posted                   

quote:

---

I never got the point of this whole sex-taboo thing. After all, sexual intercourse is a standard behaviour of human beings, amid other animals. If you think of it, it's not even that weird!

Take the procedure of eating dinner, for instance, is that something so weird? No! You have it every day, and people know you have dinner. The same should be with sex; you have it once in a while - depends on your habits - and people know you have it. Besides, it's not like nobody knows what a penis or a vagina looks like.

You don't find Web sites "spying" on people having dinner, or pleasantly enjoying their meals. Why, then, have this whole 'forbidden' secrecy regarding sex? You have - or will have - it, I have it, many people perform those 'forbidden' actions and that's how you and I were created. What's the point hiding those facts and making them so secret?

Don't tell me 'privacy, why dos anyone have to know the length of my organ?'! Why does one have to know what type of meat I had yesterday? The same applies to my favourite film-renting store; I don't someone to start going there, in case he or she rents my favourite film when I want to watch it. The same with sex, I want to have my boy/girl whenever I want to have him/her. The argument has no value.

So why is sex so tabooed?

- Yoav Ashkenazi, my old philosophy teacher; and the only one I heard say phuq.

---

Posts: 2978 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                  

quote:

---

Food doesn't love you back.

---

Posts: 1660 | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                   

quote:

---

Food doesn't love you back.

---

Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                   

quote:

---

What bothers me is people who disrespect sex by trivializing it or by bringing it into the public sphere in ways that are likely to offend the more conservative among us.

---

Posts: 2978 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                   

quote:

---

wikipedia hasn't been completely taken over by trolls

---

Posts: 2978 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                  

quote:

---

Of the perils which beset the growing boy all are recognised, and, in a measure, guarded against except the most inevitable and most fatal peril of all. In all that concerns the use and abuse of the reproductive organs the great majority of boys have hitherto been left without adult guidance, and have imbibed their ideas from the coarser of their companions and from casual references to the subject in the Bible and other books. Under these conditions very few boys escape two of the worst dangers into which it is possible for a lad to fall—the artificial stimulation of the reproductive organs and the acquisition of degraded ideas on the subject of sex. That many lives are thus prematurely shortened, that many constitutions are permanently enfeebled, that very many lads who might otherwise have striven successfully against the sexual temptations of adult life succumb—almost without a struggle—to them, can be doubted by no one who is familiar with the inner life of boys and men.

Of these two evils, self-abuse, though productive of manifold and disastrous results, is distinctly the less. Many boys outgrow the physical injuries which, in ignorance, they inflict upon themselves in youth; but very few are able wholly to cleanse themselves from the foul desires associated in their minds with sex. These desires make young men impotent in the face of temptation. Under their evil dominance, even men of kind disposition will, by seduction, inflict on an innocent girl agony, misery, degradation, and premature death. They will indulge In the most degrading of all vices with prostitutes on the street. They will defile the atmosphere of social life with filthy talk and ribald jest. Even a clean and ennobling passion can do little to redeem them. The pure stream of human love is made turbid with lust. After a temporary uplifting in marriage the soul is again dragged down, marriage vows are broken and the blessings of home life are turned into wormwood and gall.

---

quote:

---

One of the facts which I always tried to elicit from boys was the source of their information, or rather the character of that source, for I was naturally anxious not to ask a boy to incriminate any individual known to me. In many cases, information came first to the boy at home from a brother, or cousin, or casual acquaintance, or domestic servant. In one of the worst cases I have known the information was given to a boy by another boy—an entire stranger to him—whom he happened to meet on a country road when cycling. Since boys meet one another very much more at school than elsewhere and spend three-fourths of their lives there, of course information is more often obtained at school than at home. My own experience leads me to think that in this respect the day-school—probably on account of its mixed social conditions—is worse than the boarding-school.

Before passing from matters of personal experience, it may interest the reader if I give particulars of a few typical cases to illustrate some points on which I have insisted.

