Why is God so obsessed with sex?

It's not about common belief if the one you are calling God has problems then this "God" is not God by definition.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Bonobos are all ugly, though. We have better options. It's hard to bind a tribe when half of us are scuttlebuttugly.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I disagree it may have been such over a short span of time but not over long periods of time in the distant past. Also comparing different situations to our situation is subjective. I don't think people in their right minds would copulate with children who didn't reach puberty.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

so the uglier the people the more compulsion to permiscuality?

So tigerwoods (or his wife) must be BUT UGLY then (not to mention most film stars and other celebs)

 

Try visiting a few countries (I won't name them, but you can guess what region of the world) where women are not just second class citizens, but treated as if not even human.

I've seen "honor killings" in which a person murdered his family member who was raped, because she 'shamed the family by having sex out of wedlock' and the law enforcement deemed it not only justifiable homicide, but commended the lad for his courage.

This is present day, mind you.

I think you missed the intent of humor in my post...

 

You response is non-sequitur because I posted about the overall attitude toward sex on average over a long periods of time atrocities can happen in the world here and there. To add to that it seems to be the modern times that obsession of sex is global.

 

Ok.

I'll try a different approach.

Example: Old people complain about the out of control young people.

It's not unusual for a generation to think they are better or worse than the generation that preceded them nor for a generation to think that the generation that follows them is better or worse than their own.

But through out history, depending on culture, very little has changed in regards to attitude toward sex in the over-all timeline.
Research the ancient Romans take on sex. The Egyptian. Ancient Japanese. Ancient Judaic. Ancient tribal (Including Native American and Aborgine), African and various empires that ruled in the last two thousand years.
You'll find the same trends of conservatism, same frivolousness. Same taboos and same uninhibited activities.
It just depends on the dominant culture at any time. But we've grown very little. If at all.

 

I thought it was cute

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Meow baby... meeeeow....prrrrrrrrr.....

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I'll say.
Probably explains why a lackadaisical attitude towards sex is just one of the marked social impacts upon long term relationships (assuming one views long term relationships as integral to social the social fabric of course)

 

I think the two of you, LG and JR, are operating out of different definitions of what "casual sex" is.

For JR, "casual sex" seems to be 'sex in a non-committed relationship', 'one-night stands', 'sex with friends with benefits', 'sex on the first (few) date(s)'.

For LG, "casual sex" seems to be 'non-procreational sex; sex without the intention to procreate (also with explicit intention not to procreate), whatever the relationship between the parties involved'.

JR seems to see no problem with non-procreational sex, but for LG, such sex seems to be an important problem.

 

I thought it was clear.

Any sort of sexual act is simultaneously framed by not only societal attitudes but also consequences, not only in terms of progeny but also that of a casual relationship being built up as long term one (and vice versa).

To think that you can talk about never the twain shall meet is absurd.

 

Putting aside the recreational/procreational aspect for a moment .... suppose some one involved in a long term relationship has a one night stand with a third party - does the potential for this long term relationship to persevere diminish any?

 

no, i haven't, but from what you've said here, it sounds more like control and manipulation than love to me.

 

Of course. But this doesn't seem to be what the two of you disagree about.

 

Actually, I think the prevalent contemporary idea is that the main difference between a long-term relationship and a casual one is principally simply that of duration.

 

Even if people do something privately, what they do still has implications for the societal norm - at least in Western societies.
Because we here are pressured by ideas of normalcy that are based on some kind of statistical idea.
For example, if one doesn't have sex 3 to 4 times a week, that renders one abnormal, according to official medicine (at least according to some doctors). Or, a celibate person is likely to get advice to seek psychiatric help for their low self-esteem and "intimacy issues".

Being stigmatized as being abnormal in some way is a great pressure for many people, and they engage in many activities, even ones they themselves find harmful, just to avoid the stamp of not fitting in, of being abnormal.


In some other societies, they are not so pressured by this idea of "normalcy" and their ideas about how a person is, should be and why people are the way they are, are based on old traditions, not on what is deemed "current statistics and trends" (which is, basically, gossip).

 

The question is why there is such sex propaganda and why so many people buy into it.

I think that modern society is so stressed out and so bereft of coping strategies and healthy ideas about the purpose of life that people have to resort to more and more extreme means in order to find some comfort.

 

what is love?

sex is the way that bonbons bond as a tribe and they are our closest relitives. In other words there view of sex is probably how we are MENT to be rather than this sterilised form that has come out of the emporor constentines desire to have all power under his own control