Sexuality

135678

Comments

  • edited November 2012
    sexual incompatibility is one of the biggest causes of infidelity.
    Says who? People stop having sex because they're unhappy, not because he wants to do it on the table when she wants to do it on the bed and they can't compromise.

    Lack of communication and problems caused by money are the two biggest reasons why people get divorced. Not because they can't agree on where and in what position to have sex.


    And the reason why people have infidelity is because in their moments of unhappiness, they find someone else to whom they can turn emotionally; someone who makes them feel better in a way their spouse does not. This doesn't mean the couple is incompatible; it means that they don't communicate enough about their feelings and what it is that they're looking for to be happy again.
  • edited November 2012
    Chyron8472 wrote: »
    Says who? People stop having sex because they're unhappy, not because he wants to do it on the table when she wants to do it on the bed and they can't compromise.

    And that makes some people unhappy.
    And the reason why people have infidelity is because in their moments of unhappiness, they find someone else to whom they can turn emotionally; someone who makes them feel better in a way their spouse does not. This doesn't mean the couple is incompatible; it means that they don't communicate enough about their feelings and what it is that they're looking for to be happy again.

    Communication is, of course, very important, but not every single problem in a relationship has to do with feelings and communication. Sexuality plays a very important role in a relationship and compatibility should be just as important as personality, intelligence, physical attributes and everything else that you look for in someone when you're determining whether or not they're "the one". Again, you did it differently and it worked out well for you. Congratulations, I think that's wonderful. But that ain't everybody.
  • edited November 2012
    And that makes some people unhappy.
    I was pointing out that such an issue (about position and location) is a very minor quibble.

    Communication is, of course, very important, but not every single problem in a relationship has to do with feelings and communication.
    But communication will almost always solve it.
    Sexuality plays a very important role in a relationship and compatibility.
    Maybe if you're gay and in a straight relationship or vice versa, but beyond that I don't see how the problem can't be solved by talking at length about it. Besides, if that were the real issue, I'd have thought one would have figured it out early on when one's hormones weren't affected by the opposite sex.

    Communication doesn't just mean talking about random stuff. It's the emotional connection that's important. The idea that you love each other and you want to make each other happy. You have to open yourself up to being potentially vulnerable, and if you've done so in the past such that they hurt you for it, you have to tell them about it in an honest way without being accusatory.
  • edited November 2012
    Chyron8472 wrote: »
    I was pointing out that such an issue (about position and location) is a very minor quibble.

    And I assumed you knew I wasn't actually talking about anything as minor as arguments over whether to have sex on the bed or the dining room table.

    Look, we're obviously not going to agree here. You won't convince me and I won't convince you. The point of all this is that different people find happiness in different ways and, as long as nobody is getting hurt, no one should give a damn how, where, or from who that happiness comes from.
  • edited November 2012
    My opinion.

    Sex is an important part of any romantic adult relationship, and it's possible for two people to be incompatible in what they want and how often they want sex. It would be nice to know this before getting married. Yes, people do get divorced over this issue.

    As far as casual, have sex with the guy on the train and never see him again thing goes, I think that's OK, too. It's a learning experience, hopefully fun, and you'll take something away from it (hopefully using adequate protection to avoid certain somethings). Later on, when you want to settle down with your ideal partner, you'll have a better understanding of what you like, and what is overrated and not so important.

    And if you think that's overly slutty, that's OK, too. Everyone has their own opinions of how relationships should be, and no matter what yours is, there's someone out there who agrees with you.
  • edited November 2012
    A kindred spirit! Thank you!
  • edited November 2012
    Prof__Oak_Raep_Face__by_Dylaria_Fireheart.jpg
  • edited November 2012
    Coolsome...thank you. You've made Professor Oak out to be a perv in addition to a massive jerk of a grandfather.
  • edited November 2012
    Coolsome...thank you. You've made Professor Oak out to be a perv in addition to a massive jerk of a grandfather.

    You realise this now!?

    I mean the guy hangs around Ash's mom all the time and has Tracy as his manbitch! I thought it was obvious...
  • edited November 2012
    I know I'm late to the conversation here, but I'm intrigued by the fact that someone who likes Mass Effect enough to make it his forum handle would be so anti-gay at the same time. All three games had lesbian romance options, and 3 had a gay male romance options with both Kaidan and Cortez. Why would you support a game that supports something you're that offended by? Weird.
  • edited November 2012
    I think N7 has left the conversation. (I hope so, anyway)
  • edited November 2012
    What about N8!
  • edited November 2012
    It is weird though, right?

    I mean like, I probably wouldn't buy a game if it and it's developers were really pro-baby murder.

    ... unless maybe it got really good reviews ...

    Anyway, I'm glad it passed in so many states and I hope that it winds up here in PA in the near future too. I think I'll probably still go with the hetero option myself, though.
  • edited November 2012
    You realise this now!?

    I mean the guy hangs around Ash's mom all the time and has Tracy as his manbitch! I thought it was obvious...

    Tracy?
  • edited November 2012
    Tracy?

    12279062280017.jpg

    Let me sketch your picture.....
  • edited November 2012
    Thanks for this thread, guys. I've been dating both genders for a few years, and it's nice knowing that not everyone is completely opposed.
  • edited November 2012
    ted12 wrote: »
    Thanks for this thread, guys. I've been dating both genders for a few years, and it's nice knowing that not everyone is completely opposed.

    Not at all. Infact I think bisexuals are really cool!
    (Best of both worlds eh? I'm jealous! ;D)
  • edited November 2012
    Oh, that guy. Meh, I don't count the anime. Other than a catchy theme song, it broke so many of the games rules that I lost all interest. Great games, crappy tv show. Where Digimon had the opposite, great tv shows, crappy games.

    As for the topic at hand, I'm glad tolerance is showing up, but I also agree that the government has no right to restrict marriages to Christian ideals.
  • edited November 2012
    ted12 wrote: »
    Thanks for this thread, guys. I've been dating both genders for a few years, and it's nice knowing that not everyone is completely opposed.

    Greedy. :-P

    But yeah, it's nice that the discussion has remained civil. Given the rich background of ethnicities this forum has, I was expecting more people to be opposed. Or at least someone to try and put forward an argument against homosexuality. It seems most of the western world has accepted (if somewhat begrudgingly) us. Most people now are beginning to understand.
  • edited November 2012
    Friar wrote: »
    Greedy. :-P

    But yeah, it's nice that the discussion has remained civil. Given the rich background of ethnicities this forum has, I was expecting more people to be opposed. Or at least someone to try and put forward an argument against homosexuality. It seems most of the western world has accepted (if somewhat begrudgingly) us. Most people now are beginning to understand.

    Not really. Just go look at one of the horrified articles talking about ParaNorman and the tiny throw-away gay line at the end. Just make sure you haven't eaten anything before reading because you'll probably start feeling a bit sick. I know I did. Then I felt rage. Not sure what happened after that.

    I'd really put the more open attitude in this thread to the fact that the people on this board represent a younger element of the population that hasn't yet become entrenched in its ways (for the most part).
  • edited November 2012
    Apparently the SNP are going to make gay marriage legal in Scotland, to the horror of the Catholic church. (but since Britain is pretty secular, especially compared to the USA, most people don't care what the Catholics think) Which is nice, but I'm still not voting for independence, or anything that involves promoting Gaelic.
  • edited November 2012
    Jen Kollic wrote: »
    Apparently the SNP are going to make gay marriage legal in Scotland, to the horror of the Catholic church. (but since Britain is pretty secular, especially compared to the USA, most people don't care what the Catholics think) Which is nice, but I'm still not voting for independence, or anything that involves promoting Gaelic.

    Eh, nobody cares what the Catholics think in the US either. Most Christians view Catholics as pagans and borderline cannibals from my experience.
  • edited November 2012
    Eh, nobody cares what the Catholics think in the US either. Most Christians view Catholics as pagans and borderline cannibals from my experience.

