Yet another sexuality topic

[scorpia]

I'm sorry, I wasn't starting the whole tired Homosexuality vs Christianity debate again. But you haven't quite seen my point, I didn't hate God for condemning the act of sex, but my desire for it, which is such a core part of who someone is. I assume you're straight, can you imagine having to quash the feelings of attraction you have for men? Well, there's arguments backwards and forwards for it and this isn't the thread for them, I was just deatailing my former stance.

And I was detailing mine. Yes I can imagine quashing it since all desire is is some signal your body sends you like pain or hunger demanding treatment it doesn't care what you do so long as it's fixed I usually don't even think about guys I think about what I want done to me and that's all.

Praise reason! No more chains.

Yay for you but not everyone wants to indulge in it if anything sexuality IS the chains

Questions for debate;

Can sexuality, gay, lesbian, straight, or otherwise, be controlled?

Is the demand that you control yours chains or is the sexuality itself the chains?

My stance; I mentioned before there was some sheik that once sommented that it was all the woman's fault that men rape them, for being "uncovered" like not covering meat in front of a cat. I don't really see the God vs sexuality debate as much different and despite what he said about women he also insulted men too, they're not some pathetic cat that can't control themselves. Imagine what that would mean otherwise...............

[scorpia]

How do you think he could come to the state of not thinking "that the girl might not want it as much as he does"? How could he believe that when he has to use force or the credible threat of violence to overcome her protestations and/or physical resistance?

Because seemingly even if he might believe that the woman doesn't want it he just has to put a bit more effort into arousing her until she says yes. That and the man in the date rape situation believes he is owed anyway. And this desn't cover the stranger rapist situation either, where the guy knows he's doing something wrong

The answer is the social assumption that women must say no even when they mean yes. And that comes from the social/moral/religious pressure on women to never express interest in sexuality.

So I HAVE to express my sexuality? What if I don't want to? Is that what every girl is supposed to do if they stop being religious? Bit of a put off. Aren't there women out there that aren't religious yet get raped anyway? There are cases mentioned where the woman did have sex before hand and wouldn't have had inhibitions yet she gets raped afterwards. What about those?

You mean the problem would go away if the pressure was ratched up a few notches? Doesn't sound credible, does it? That way lies burkas. And look what happens to the societies that have burkas. There the mere existance of women is dangerously sexual.

What about Islam? Yeah you get idiots like that shiek but then there are several muslim men I have met that are quite nicely mannered. Guess that means just because they are muslim/ religious doesn't mean they will turn into evil sex-fiends.

Please don't try to demonise Islam to justify your beliefs.

Because that isn't the lesson of Soddom and Gemorrah, and rape is specifically encouraged, ordered, or supported in many instances. Look up the concept of "marriage by rape" it was allowable in christendom at least up to late medieval times.

That is not the only instance of rape in the Bible.

Look up Genesis 34, Judges 19, 2 Sam 13, all instances of rape where other males reacted violently to the offender. It seems to be the lesson there.

[juliod]

Because seemingly even if he might believe that the woman doesn't want it he just has to put a bit more effort into arousing her until she says yes.

Yes but that implies a social conditioning where a woman would not be expected (allowed) to say yes when she means it.

That and the man in the date rape situation believes he is owed anyway.

I've read quite a bit of the reasearch on rape, including acquaintance rape, and I don't think this concept of being "owed" something is considered a significant component.

And this desn't cover the stranger rapist situation either, where the guy knows he's doing something wrong

Let's not flit back and forth. When I was talking about non-acquaintance rape you objected based on date rape. When I talk about dape rape you switch back to stranger rape.

For non-aquaintance rape, the question is why does someone who is intent on violence and harm choose to use sexual activity, which is inherently non-violent? Sex can only be a tool of the rapist because of the social pressue focused on sex, which is predominately religious in nature. IOW, the religions arm the rapist.

So I HAVE to express my sexuality? What if I don't want to?

No one said that, did they? The fact that you interpreted my description of oppressed female sexuality as a demand for you to express your sexuality is surely a clue as to how socially pressurized this issue is.

Is that what every girl is supposed to do if they stop being religious?

Nope. No one said that either. By contrast, if you are a christian woman you are supposed to be married and boinking your husband, regardless of whether you want to or not. Sexual freedom inherently includes freedom to be non-sexual if you choose.

Aren't there women out there that aren't religious yet get raped anyway? There are cases mentioned where the woman did have sex before hand and wouldn't have had inhibitions yet she gets raped afterwards. What about those?

What about them? Rape is about consent, not about a woman's attitude towards sex.

It's funny that many religious people can't understand how a prostitute can be raped. It comes back to the anti-feminist view that women's consent can be assumed or inferred.

You mean the problem would go away if the pressure was ratched up a few notches? Doesn't sound credible, does it? That way lies burkas. And look what happens to the societies that have burkas. There the mere existance of women is dangerously sexual.

What about Islam? Yeah you get idiots like that shiek but then there are several muslim men I have met that are quite nicely mannered. Guess that means just because they are muslim/ religious doesn't mean they will turn into evil sex-fiends.

The muslims you meet here in the west are very likely to be highly-educated, socially-sensitive, and (gasp) liberal. But you don't follow women's affairs in the arab/islamic world, do you? In many of those countries there needs to be an actual movement to try (unsucessfully so far) to convince families to stop murdering their daughters if they are raped.

Imagine that! Sex is so highly charged in those societies that if you are unfortunate enough to be a victim of rape, you risk being killed by your family because you have dishonored them. In those societies, is islam contributing to the well-being of it's citizens?

Please don't try to demonise Islam to justify your beliefs.

I'm an atheist. I oppose islam no more and no less than I oppose christianity.

Genesis 34

The issue is intermarriage, not rape. We do not know if Dinah consented to sex or not. It doesn't say. And the Israelites aren't interested. They weren't going to consent to her marriage, even if it were based on love, respect and peace. BTW, they carried off the women of that city. What for, we wonder?

Judges 19

One of the more perverse passages in the bible. What lesson about rape are you drawing from it? Islam-style honor-killing?

2 Sam 13

This is one of the passages that justifies marriage by rape.


Did you notice, in these passages, that the rape of a woman is in fact an attack on the "property" of men? Daughter, sister, concubine, all owned by one man or another. Where is the sense in your bible that women can make up thier own minds, live their own lives, and seek their woen fulfillment?

DanZ

[Easyrider]

Quote: It's funny that many religious people can't understand how a prostitute can be raped. It comes back to the anti-feminist view that women's consent can be assumed or inferred.

I think a great many religious people do understand that a prostitute can be raped. I also think a lot of non-religious people have believed that a prostitute can't be raped.

[juliod]

I also think a lot of non-religious people have believed that a prostitute can't be raped.

I won't say it can't happen, but I can't see how an atheist could believe that a prostitute can't be raped. Not having a doctrine of feminine purity to draw on, it would seem difficult to find a way to condemn prostitutes or place them in a moral no-man's-land.

For theists, with a firm grounding of moral standards, it is easy to see prostitutes as "bad women" from whom consent is not asked or needed.

DanZ

[scorpia]

Because seemingly even if he might believe that the woman doesn't want it he just has to put a bit more effort into arousing her until she says yes.

Yes but that implies a social conditioning where a woman would not be expected (allowed) to say yes when she means it.

No, it implies that the man believes that women are ignorant about sex

I've read quite a bit of the reasearch on rape, including acquaintance rape, and I don't think this concept of being "owed" something is considered a significant component.

Well it is according to my sources, which I've cited

Let's not flit back and forth. When I was talking about non-acquaintance rape you objected based on date rape. When I talk about dape rape you switch back to stranger rape.

No, I included all sorts beforehand, and I continued to do so.

For non-aquaintance rape, the question is why does someone who is intent on violence and harm choose to use sexual activity, which is inherently non-violent?

Everything that person does becomes violent.

Sex can only be a tool of the rapist because of the social pressue focused on sex, which is predominately religious in nature. IOW, the religions arm the rapist.

But there aren't necessarily environments with no social pressure that are rape free, and it isn't always the case that where there is social pressure there is more rape

No one said that, did they? The fact that you interpreted my description of oppressed female sexuality as a demand for you to express your sexuality is surely a clue as to how socially pressurized this issue is.

No, you implied that someone has to be open about their sexuality to not be raped. I am not allowed to be shy. If I am, it's all about religion. It's always the case for a non-believer, religion is to blame for eveything. They just can't face the fact some women are simply shy and don't want to talk about it.

Nope. No one said that either. By contrast, if you are a christian woman you are supposed to be married and boinking your husband, regardless of whether you want to or not. Sexual freedom inherently includes freedom to be non-sexual if you choose.

1 Corithians 7 says otherwise

Aren't there women out there that aren't religious yet get raped anyway? There are cases mentioned where the woman did have sex before hand and wouldn't have had inhibitions yet she gets raped afterwards. What about those?

