Can you explain why people assume that it's good to be sex-positive? Why be sex-positive instead of sex-skeptical and/or sex-ambivalent? Isn't sex-positivity a form of primitivism and bio-Luddism? What experimental-psychological evidence do sex-positives have to back their claims, if any? And if sex-positivity is not OK, then why is it that a majority of atheists are sex-positive? Or are they not?

Views: 1397

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Are you talking about sex in the most broad sense,

Yes, but not just about sex, but also about sexuality and sexual things in general, such as sexual attraction, sexual feelings, sexual emotions, sexual attitudes, lust, infatuation, sexual jealousy, gynophobia.

from baby-making to casual sex to complete and total promiscuity,

Yes. All of that. But not only. Not just intercourse, tribadism, masturbation, sex, but all of sexuality. All which is sexual.

or do you want to limit the scope to sex somewhere on that continuum?

No. I'm not limiting it.

When I say "sex-positive," I mean it the way sex-positives mean it. Like this, for example:

Because sex is fun if done right and you are protected. Sex keeps people in relationships happy. Sex keeps our species from extinction. Sex keeps you healthy and is also good exercise. Only ones that are not sex positive are the ones that nor getting any, and sad, lonely women.

I'm sex-positive (generally speaking) because it is fat-free, sugar-free, tax-free, cholesterol-free, pleasurable cardio-vascular activity.  For what more could a person possibly ask?

Yup! You nailed it.

Yes she did and I'd like to nail

Hi Heather


Exactly! LOL

Took my thoughts from the future and put them in the past.

We eat and drink to keep the individual alive

We fuck to keep the species alive.

It is too fundamental to be affected by opinion.

By that logic you should drink some sort of protein shake that contains all nutrition and fluids that you need for the day, and you should have sex only for the purpose of reproduction.

You are right that in itself food and sex are not really up for debate, but nutrition and reproduction are not their only purposes. Both are involved in socializing, and both can provide a fair amount of pleasure (although too much can quickly cause problems).

I view sex (in the broad sense) in a positive light, both for reproduction and for pleasure purposes.

Homo sapiens is also known as "man the toolmaker." Taking the concept of a tool and extending it a bit, just as mankind can use sticks to hit stones for recreation, we also put sex to a use other than reproduction. Sex is apparently pleasurable for all of the higher animals, but most (all?) of the non-primates are disinterested in sex when they are not "in season" (rutting or whatever it is called for the particular species). We and other primates, most notably bonobos (resembling chimps but smaller), are ready to go a few rounds just about anytime.

I agree with you, of course sex and food are more than procreation and nutrition. I always talk in general fundamentals, for me they are the best starting point.

Let's take it a step into specifics. And let's say sex had nothing to do with procreation like for example, anal-sex (man on man, man on woman, whichever). I think we can agree that it still comes under your definition of sex, so how positive are you about anal sex?


© 2019   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service