Case A.—The father and mother of a boy close on thirteen came to see me before entering the lad. They had no idea that I was specially interested in purity-teaching; but they were anxious to ascertain what precautions we took against the corruption of small boys. They struck me as very good parents. I was specially pleased that they were alive to the dangers of impurity, and that the mother could advert openly to the matter without embarrassment. I advised them to give the boy explicit warning; but they said that they were anxious to preserve his innocence as long as possible. He was at present absolutely simple, and they hoped that he would long remain so. It was a comfort to them that I was interested in the subject, and they would leave the boy with confidence in my care. As soon as I saw the boy, I found it difficult to believe in his innocence; and I soon discovered that he was thoroughly corrupt. Not merely did he begin almost at once to corrupt other boys, but he actually gave them his views on brothels! In a private interview with me he admitted all this, and told me that he was corrupted at ten years of age, when he was sent, after convalescence from scarlet fever, to a country village for three months. There he seems to have associated with a group of street boys, who gave him such information as they had, and initiated him into self-abuse. Since then he had been greedily seeking further information and passing it on.

Case B.—A delicate, gentle boy of eleven, an only son, was sent to me by an intellectual father, who had been his constant companion. The lad was very amiable and well-intentioned. A year later he gave me particulars of his corruption by a cousin, who was three years older than he. Since that time—particularly of late—he had practised masturbation. He had not the least idea that it was hurtful or even unrefined, and thought that it was peculiar to himself and his cousin. He knew from his cousin the chief facts of maternity and paternity, but had not spoken to other boys about them. He was intensely anxious to cleanse himself entirely, and promised to let me know of any lapse, should it occur. In the following vacation he developed pneumonia. For some days his life hung in the balance, and then flickered out. His father wrote me a letter of noble resignation. Terribly as he felt his loss, he was greatly consoled, he said, by the knowledge that his boy had died while his mind was innocent and before he could know even what temptation was. It is needless to add that I never hinted the real facts to the father; and—without altering any material detail—I am disguising the case lest it should possibly be recognised by him. I have often wondered whether, when the lad's life hung in the balance, it might not have been saved if Death's scale had not been weighted by the child's lowered vitality.

Case C.—A boy of fourteen came to me. He was a miserable specimen in every way—pale, lethargic, stupid almost beyond belief. He had no mother; and the father, though a man of leisure, evidently found it difficult to make the lad much of a companion. I felt certain from the first that the boy was an exceptionally bad victim of self-abuse; And this I told his father, advising him to investigate the matter. He was horrified at my diagnosis, and committed the great indiscretion of taxing the boy with self-abuse as though it were a conscious and grave fault. The father wrote during the vacation saying that he found I was entirely mistaken: not, content with the lad's assurance, he had watched him with the utmost care. As soon as the boy returned to school I interviewed him. He admitted readily that he had long masturbated himself daily—sometimes oftener. He had first—as far as he could remember, at about six—had his private parts excited by his nurse, who apparently did this to put an irritable child into a good temper! My warning had little effect upon him, as he had become a hopeless victim. He was too delicate a boy for us to desire to keep; and after a brief stay at school, during which we nursed him through a critical illness, he left to finish his education under private tuition at home.

Case D.—This boy came to me at thirteen. He was always a conscientious and amiable boy, but was nervous and dull. By fifteen his dullness had increased, and he complained of brain-strain and poorness of memory. Finally he began to develop St. Vitus's dance. I sent him to our school doctor, who returned him with a note saying that his condition was serious—that he must stop all work, &c. &c. I was in my study when the lad came back, and I at once told him what was the matter. He frankly admitted frequent self-abuse, which he had learned from an elder brother. He had not the least suspicion that the habit was injurious; but was very apprehensive about his future until I reassured him. He wanted me to write at once and warn a younger brother who had fallen into the habit. By great effort he got himself rapidly under control. His nervous twitchings disappeared, his vitality improved, the brain-fag gradually ceased; and when he left, eighteen months later, he was fairly normal. His improvement continued afterwards, and he is now a successful man of business and a married man.