    Right, it's those damn baptists that people seem to care so much about. :p
  • edited November 2012
    Right, it's those damn baptists that people seem to care so much about. :p

    I actually don't really know many Baptists. Then again, California. They don't have much of a presence here. Though most of the Catholics I know are kinda the weird conservative sect that doesn't want gay people to marry but otherwise doesn't care. It's kinda a silent disapproval with the occasional crazy (like my sixth grade teacher). I'm guessing that the Baptists are similar but they get more media attention.
  • edited November 2012
    Come visit the South! You'll see.
  • edited November 2012
    Come visit the South! You'll see.

    Actually, I think I'll... not do that. I'd like to live.
  • edited November 2012
    Well, in the Republic of Ireland doctors will let you die rather than give you an abortion...
  • edited November 2012
    Jen Kollic wrote: »

    Waitwaitwait. How'd we get to abortion and dying in hospitals?
  • edited November 2012
    Because if there's one thing Catholics hate just as much as homosexual marriage, it's abortion.

    ETA: And because if you don't want to visit the south of the USA because of religious crazies, better scratch Ireland off the list of places to visit too.
  • edited November 2012
    Jen Kollic wrote: »
    Because if there's one thing Catholics hate just as much as homosexual marriage, it's abortion.

    Lots of Christian sects hate both. It's not just Catholics. Though the hatred of abortion is a lot more understandable in the context of the Christian belief system than the hatred of gay marriage as abortion involves the termination of a human life. And there's lots of stuff in the Bible about not killing people, though it does seem to happen fairly regularly. I'm kinda hazy on the morality myself, because choosing between two sets of rights is never a fun position to be in.

    Also, most religious authorities don't know enough about science to answer the types of questions I have. Like, my primary question: if you create a life via removing a single totipotent cell from a blastula would that still count as a human life, even though it was created completely through artificial means? Everyone I've asked this question to gets caught up on the fact that I used the term blastula instead of baby and claims I'm using scientific terms to confuse the issue.
  • edited November 2012
    I find it interesting that religious organizations tend to vocalize on these problems and not on things like poverty and violence. Nobody actively would think "huh i want to actively suppress a lady's reproductive rights. im gonna do that instead of feed the poor".

    It must have been a process, but I wonder how it eventually came to this.
  • edited November 2012
    I got the impression that in America people don't want to feed the poor because that would be socialism, the poor just need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and get their own food. (and healthcare)

    To quote Dom Helder Camara: "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why they are poor, they call me a communist."
  • edited November 2012
    Yeah... I don't even know what to do at this point. Some people are poor just to live off the system and the people who really are poor you never see and probably wouldn't benefit from reforms because they're off the radar.
  • edited November 2012
    Giant Tope wrote: »
    I find it interesting that religious organizations tend to vocalize on these problems and not on things like poverty and violence. Nobody actively would think "huh i want to actively suppress a lady's reproductive rights. im gonna do that instead of feed the poor".

    To be fair, the Catholic church (and other denominations as well) actually do a lot to help the poor. It's just not talked about nearly as often or as loudly as other issues. For every pedophiliac priest or bishop who rails against homosexuality, there are another half dozen who are providing food and shelter to the homeless or building schools and wells in the third world. It's a shame that the good they do is always overshadowed by the bad.
  • edited November 2012
    To be fair, the Catholic church (and other denominations as well) actually do a lot to help the poor.

    Well, I don't really doubt that. I mean putting things on the vocal forefront.
  • edited November 2012
    Poor people in the U.S. generally do get food one way or another. That's why you don't see stick-figure people here, as you do in some African countries.
  • edited November 2012
    Not really. Just go look at one of the horrified articles talking about ParaNorman and the tiny throw-away gay line at the end. Just make sure you haven't eaten anything before reading because you'll probably start feeling a bit sick. I know I did. Then I felt rage. Not sure what happened after that.\

    28899833.jpg
  • edited November 2012
    GaryCXJk wrote: »
    28899833.jpg

    Yes. Yes it did.
  • edited November 2012
    WarpSpeed wrote: »
    That's why you don't see stick-figure people here, as you do in some African countries.

    4e1a8da21ab42_1.jpg
  • edited November 2012
    Ick.
Sign in to comment in this discussion.