What about them? Rape is about consent, not about a woman's attitude towards sex.

Yet you imply misintepreted consent is based on a woman's attitude towards sex

It's funny that many religious people can't understand how a prostitute can be raped. It comes back to the anti-feminist view that women's consent can be assumed or inferred.

Where did this come from?

The muslims you meet here in the west are very likely to be highly-educated, socially-sensitive, and (gasp) liberal. But you don't follow women's affairs in the arab/islamic world, do you? In many of those countries there needs to be an actual movement to try (unsucessfully so far) to convince families to stop murdering their daughters if they are raped.
Imagine that! Sex is so highly charged in those societies that if you are unfortunate enough to be a victim of rape, you risk being killed by your family because you have dishonored them. In those societies, is islam contributing to the well-being of it's citizens?

Well let's see, muslims in too different areas, one are nice, the others aren't. Maybe it's the location, or their government that causes this.

I'm an atheist. I oppose islam no more and no less than I oppose christianity.

I thought one could be an atheist yet still be tolerant. And I thought atheism was all about the lack of belief, not demonising the beliefs of others.

One of the more perverse passages in the bible. What lesson about rape are you drawing from it? Islam-style honor-killing?

And how was she "honour killed?"

This is one of the passages that justifies marriage by rape.

Huh? It was the woman who suggested the marriage

Did you notice, in these passages, that the rape of a woman is in fact an attack on the "property" of men? Daughter, sister, concubine, all owned by one man or another. Where is the sense in your bible that women can make up thier own minds, live their own lives, and seek their woen fulfillment?

Considering how they dislike such women being treated as "a prostitute", I'll have to disagree

[The Nice Centurion]

From a Christian standpoint, the Bible at the very least allows an outlet for sexuality through marriage. It is unclear whether sex outside of marriage is always sinful, but it is in general frowned upon.

Well it does say Exo 22: 16 "If a man seduces a virgin who is not pledged to be married and sleeps with her, he must pay the bride price, and she shall be his wife. If her father refuses to give her to him, he must still pay the bride price for virgins"

There was also Jesus saying lust wasn't any different from adultery although one debater did point out how can it be adultery if say you're attracted to your partner.

Not that this needs to be another homosexuality thread, but it seems to me to allow a sanctioned outlet for heterosexuals and not homosexuals is an 'unreasonable chain.'

No, and I was hoping it wouldn't have to be

In a word, no.

No one has ever come up with any scheme for doing so.

There's a first time for everything

Rape, for example, can be seen as a result of this "control". Why should someone who is intent on violence choose to express it through rape (i.e. by sexual activity)?

Rape often enough happens during a date a girl has with a man she wouldn't otherwise suspect, and because he say offers her a ride home and the girl doesn't agree, yet the guy doesn't take no for an answer because he expects that in particular for return. (Brent Sanders "How dagerous men think- and how to stay safe for life" 2001)

We are so used to viewing rape as violence that we almost can't see that on the face of it this is absurd. Sexual activity is inherently non-violent, and to use it as violence requires a great deal of social conditioning.
In other words, our morality has made sex such a "bad thing" that people can use it as a violent crime even though it is not a violent act.

In the case where when it is seen as a bad thing affecting conditioning, the one who feels guilty associates the guilt with the desire and though this can be a basis for sadism (though it also relates to hierophilia) (Dr Stephen Juan "the odd sex" 2001) there are clubs out there for that particular thing, it doesn't necessarily lead to rape.

A common misconception though I have found, if this is also something you are going to refer to, is that the church is the cause of pedophilia but that in fact is caused by the person in question having being abused themselves and blaming the church would not explain those incidents involving teachers.

Serial rapists do what they do in order to compensate for their own feelings of inadequacy physically, mentally and sexually and try to look macho (Brent Sanders "How dangerous men think- and how to stay safe for life" 2001)

(In addition, there have been many other negative consequences, from psychopathic sex-murderers to soul-crushing guilt at one's own normal sexual feelings.)

Yeah? Well there's guilt, but then on the opposite end there's that powerless feeling. If you don't control it others might. You can get women out there that use their looks to get men to do whatever they want you don't want that happening do you?

I wouldnt generally say that the church is the cause of pedophilia.

I would say that the abrahamic hate and regulating toward sex laid the groundstone for the christian pedophilian movement.

Zelibate was the grande trick that offered homosexualists and pedophilians a homestead where to undisturbed still their desires;
The christian church

After all: Who has ever heard of one single satanist raping a kid

But all have heard countless times about christians raping kids

Kind of makes you think!

Doesnt it?