Case E.—This boy entered at twelve. He was very weak physically and highly nervous—owing, his people thought, to severe bullying at a previous school. He was an able boy, of literary and artistic tastes, and almost painfully conscientious. He was very shy; always thought that he was despised by other boys; and was a duffer at games, which he avoided to the utmost. With my present experience I should have known him to be a victim of self-abuse. Then, I did not suspect him; and it was not until he was leaving at eighteen for the University that we talked the matter over, on his initiative. Then I found that he had been bullied into impurity at eleven, and was now a helpless victim. After two years at the University he wrote me that, though the temptation now came less frequently, he seemed absolutely powerless when it did come; that he despised himself so much that the impulse to suicide often haunted him; but that the cowardice which had kept him from games at school would probably prevent his taking his life. With the assistance of an intense and devoted religious life he gradually began to gain self-mastery. It is some years now since he has mentioned the subject to me.

---

Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                   

quote:

---

the brain-fag gradually ceased;

---

What an unfortunate typo.

Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                  

quote:

---

I also have a huge rant-in-utero about how a very open sexual culture is discriminatory to unattractive people. But I'll spare you that one until it's more fully formed.

---

quote:

---

I am all for being comfortable about openly discussing sex. I think that taboos against such open communication are harmful and destructive. But I also am very much for treating sex with a certain amount of respect, because I *do* feel it should be treated with a certain sacredness.

---

This is spot-on.

beverly

Posts: 4077 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                   

quote:

---

semi-serious thread

---

Posts: 2978 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                  

quote:

---

Now all these "authorities" base their whole argument upon the purely animal facts in the premises. Probably a certain Dr. C. is more largely read for information on these matters than any other author, especially among young women. He has written a large, and from the view-point he takes, a very plausible volume; and it is very extensively advertised, especially in papers which young women read. The result is that it has come to be almost a standard authority in these affairs.

Dr. C.'s argument is, baldly, as follows:—(a) Among animals, the universal practice is a single act of coitus for each begetting of off-spring, (b) Human beings are animals, (c) Therefore, human beings should only engage in coitus for reproductive purposes.

To this syllogism he adds a corollary, which is, that, therefore, all sexual commerce in the human family, for any other than reproductive purposes, is wrong. These are his texts, so to speak, and through several hundred pages he preaches, don't, don't, don't, sermons. The entire volume is one of denial and prohibition. He proclaims the act, even for the one purpose he allows to be right, as low, and in itself degrading, to be engaged in only after "prayer and fasting" and "mortifying the flesh," and even then, in the most passionless, and only done-because-it-has-to-be manner; as a mere matter of duty; to be permitted by sufferance; joyless, disgusting in itself; a something to be avoided, even in thought, other than it is a necessity for the continuance of the race.

It is from such data as this that thousands of "innocent" brides annually make up their minds as to what is right or wrong in the matter of sexual intercourse.

In doing this, most of these young women are perfectly conscientious, and want to do the right thing, and there are two items in the count that naturally lead them to accept Dr. C.'s teachings as correct. The first is, that it coincides with all they have ever heard about such matters; the second, that the Doctor flavors all his text with a religious quality, of the alleged most sacred sort. He instances saintly women who have lived the most ascetic lives, and whose religious status was achieved because, and by means of, their perfect chastity. In fact, this word "chastity" (which he translates as entire renunciation of the whole sex nature) becomes the test word of his whole treatise, and its practice is upheld as the true road to all goodness and virtue.

Now, nearly all well-bred and cultivated young women are naturally religious (and not a word should be said against their being so) and they are anxious to time their lives to everything that the highest religious demands prescribe. It is, therefore, most natural that, being thus taught by an authority for which they have the highest regard, they enter marriage with the fixed opinion in accordance with their teaching. How could it be otherwise?

On the other hand, a few young husbands, indeed none but now and then a "goody-good" (who usually turns out to be the worst of the whole lot, in course of time), are willing to "stand for" any such theory, much less to live any such life as this theory would impose. These "don't care what the book says," and, from the manner of their bringing up, from all they have learned or heard by hearing men talk about married life, (which is usually of the most vulgar sort) they have come to the conclusion that marriage confers upon the parties the right to engage in sexual commerce at will; and, especially, that the husband has the right to the body of his wife whenever he chooses. For, indeed, does not the law give him that right! And so long as one "keeps inside the law" what more could be asked! Yea, verily! What more could be asked?

So it is that most brides and bridegrooms go to their marriage bed with the most widely diverse views as to what is right and wrong in the premises—as to the life they will lead in their new estate. The young wife is for "purity" and "chastity." The young husband, driven by a passion which he has long held in thrall, in the belief that he can now give the fullest vent to it, when he has got where such relief is possible, is like an excited hound when it seizes its prey, which he fully believes he has the right to deal with as he pleases! What wonder that, in view of all these circumstances, the most extensive observer of marriage-bed phenomena should write: "As a matter of fact, nine young husbands in ten practically rape their brides at their first sexual meeting." Could anything be more horrible, or criminally wicked? And it is all so needless! It is all the result of ignorance, of "innocence," and the worst of false teaching. The pity of it!

True, these unfortunate conditions are often modified by "mother nature," who inspires the bride with curiosity, which, in a measure, controls her in spite of her false teachings, and with passion, which, to a degree, will assert itself over and above all false modesty, her religious scruples and her fear of pregnancy; and so she may come through the ordeal of introduction to the act of coitus in a fairly sane condition of mind, even though she may have practically been raped! But, too often, the result of such first contact is a shock to the bride from which she may not recover during all the subsequent years of married life! And "here is where the trouble lies," for untold thousands of married men and women, all over the civilized world, to-day. And it might all be so different! It ought, in every case, to be all so different! But if it ever does become different, knowledge has got to take the place of "innocence" on the part of the bride, and of ignorance on the part of the bridegroom, both of whom must be taught to "Know what they are about" before they engage in the sexual act, and be able to meet each other sanely, righteously, lovingly, because they both desire what each has to give to the other; in a way in which neither claims any rights, or makes any demands of the other—in a word, in perfect concord of agreement and action, of which mutual love is the inspirer, and definite knowledge the directive agent.

---

I hope someone other than me finds these links fascinating, illuminating, and breathtaking in their clarity and use of language.

[ February 19, 2005, 10:10 PM: Message edited by: Storm Saxon ]

Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                  

quote:

---

So here is where the trouble comes. If the husband is in haste, if he does not wait for the wife to become ready to meet him; if he forces his large, hard penis into the vagina before either is fully ready for such union—when there is no prostatic fluid on its glans, and the vagina is shrunken and its walls are dry—if coitus is engaged in in this way, it is perfectly easy to see that only disaster can result! The woman is hurt, sometimes most cruelly, and the man in reality gets only a beastly gratification from the act. Of all bad things in all the world, such manner of coition is the worst!

And so, in this first part of the act, the one foremost thought to remember and observe is, take plenty of time!

There is another reason why, on the part of woman, this time should be extended, especially when she is a bride and inexperienced in these matters, and that is, that her "innocence," and all her education, make her feel that she is doing wrong, or at least permitting a wrong thing to be done, and this holds back the proper growth of her passion, hinders the tumescence of her sex organs, delays the flow of the precoital secretion, and so keeps her from becoming properly prepared for her share of the mutual act.

Again, her fear of pregnancy may still further retard her coming into a proper condition. Indeed, this last is the almost common cause for her failing to be in readiness for meeting her husband. All of which items must be taken into account by both husband and wife, and intelligently, lovingly dealt with, if the best results for both parties are attained.

As regards the item of possible pregnancy, special note will be made of this feature later on. It is here placed in abeyance for the time being, because its consideration can be better provided for after some other points have been studied.

Now the one easily understood (and as easily practiced as understood) direction as to what to do by way of preparation for the act of coitus is: do as lovers do when they are "courting." And everybody knows what that is! And note this—that nobody ever hurries when they are courting! They delay, they protract, they dilly-dally, they "fool around," they pet each other in all sorts of possible and impossible ways. They kiss each other—"long and passionate kisses, they again and again give and receive"—they hug each other, nestle into each other's arms—in a word, they "play together" in a thousand-and-one ways which the "goody-goods" declare to be wrong, and the cold-blooded call nonsense or foolishness, but which all lovers know is an unspeakable delight ("unspeakable" is the word, for who wants to talk when these blissful experiences are going on!).

Now, these things, and the likes of these things, in limitless supply, should always precede the act of coitus. It is right there that this part of the first act of this wonderful four-act drama or play should be wrought out, and if they are omitted or disregarded, the play will end in tragedy, with all the leading actors left dead upon the stage!

---

Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged |