• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Problem of Sex

ecofarm said:
OP source:



Why is the author so confused about consent? If he thinks "sex will not be allowed" he must never have consensual sex.

In the 60s, consent was required. "If it feels good, do it" was not referring to rape. Today, consent is required. That has not changed. Does the author believe rape was part of the sexual revolution?

What a messed up creepy article. Reads like a predator.
Click to expand...

Oh no! Consent is needed prior to having sex with a woman? Oh, the humanity!

WE USED TO BE BETTER
 
TheGoverness said:
Oh no! Consent is needed prior to having sex with a woman? Oh, the humanity

WE USED TO BE BETTER
Click to expand...

Yeah, the good ol' hippy days of "if it feels good, rape 'em in the street" are over. Those were the days. But now those same people say "don't rape" and we're back to sexual oppression. Soon no sex will be allowed.

:screwy
 
TheGoverness said:
Oh no! Consent is needed prior to having sex with a woman? Oh, the humanity!

WE USED TO BE BETTER
Click to expand...

Yeah. In the good old days men would would raise the village, rape the women and move on. Nowadays they're afraid to get into an elevator alone with a woman. That's quite an evolutionary come down in only very few years. ;)
 
ecofarm said:
Yeah, the good ol' hippy days of "if it feels good, rape 'em in the street" are over. Those were the days. But now those same people say "don't rape" and we're back to sexual oppression. Soon no sex will be allowed.

:screwy
Click to expand...

What a tragedy.
 
TheGoverness said:
What a tragedy.
Click to expand...

It used to be 'free love'. That was great. Now we gotta ask, like beggars.



Sure, it's funny but the OP article genuinely appears to confuse sexual liberation with lax enforcement of sex crime laws. It's pretty scary to think someone believes liberation and ignoring sex crimes are the same thing.
 
ecofarm said:
OP source:



Why is the author so confused about consent? If he thinks "sex will not be allowed" he must never have consensual sex.

In the 60s, consent was required. "If it feels good, do it" was not referring to rape. Today, consent is required. That has not changed. Does the author believe rape was part of the sexual revolution?

What a messed up creepy article. Reads like a predator.
Click to expand...

We're talking about the 60's ...Sex, Drugs and Rock and Roll. I'd say the consent factor is or was blurred.
 
WCH said:
We're talking about the 60's ...Sex, Drugs and Rock and Roll. I'd say the consent factor is or was blurred.
Click to expand...

No. It might have been or is for you but that's a personal problem.
 
WCH said:
Like I said...blurred.
Click to expand...

Clear and same as it's always been. Plenty of people still live the 'sex drugs and rock n roll', and they manage a grasp of consent.

In what way do you believe consent was confusing in the 60s? Why do you seek to apologize for sex crimes in the 60s? Perhaps you should give us an example of this "blurring".
 
ecofarm said:
It used to be 'free love'. That was great. Now we gotta ask, like beggars.



Sure, it's funny but the OP article genuinely appears to confuse sexual liberation with lax enforcement of sex crime laws. It's pretty scary to think someone believes liberation and ignoring sex crimes are the same thing.
Click to expand...

You’re right, Eco. Sexual liberation/freedom is entirely different than sexual conduct laws. Consent is still required for liberated folks.

Not long after Woodstock there was a similar event call “The Texas Music Festival” featuring a lot of the same acts. It was at Lake Dallas. There were 10’s of thousands who attended. There was a lot of drugs, sex, and rock n roll. The was a fair amount of nudity, especially along the banks of the lake. “Love in’s” as they were called were all over the place around the various camp areas.

I assure all that a lot of stoned people were having sex and some in groups and with strangers “BUT ONLY WITH CONSENT! Without consent - that was considered to be “rape”. That was completely frowned on.

Civilized people shouldn’t need laws to understand that one person doesn’t violate the personal boundaries and the bodies of others regardless of how stoned one or more is (or are). Or in any other state of mind, as far as that goes.

Adult men and women who are drawn to have a girlfriend/boyfriend relationship with minors who are “statutorily under age” can “NEVER lawfully get consent” to engage in behaviors that involve the sexual stimulation of the minor - regardless of the method of stimulation.

It’s obviously very, very difficult for victims of sexual misconduct to go up against rich, or famous, or powerful individual in politics. They can’t afford a counter-suit to defend their claims. Some are threatened in various ways to keep quiet about incidents.

Short of murder - unless on video - sexual violations by politicians makes it almost impossible to kick their asses out of office or prevent them from getting into office.
 
LowDown said:
At the bottom of the sex problem is the drive to procreate, the natural biological urge that has driven generation after generation of human beings to sustain the species. This is far greater than any ideology can contain. So, what do we do about it? How do we manage it? Currently there is no standard. There is no north star to tell us how we can safely navigate. The traditions that previously provided us with guidelines have been stripped away.

https://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/the-problem-of-sex/
Click to expand...

LMAO uhm the article doesnt even make any logical or rational sense....it attempts to tie things together that arent even related and ignores that women are safer in general when it comes to laws etc.

even this statement "“Rape culture,” “is perpetuated through the use of misogynistic language, the objectification of women’s bodies, and the glamorization of sexual violence, thereby creating a society that disregards women’s rights and safety. … Most women and girls live in fear of rape.”

then how does womens rights, equal rights, protections of sexual orientation condone/add to it?


Women have always had fear of assault but now its more frowned on than ever before in this country and men engaging in such are more likely to be punished. . . . seems the article ignores that reality
 
LowDown said:
At the bottom of the sex problem is the drive to procreate, the natural biological urge that has driven generation after generation of human beings to sustain the species. This is far greater than any ideology can contain. So, what do we do about it? How do we manage it? Currently there is no standard. There is no north star to tell us how we can safely navigate. The traditions that previously provided us with guidelines have been stripped away.

https://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/the-problem-of-sex/
Click to expand...

5f0718d96b69ed141b7ca04f402f3cd3.jpg


What do you mean by "there is no standard"?

I don't understand this insistence on a specific type of family unit. Family units come in all sorts of forms. A child can be raised by two dads, two moms, a mom and a grandma, a dad and a family friend, or even two adoptive parents; the issue isn't the biological relationship between the child and the family, it's the social health of the family, itself. You can't force that. Trying to define how other families should be is just a new, manufactured conflict.

Freedom can be scary, but people need to take their own plunge.
 
ecofarm said:
Clear and same as it's always been. Plenty of people still live the 'sex drugs and rock n roll', and they manage a grasp of consent.

In what way do you believe consent was confusing in the 60s? Why do you seek to apologize for sex crimes in the 60s? Perhaps you should give us an example of this "blurring".
Click to expand...

Spare me your 'holier than thou' condescension. People were on plenty of drugs that made proper consent nearly impossible.
 
Removable Mind said:
You’re right, Eco. Sexual liberation/freedom is entirely different than sexual conduct laws. Consent is still required for liberated folks.

Not long after Woodstock there was a similar event call “The Texas Music Festival” featuring a lot of the same acts. It was at Lake Dallas. There were 10’s of thousands who attended. There was a lot of drugs, sex, and rock n roll. The was a fair amount of nudity, especially along the banks of the lake. “Love in’s” as they were called were all over the place around the various camp areas.

I assure all that a lot of stoned people were having sex and some in groups and with strangers “BUT ONLY WITH CONSENT! Without consent - that was considered to be “rape”. That was completely frowned on.

Civilized people shouldn’t need laws to understand that one person doesn’t violate the personal boundaries and the bodies of others regardless of how stoned one or more is (or are). Or in any other state of mind, as far as that goes.

Adult men and women who are drawn to have a girlfriend/boyfriend relationship with minors who are “statutorily under age” can “NEVER lawfully get consent” to engage in behaviors that involve the sexual stimulation of the minor - regardless of the method of stimulation.

It’s obviously very, very difficult for victims of sexual misconduct to go up against rich, or famous, or powerful individual in politics. They can’t afford a counter-suit to defend their claims. Some are threatened in various ways to keep quiet about incidents.

Short of murder - unless on video - sexual violations by politicians makes it almost impossible to kick their asses out of office or prevent them from getting into office.
Click to expand...

This one?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_International_Pop_Festival

Judging by the way you described this, not sure you could have given consent. ;)
 
WCH said:
This one?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_International_Pop_Festival
.
Judging by the way you described this, not sure you could have given consent. ;)
Click to expand...

Yes, that’s the one.

Odd you would make such a comment. Especially since you’ve not indicated that you were there. I was for 3 Days.

Could it be - you engage in too much judging? That’s your God’s job - or - have you been appointed to take on that role?
 
LowDown said:
At the bottom of the sex problem is the drive to procreate, the natural biological urge that has driven generation after generation of human beings to sustain the species. This is far greater than any ideology can contain. So, what do we do about it? How do we manage it? Currently there is no standard. There is no north star to tell us how we can safely navigate. The traditions that previously provided us with guidelines have been stripped away.

https://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/the-problem-of-sex/
Click to expand...

