer from serious deficiencies.

No one cares about Kants philosophy or "rule utilitarian," those are irrelevant.

You don't care about it because you haven't given ethics much thought beyond the harm principle, which as I've already told you, only works when looking at isolated actions that have no social context.

[Purple Rats]

I think that some people are honestly monogamous, either by nature or nurture I don't know. I grew up thinking I'd be monogamous, but here I am, polyam as fuck and trying to gay my life away.

Some can be of course, and be in healthy happy relationship. And some people can also pick their high school crush on date and be happily together "til death tears us apart".

Just not every one, who says they are.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

such as?

Both moral systems judge actions based on their results when universally applied (i.e. if they were the norm). And the result is clearly that, since more people are monogamous than would prefer a polygamous relationship, then fewer people would be happy with the results of polygamy universally applied (because it would necessarily require people who are monogamous to seek polygamous relationships in order to find partners were it the norm).

No.
The rule should be
"Don't stigmatize relationships that are alternate to your own."
We don't have to make people polyam. We don't have to make people monogamous. We need to reduce the stigma.
jfc it's a simple concept. The most beneficial system is one in which people are free to make choices that fit their ideals best.

[Purple Rats]

such as?

Both moral systems judge actions based on their results when universally applied (i.e. if they were the norm). And the result is clearly that, since more people are monogamous than would prefer a polygamous relationship, then fewer people would be happy with the results of polygamy universally applied (because it would necessarily require people who are monogamous to seek polygamous relationships in order to find partners were it the norm).

To be honest, life would be really boring and also sad if there would be some "universal norm" which would have to apply to everyone.

As long as no harm done to others, do whatever.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

No one cares about Kants philosophy or "rule utilitarian," those are irrelevant.

You don't care about it because you haven't given ethics much thought beyond the harm principle, which as I've already told you, only works when looking at isolated actions that have no social context.

No, I don't care about them because they're stupid

[United Muscovite Nations]

Both moral systems judge actions based on their results when universally applied (i.e. if they were the norm). And the result is clearly that, since more people are monogamous than would prefer a polygamous relationship, then fewer people would be happy with the results of polygamy universally applied (because it would necessarily require people who are monogamous to seek polygamous relationships in order to find partners were it the norm).

No.
The rule should be
"Don't stigmatize relationships that are alternate to your own."
We don't have to make people polyam. We don't have to make people monogamous. We need to reduce the stigma.
jfc it's a simple concept. The most beneficial system is one in which people are free to make choices that fit their ideals best.

Define "beneficial."

[United Muscovite Nations]

You don't care about it because you haven't given ethics much thought beyond the harm principle, which as I've already told you, only works when looking at isolated actions that have no social context.

No, I don't care about them because they're stupid

Wrong.