If you want clear boundaries and lines for moral behavior, then you will probably do best in conservative Islamic societies: you never get to see any women's faces or bodies; they are covered in a hijab all the time. The parents arrange a proper marriage for you when you are the right age. You get to see the bride's face only on the wedding night. They were shocked at the west's lack of boundaries and permissiveness, even in the 1950s. That kind of control should be our goal too.
 
Removable Mind said:
Yes, that’s the one.

Odd you would make such a comment. Especially since you’ve not indicated that you were there. I was for 3 Days.

Could it be - you engage in too much judging? That’s your God’s job - or - have you been appointed to take on that role?
Click to expand...

You said people were having sex on the lake Dallas shore. No such animal.

I figured you were too ****ed up to know where you were.
 
WCH said:
You said people were having sex on the lake Dallas shore. No such animal.

I figured you were too ****ed up to know where you were.
Click to expand...

Indeed they were, and numerous other places. So what?

And what led you to that conclusion I was too ****ed up to know where I was?

It was a very peaceful event. No police were running around responding to claims of rape. People are capable of being high and not rape others.

Now that you’ve seen the errors of your past ways and taken up death row level of religion. In other words, you’ve atoned for every sin, made amend with all you sinned against, and earned your “self-righteous merit badge” - you now believe people shouldn’t have sex but to procreate.

If I wasn’t an atheist I would be on my knees daily thanking God I would never subscribe to your outrageous “self-concocted” beliefs.

Any other judgements you want to throw into our exchanges?
 
Removable Mind said:
Indeed they were, and numerous other places. So what?

And what led you to that conclusion I was too ****ed up to know where I was?

It was a very peaceful event. No police were running around responding to claims of rape. People are capable of being high and not rape others.

Now that you’ve seen the errors of your past ways and taken up death row level of religion. In other words, you’ve atoned for every sin, made amend with all you sinned against, and earned your “self-righteous merit badge” - you now believe people shouldn’t have sex but to procreate.

If I wasn’t an atheist I would be on my knees daily thanking God I would never subscribe to your outrageous “self-concocted” beliefs.

Any other judgements you want to throw into our exchanges?
Click to expand...



I can't believe you had to post that.

Vancouver's world famous clothing optional "Wreck Beach" has been so for five decades. The most serious problem has been people who eat too many cannabis cookies and fall asleep with the tide coming in.

The police are not welcome and the place pretty much takes care of itself.

https://www.google.ca/search?q=vanc...yM9N_XAhUfS2MKHVYsDeEQsAQINA&biw=1158&bih=628

Right wing Americans only think of sex when they talk about "morals"...I am a believer and both God and I had a long, long and deep laugh at how an entire nation can be provoked into near riots over a half second exposure of a woman's nipple at a Super Bowl...while some of the cigarette and booze ads are ten times provocative. What are you all afraid of?
 
Removable Mind said:
Indeed they were, and numerous other places. So what?

And what led you to that conclusion I was too ****ed up to know where I was?

It was a very peaceful event. No police were running around responding to claims of rape. People are capable of being high and not rape others.

Now that you’ve seen the errors of your past ways and taken up death row level of religion. In other words, you’ve atoned for every sin, made amend with all you sinned against, and earned your “self-righteous merit badge” - you now believe people shouldn’t have sex but to procreate.

If I wasn’t an atheist I would be on my knees daily thanking God I would never subscribe to your outrageous “self-concocted” beliefs.

Any other judgements you want to throw into our exchanges?
Click to expand...

Lake Dallas is a city not, a lake. I lived in DFW during that time period.

My religious beliefs have nothing to do with this topic.
 
WCH said:
Lake Dallas is a city not, a lake. I lived in DFW during that time period.

My religious beliefs have nothing to do with this topic.
Click to expand...

So what?

You were accusing me of not knowing where I was during the Texas Music Festival and you come back with this silly comment. Is this a “gotcha kind of thing?

I was born and raised in Dallas.

There is the town of lake Dallas. Absolutely. Where do you suspect that town is extremely close to?

The local folks have called the lake “Lake Dallas” despite its name being changed several times. I lived a few miles from the lake for 7 years.

THE LAKE’S NAME ITSELF has been changed several times. Aside of being called Lake Dallas it’s been named as Garza’s Little Elm and for sometime now it’s known as Lake Lewisville.

A little history lesson for you:

Just do fun, Google “Garza’s Little Elm”.

Lewisville Lake (AKA Garza’s Little Elm and Lake Dallas) is a reservoir in North Texas (USA) on the Elm Fork of the Trinity River in Denton County near Lewisville. Originally engineered in 1927 as Lake Dallas, the reservoir was expanded in the 1940s and 1950s and renamed Lewisville Lake. It was built for flood control purposes and to serve as a water source for Dallas and its suburbs, but residents also use it for recreational purposes.
 
Removable Mind said:
So what?

You were accusing me of not knowing where I was during the Texas Music Festival and you come back with this silly comment. Is this a “gotcha kind of thing?

I was born and raised in Dallas.

There is the town of lake Dallas. Absolutely. Where do you suspect that town is extremely close to?

The local folks have called the lake “Lake Dallas” despite its name being changed several times. I lived a few miles from the lake for 7 years.

THE LAKE’S NAME ITSELF has been changed several times. Aside of being called Lake Dallas it’s been named as Garza’s Little Elm and for sometime now it’s known as Lake Lewisville.

A little history lesson for you:

Just do fun, Google “Garza’s Little Elm”.

Lewisville Lake (AKA Garza’s Little Elm and Lake Dallas) is a reservoir in North Texas (USA) on the Elm Fork of the Trinity River in Denton County near Lewisville. Originally engineered in 1927 as Lake Dallas, the reservoir was expanded in the 1940s and 1950s and renamed Lewisville Lake. It was built for flood control purposes and to serve as a water source for Dallas and its suburbs, but residents also use it for recreational purposes.
Click to expand...

The concert was at the, now dismantled, Dallas International Speedway, not on Lake Lewisville. There was a campground on the lake for concert goers.

Just to be clear.
 
ecofarm said:
The term really upsets you? He committed sexual crimes. He's a sex offender. This isn't a courtroom, so hiding behind legal definitions is creepy. Using him as evidence for confusion about consent does not help Lowdown's claims, it does the opposite.
Click to expand...

No never even liked Lewis CK before this whole mess. What I dont care for is ignorance combined with arrogance which you seem to have an unlimited supply of both. Sex offender is only legal definition so Im not hiding behind anything. Lewis might be a sexual predator and a sexual abuser but he is not a sexual offender. Claiming otherwise at this point when you have been told over and over the difference is just further evidence of your willingness to openly lie. You got caught and now you are unable to man up and admit you were wrong.
 
Crovax said:
No never even liked Lewis CK before this whole mess. What I dont care for is ignorance combined with arrogance which you seem to have an unlimited supply of both. Sex offender is only legal definition so Im not hiding behind anything. Lewis might be a sexual predator and a sexual abuser but he is not a sexual offender. Claiming otherwise at this point when you have been told over and over the difference is just further evidence of your willingness to openly lie. You got caught and now you are unable to man up and admit you were wrong.
Click to expand...

Meaningless semantics. I didn't claim he is a convicted sex offender, the common term for those convicted. Everyone knows he was not convicted.
 
WCH said:
The concert was at the, now dismantled, International Speedway, not on Lake Lewisville. There was a campground on the lake for concert goers.

Just to be clear.
Click to expand...

About 99% in DP don’t know the area so in making my comments about the Festival I chose to state “Lake Dallas” as the location as it was in such close proximity to the lake that it might give people a better understanding of the immediate area.

Just to be clear - you’re still trying to play a gotcha game.

On the east end of the festival field was the backstage/crew complex which was a separately fenced area from the festival grounds. The crew tents were basically 30' x 30' tents, one for serving food and holding meetings and one for a barracks of sorts. The crew camped in the Crew Compound, the area that surrounded the back stage area. Lots of people camped on the festival grounds but no tents or fires were officially allowed, although some fires were going. The free camping mentioned on the festival posters was around the Lake Lewisville area, a short distance away from the main stage.

The big stage show wasn’t the only thing going on. And it was closed at 10:00. Thousands of people would walk back and forth from the main stage to the camping areas around the lake for a variety of reasons. There were several small stages setup in various areas around the lake so that local bands or anyone who wanted to play could. There were tables openly set up by people selling pot, acid, etc. The police bother NOBODY at the main stage or around the lake areas.

I stand by all of my comments - I was at the Festival/Lake camp grounds for 3 days. My points on the “many sexual things going on (around the main stage and lake areas) were without any violent rape incidents. Again, people who get high aren’t rapists - the understand “consent”.

Anything else?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom