Choices [W:1315]

[RamFel]

IOW, you can't prove your claim. I understand.

And good luck on making it illegal for liberals to have sex. smh

Yeah you may be right. If you just wouldn't kill your own, the topic would come up less often.

 

[TheGoverness]

I win and big. It's easy when I'm right and you're always wrong.

Ha! Funny joke!

 

[minnie616]

It sounds like the same thing to me. I have to say it again. Sex is still the baby maker around here. You want a baby? Yes? Then have sex. ...

If a woman wants a baby she doesn't even have to have sex she can have her or someone else's ovum fertilized in a lab and inplanted into her womb.

 

[TheGoverness]

If a woman wants a baby she doesn't even have to have sex she can have her or someone else's ovum fertilized in a lab and inplanted into her womb.

Put 'dem facts away, gosh 'dernit!

 

[TheGoverness]

Yeah you may be right. If you just wouldn't kill your own, the topic would come up less often.

If you had a good grasp on reality, you'd realise that not every liberal has abortions. I certainly haven't. It's kinda like how not every pro-marijuana legalization advocate smokes weed.

 

[RamFel]

Hahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Thanks for the laugh.

Claim proven.

 

[Scrabaholic]

Yeah you may be right. If you just wouldn't kill your own, the topic would come up less often.

Please do not libel me. I have never "killed my own".

 

[Scrabaholic]

Claim proven.

Hahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!! :lamo

Where????

 

[FutureIncoming]

[part 1 of 2, in reply to Msg #1190]

OK, but I will have to do it without the biggest and best proof of them all. And that is an interview with a member of pre-historic man.

ARE YOU CLAIMING THAT YOU BELIEVE PREHISTORIC HUMANS DID NOT ENJOY SEX? Perhaps you should remember that in the early 20th century, anthropologists traveled the world looking for, and finding, Stone Age cultures, peoples who didn't know anything more than prehistoric humans knew. We still have the data the anthropologists collected about those tribes, including sex-related customs.

And since I don't have one of those fine people, ill have to do it without absolute proof.

YOU WON'T BE PROVING ANYTHING EXCEPT THAT THEY HAD ENOUGH SEX FOR THEIR TRIBES TO SURVIVE --without knowing that sex can sometimes cause a pregnancy.

BY THE WAY, one other point you seem to have totally ignored is the Fact that roughly 1/7 of all human couples are Naturally infertile. They can and do have all the sex they want, even though they know they can't have kids. SO: if the only purpose of human sex is reproduction, why does that behavior happen?

The absolute main purpose of sex is,

FOR MOST ANIMAL SPECIES, BUT NOT INCLUDING HUMANS.

and still continues to be procreation.

FOR MOST ANIMAL SPECIES, BUT NOT INCLUDING HUMANS. One of the most Stupidly Hypocritical thing about Religion-based anti-abortion arguments is how Religions claim humans are different from animals, but when sex is concerned, humans are just another animal (and must mindlessly breed like just other animals). NOPE!!! Not when humans have to deal with concealed ovulation, and all those other animals don't!

Without this act, we would be wasting a lot babies.

NOT A VERY SENSIBLE STATEMENT. We have contraception that has prevented vast numbers of babies (and would prevent even more if it was 100% effective). And of course we have abortion that can be directly equated (at least by ignorant abortion opponents) with "wasting a lot of babies". I asked you before why any woman would be interested in birth control if the primary purpose of human sex was reproduction, and you ignored my question --possibly because you can't answer it without admitting you are wrong. Tsk, tsk!

 

[FutureIncoming]

[part 2 of 2, in reply to Msg #1190]

Sex makes babies and that is your proof.

NOT PROOF, BECAUSE SEX DOES NOT ALWAYS MAKE BABIES. See what I wrote above (in part 1) about infertile couples, for example. And then there is the "rhythm method" of birth control, which works **specifically** because sex does not always make babies.

But you know what I don't get is what the big deal is.

DENYING FACTS IS ALWAYS PART OF A BIG DEAL. The Fact-Denier wants lies to be accepted instead of truths. The LIE that "purpose of human sex is babies" exists entirely to try to convince pregnant women that they must accept pregnancy if they have sex. NOPE! See above (in part 1) about all those infertile couples? Why should those women be able to have all the sex they want, without having babies, while other women must have babies just because they had sex? That in a nutshell is one reason why both contraception and abortion exist!

If babies are our enemies

TOO MUCH OF ANY GOOD THING IS **ALWAYS** A BAD THING. Babies are not our enemies, per se. TOO MANY BABIES is the enemy!

then why try and protect the process that produces them?

THE LINK IS NOT A CERTAIN THING; THAT'S WHY. It is more-often possible for humans to have sex without causing a pregnancy, than it is possible for humans to have sex that causes a pregnancy (a woman's fertile time is only a few days per month, remember!).

You want to know something else, I believe all liberals should be prohibited from having sex since they seem to want the destruction of the human population.

HAW! HAW!! HAW!!! Liberals are generally focused only on excess/unnecessary/unwanted births (because those are the unborn humans that most-often get aborted), not all births.

BY YOUR "LOGIC", all couples that include at least one political conservative should be subject to mandatory abortions, since political conservatives are quite obviously working to cause human overpopulation and a Malthusian Catastrophe that can kill up to 99% of the entire human race, and we would be better off if that political tendency was weeded out of the population.

 

[year2late]

Hahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!! :lamo

Where????

In the shadows of his mind.

 

[RamFel]

[part 1 of 2, in reply to Msg #1190]

1. You have no legs without someone who has been there to witness.
2. At best, you're just guessing.
3. Why the interest?
4. You lost. Get over it!


ARE YOU CLAIMING THAT YOU BELIEVE PREHISTORIC HUMANS DID NOT ENJOY SEX? Perhaps you should remember that in the early 20th century, anthropologists traveled the world looking for, and finding, Stone Age cultures, peoples who didn't know anything more than prehistoric humans knew. We still have the data the anthropologists collected about those tribes, including sex-related customs.


YOU WON'T BE PROVING ANYTHING EXCEPT THAT THEY HAD ENOUGH SEX FOR THEIR TRIBES TO SURVIVE --without knowing that sex can sometimes cause a pregnancy.

BY THE WAY, one other point you seem to have totally ignored is the Fact that roughly 1/7 of all human couples are Naturally infertile. They can and do have all the sex they want, even though they know they can't have kids. SO: if the only purpose of human sex is reproduction, why does that behavior happen?


FOR MOST ANIMAL SPECIES, BUT NOT INCLUDING HUMANS.


FOR MOST ANIMAL SPECIES, BUT NOT INCLUDING HUMANS. One of the most Stupidly Hypocritical thing about Religion-based anti-abortion arguments is how Religions claim humans are different from animals, but when sex is concerned, humans are just another animal (and must mindlessly breed like just other animals). NOPE!!! Not when humans have to deal with concealed ovulation, and all those other animals don't!


NOT A VERY SENSIBLE STATEMENT. We have contraception that has prevented vast numbers of babies (and would prevent even more if it was 100% effective). And of course we have abortion that can be directly equated (at least by ignorant abortion opponents) with "wasting a lot of babies". I asked you before why any woman would be interested in birth control if the primary purpose of human sex was reproduction, and you ignored my question --possibly because you can't answer it without admitting you are wrong. Tsk, tsk![/QUOTE]

 

[FutureIncoming]

1. You have no legs without someone who has been there to witness.

WE HAVE FACTS AND YOU DON'T. One highly relevant Fact I've mentioned before, that human females don't Naturally know when the right time is to have reproductive sex. It is a learned thing --and that means humanity in general did not originally/automatically know to associate sex with reproduction. The association had to be discovered --and we **know** that that is a Fact because as I previously wrote and linked, anthropologists discovered tribes that still had a Stone-Age culture, in which they did not know to associate sex with reproduction.

2. At best, you're just guessing.

FALSE; SEE ABOVE. We have Facts and you don't!

3. Why the interest?

BECAUSE YOU KEEP LYING ABOUT THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF HUMAN SEX. You have been **proved** wrong, and yet continue to Deny Facts.

4. You lost. Get over it!

HAW! HAW!! HAW!!! Not when we have the Facts on our side, and all you have is lying blather.

 

[RamFel]

WE HAVE FACTS AND YOU DON'T. One highly relevant Fact I've mentioned before, that human females don't Naturally know when the right time is to have reproductive sex. It is a learned thing --and that means humanity in general did not originally/automatically know to associate sex with reproduction. The association had to be discovered --and we **know** that that is a Fact because as I previously wrote and linked, anthropologists discovered tribes that still had a Stone-Age culture, in which they did not know to associate sex with reproduction.


FALSE; SEE ABOVE. We have Facts and you don't!


BECAUSE YOU KEEP LYING ABOUT THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF HUMAN SEX. You have been **proved** wrong, and yet continue to Deny Facts.


HAW! HAW!! HAW!!! Not when we have the Facts on our side, and all you have is lying blather.

No. Even with no evidence I still have better than you. You have guesses but at least I don't try to make something out of nothing. And you got plenty of nothing. So you lost. Time to get over it. Move on.

This is is why I won't do evidenvce. It's all bull. It's like saying "here boy, go chase after this" I won't do it.

 

[FutureIncoming]

No. Even with no evidence I still have better than you.

LIES ARE NEVER BETTER THAN FACTS. See below.

You have guesses

STUPIDLY FALSE; FACTS ARE NOT GUESSES. It is a Fact that human females do not Naturally/automatically know when sex can lead to reproduction. It is a Fact that human tribes existed that never knew sex was associated with reproduction. It is a Fact that the connection had to be discovered/learned. It Is Logically Obvious that before that connection was discovered/learned, no human knew about it. What they did know was that sex was fun and desirable. Consider this Fact, that about 2% of average modern human DNA came from the Neanderthals. Only interbreeding could have done that --but now, knowing something about what Neanderthals looked like, consider the origins of the word "troll", and the fact that Neanderthals died out as humans with superior weapons invaded Europe, migrating from Africa. Finally, keep in mind that while "bestiality" is generally condemned (possibly because, like masturbation, it is one more way for humans to have sex without having offspring), it still happens, and, Historically, female captives were usually raped --and rape is far more about dominance than reproduction.

but at least I don't try to make something out of nothing.

FACTS ARE NOT NOTHING. Assemblages of Facts are not nothing, either, although it is often true that different assemblages of Facts can be constructed, sometimes depending only on the "weights" arbitrarily assigned to each Fact. YOU seem to think that Facts have zero "weight", yet you only offer the Outright Lie that human sex is the same as ordinary-animal sex.

And you got plenty of nothing.

FALSE. See above.

So you lost.

STUPIDLY FALSE. Mere unsupported claims never trump Facts!

This is is why I won't do evidence.

YOU WOULD RATHER ARGUE LIKE A 4-YEAR-OLD? "Is not!" ... "Is so!" ... "Is not!" ... "Is so!"....
Tsk, tsk!

It's all bull.

AND IN COMPARISON, UNSUPPORTED CLAIMS ARE EXCREMENT. At least bulls are often considered to be noble animals.

It's like saying "here boy, go chase after this" I won't do it.

THEN WHY ARE YOU HERE, AT A DEBATE SITE???. No one can achieve victory in a Debate without offering evidence supporting claims made!

 

[RamFel]

D

LIES ARE NEVER BETTER THAN FACTS. See below.


STUPIDLY FALSE; FACTS ARE NOT GUESSES. It is a Fact that human females do not Naturally/automatically know when sex can lead to reproduction. It is a Fact that human tribes existed that never knew sex was associated with reproduction. It is a Fact that the connection had to be discovered/learned. It Is Logically Obvious that before that connection was discovered/learned, no human knew about it. What they did know was that sex was fun and desirable. Consider this Fact, that about 2% of average modern human DNA came from the Neanderthals. Only interbreeding could have done that --but now, knowing something about what Neanderthals looked like, consider the origins of the word "troll", and the fact that Neanderthals died out as humans with superior weapons invaded Europe, migrating from Africa. Finally, keep in mind that while "bestiality" is generally condemned (possibly because, like masturbation, it is one more way for humans to have sex without having offspring), it still happens, and, Historically, female captives were usually raped --and rape is far more about dominance than reproduction.


FACTS ARE NOT NOTHING. Assemblages of Facts are not nothing, either, although it is often true that different assemblages of Facts can be constructed, sometimes depending only on the "weights" arbitrarily assigned to each Fact. YOU seem to think that Facts have zero "weight", yet you only offer the Outright Lie that human sex is the same as ordinary-animal sex.


FALSE. See above.


STUPIDLY FALSE. Mere unsupported claims never trump Facts!


YOU WOULD RATHER ARGUE LIKE A 4-YEAR-OLD? "Is not!" ... "Is so!" ... "Is not!" ... "Is so!"....
Tsk, tsk!


AND IN COMPARISON, UNSUPPORTED CLAIMS ARE EXCREMENT. At least bulls are often considered to be noble animals.


THEN WHY ARE YOU HERE, AT A DEBATE SITE???. No one can achieve victory in a Debate without offering evidence supporting claims made!

if you want to believe it then be my guest. But I for one am never going to. Your explanation didn't really explain because early man did not know about how babies were made proves nothing.

 

[TheGoverness]

Claim proven.

Only in your mind, my double-horned friend.

 

[RamFel]

LIES ARE NEVER BETTER THAN FACTS. See below.


STUPIDLY FALSE; FACTS ARE NOT GUESSES. It is a Fact that human females do not Naturally/automatically know when sex can lead to reproduction. It is a Fact that human tribes existed that never knew sex was associated with reproduction. It is a Fact that the connection had to be discovered/learned. It Is Logically Obvious that before that connection was discovered/learned, no human knew about it. What they did know was that sex was fun and desirable. Consider this Fact, that about 2% of average modern human DNA came from the Neanderthals. Only interbreeding could have done that --but now, knowing something about what Neanderthals looked like, consider the origins of the word "troll", and the fact that Neanderthals died out as humans with superior weapons invaded Europe, migrating from Africa. Finally, keep in mind that while "bestiality" is generally condemned (possibly because, like masturbation, it is one more way for humans to have sex without having offspring), it still happens, and, Historically, female captives were usually raped --and rape is far more about dominance than reproduction.

Hhhhhhh
FACTS ARE NOT NOTHING. Assemblages of Facts are not nothing, either, although it is often true that different assemblages of Facts can be constructed, sometimes depending only on the "weights" arbitrarily assigned to each Fact. YOU seem to think that Facts have zero "weight", yet you only offer the Outright Lie that human sex is the same as ordinary-animal sex.


FALSE. See above.


STUPIDLY FALSE. Mere unsupported claims never trump Facts!


YOU WOULD RATHER ARGUE LIKE A 4-YEAR-OLD? "Is not!" ... "Is so!" ... "Is not!" ... "Is so!"....
Tsk, tsk!


AND IN COMPARISON, UNSUPPORTED CLAIMS ARE EXCREMENT. At least bulls are often considered to be noble animals.


THEN WHY ARE YOU HERE, AT A DEBATE SITE???. No one can achieve victory in a Debate without offering evidence supporting claims made!

Why I'm here is really no affair of yours. But if you must know, I happen to love debating, although you may not think so.

When ever I do look at your explanations, I see you guessing. If early man didn't know about sexual enjoyment, the how did he know that the main purpose of sex was? The answer was that he didn't. Because You are guessing! STOP GUESSING! It makes you look less intelligent.

 

[year2late]

Why I'm here is really no affair of yours. But if you must know, I happen to love debating, although you may not think so.

When ever I do look at your explanations, I see you guessing. If early man didn't know about sexual enjoyment, the how did he know that the main purpose of sex was? The answer was that he didn't. Because You are guessing! STOP GUESSING! It makes you look less intelligent.

There is no guessing.

Each individual knows why he or she is having sex. Companionship, procreation, recreation, control, money.....every individual knows why they have sex each time they have sex. And the reason they have sex one day may be different the next day.

Not sure what all this guessing BS is about.

 

[FutureIncoming]

if you want to believe it then be my guest.

IT IS FAR WISER TO BELIEVE SENSIBLE THINGS THAN PROVABLY NONSENSICAL THINGS. It really is a shame, that so many abortion opponents appear to prefer to exhibit Stupid Prejudice instead of wisdom....

But I for one am never going to.

WE KNOW. Your blatherings about "human life" are an extremely obvious exhibition of Stupid Prejudice, especially Stupid because living human hydatidiform moles MUST be killed, and no one complains about all the human life that routinely gets killed during manicures and pedicures.

Your explanation didn't really explain

IT EXPLAINS MORE THAN YOU WANT TO ADMIT. But then, since you are a known Fact-Denier, what else is new?

because early man did not know about how babies were made proves nothing.

IT PROVES THEY DIDN'T HAVE SEX BECAUSE THEY WANTED BABIES. Such a rationale is impossible when no one knows that sex can cause pregnancy.

 

[FutureIncoming]

Why I'm here is really no affair of yours. But if you must know, I happen to love debating, although you may not think so.

THE ONLY THING WRONG WITH THAT IS YOUR DEFINITION OF "DEBATING". "Is not!" ... "Is so!" ... "Is not!" ... "Is so!" ... appears to be all you can offer. Tsk, tsk.

When ever I do look at your explanations, I see you guessing.

THAT'S YOU DELIBERATELY TRYING TO MISINTERPRET THE EXPLANATION. After all, if I had made an actual guess regarding one of the statements I made, you should be able to say, "That particular statement is a guess!", and explain exactly why it is just a guess.

If early man didn't know about sexual enjoyment,

NOW YOU ARE GUESSING. Don't you know about the "pleasure center" of the brain? It is an evolved structure that many ordinary mammals have, not just humans. We can measure activity in that brain region during orgasm, and we know that brain region has existed for many millions of years (simply because so many descendant-species, of the first species to have it, also have it). We can be absolutely certain that early humans thought sex was fun.

then how did he know that the main purpose of sex was?

HE DIDN'T NEED TO KNOW. The Provable Fact that sex was fun is the only reason early humans needed, to have all the sex necessary for pregnancies to happen as a side-effect. Nature only cares about what works!!

The answer was that he didn't.

HE DIDN'T NEED TO KNOW. And again, Nature only cares about what works!

Because You are guessing!

NOT IN THE SLIGHTEST. We have Facts, Objectively Measurable Data!

STOP GUESSING!

TAKE YOUR OWN ADVICE. When I actually do make a guess, I say so (often by saying "I suspect ...").

It makes you look less intelligent.

TALKING ABOUT YOURSELF, STILL. "Is not!" ... "Is so!" ... "Is not!" ... "Is so!" ...

 

[RamFel]

THE ONLY THING WRONG WITH THAT IS YOUR DEFINITION OF "DEBATING". "Is not!" ... "Is so!" ... "Is not!" ... "Is so!" ... appears to be all you can offer. Tsk, tsk.


THAT'S YOU DELIBERATELY TRYING TO MISINTERPRET THE EXPLANATION. After all, if I had made an actual guess regarding one of the statements I made, you should be able to say, "That particular statement is a guess!", and explain exactly why it is just a guess.


NOW YOU ARE GUESSING. Don't you know about the "pleasure center" of the brain? It is an evolved structure that many ordinary mammals have, not just humans. We can measure activity in that brain region during orgasm, and we know that brain region has existed for many millions of years (simply because so many descendant-species, of the first species to have it, also have it). We can be absolutely certain that early humans thought sex was fun.


HE DIDN'T NEED TO KNOW. The Provable Fact that sex was fun is the only reason early humans needed, to have all the sex necessary for pregnancies to happen as a side-effect. Nature only cares about what works!!


HE DIDN'T NEED TO KNOW. And again, Nature only cares about what works!


NOT IN THE SLIGHTEST. We have Facts, Objectively Measurable Data!


TAKE YOUR OWN ADVICE. When I actually do make a guess, I say so (often by saying "I suspect ...").


TALKING ABOUT YOURSELF, STILL. "Is not!" ... "Is so!" ... "Is not!" ... "Is so!" ...

So early man figured out them true purpose of sex thousands of years ago, and you're still buying this even to this day? All of you? Even though we have since figured out the true purpose since then, to be procreation, you still buy the "pleasure only" theory?

Amazing!

 

[FutureIncoming]

So early man figured out them true purpose of sex thousands of years ago, and you're still buying this even to this day?

I NEVER SAID THAT PLEASURE WAS THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF SEX. (In #1184 I stated that the "primary product" was pleasure, in response to your claim that pair-bonding was a "secondary by-product".) "Purpose" and "product" are two different things! I don't know (or care) what early man thought was the primary purpose of sex. The Fact that it was fun was all they **needed** to know, about it, simply because that sufficed to ensure that enough sexual interactions took place for a primitive tribe to keep its numbers up. Anthropologists generally think that when humans became animal-herders (probably of goats or sheep) instead of just hunter-gatherers, that they discovered sex is associated with pregnancies. Females are generally more docile than males, more-easily herded --but a herd of females-only, with males kept away (possibly killed for dinner whenever they approached the captive females for sex), had no offspring.... Anthropologists also think that after the discovery happened, human cultures suffered: Women were demoted to breeders (where abortion opponents still want to keep them), harems became common, and men began fighting each other for the privilege of having offspring, since there weren't enough women for all men to have harems (before, no one had any problem with women having sex with whoever turned them on, **because** it was not known that sex was associated with causing pregnancies).

All of you?

THEY HAVE NOT BEEN PARTICIPATING IN THIS PARTICULAR DEBATE BETWEEN US. But I'm pretty sure more of them will agree with the Facts than with your unsupported claims,

Even though we have since figured out the true purpose since then,

TO BE, FOR HUMANS, PAIR-BONDING. Reproduction is still just a side-effect! While a tribe of humans could raise children communally, there were always humans who didn't get-along with the tribe and moved away, often in male-female pairs --humans still pair-up and move away today (one era famous for that was the settling of the Old West in America).

to be procreation,

CONFLATING THE FACTS ABOUT ABOUT GENERIC ANIMAL SEX DOES NOT CHANGE ITS STATUS FROM A STUPID LIE WHEN TALKING ABOUT HUMAN SEX. Hidden ovulation makes a huge difference!

you still buy the "pleasure only" theory?

NO ONE HERE SAID THAT PLEASURE WAS THE ONLY PURPOSE OF SEX.

Amazing!

THE ONLY AMAZING THING HERE IS THE DEGREE TO WHICH YOU INSIST ON DENYING FACTS.

 

[RamFel]

I NEVER SAID THAT PLEASURE WAS THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF SEX. (In #1184 I stated that the "primary product" was pleasure, in response to your claim that pair-bonding was a "secondary by-product".) "Purpose" and "product" are two different things! I don't know (or care) what early man thought was the primary purpose of sex. The Fact that it was fun was all they **needed** to know, about it, simply because that sufficed to ensure that enough sexual interactions took place for a primitive tribe to keep its numbers up. Anthropologists generally think that when humans became animal-herders (probably of goats or sheep) instead of just hunter-gatherers, that they discovered sex is associated with pregnancies. Females are generally more docile than males, more-easily herded --but a herd of females-only, with males kept away (possibly killed for dinner whenever they approached the captive females for sex), had no offspring.... Anthropologists also think that after the discovery happened, human cultures suffered: Women were demoted to breeders (where abortion opponents still want to keep them), harems became common, and men began fighting each other for the privilege of having offspring, since there weren't enough women for all men to have harems (before, no one had any problem with women having sex with whoever turned them on, **because** it was not known that sex was associated with causing pregnancies).


THEY HAVE NOT BEEN PARTICIPATING IN THIS PARTICULAR DEBATE BETWEEN US. But I'm pretty sure more of them will agree with the Facts than with your unsupported claims,


TO BE, FOR HUMANS, PAIR-BONDING. Reproduction is still just a side-effect! While a tribe of humans could raise children communally, there were always humans who didn't get-along with the tribe and moved away, often in male-female pairs --humans still pair-up and move away today (one era famous for that was the settling of the Old West in America).


CONFLATING THE FACTS ABOUT ABOUT GENERIC ANIMAL SEX DOES NOT CHANGE ITS STATUS FROM A STUPID LIE WHEN TALKING ABOUT HUMAN SEX. Hidden ovulation makes a huge difference!


NO ONE HERE SAID THAT PLEASURE WAS THE ONLY PURPOSE OF SEX.


THE ONLY AMAZING THING HERE IS THE DEGREE TO WHICH YOU INSIST ON DENYING FACTS.

You may have this so-called proof, but you know I can't buy into it. I know it would make you very happy to win this debate. And I can't see you winning anything like that. Not with such flimsy proof. It just wouldn't be right. But in the interest of fairness I have some questions if you don't mind.

If what you say is true, about the true purpose of sex not really being procreation, then others must know about too. I mean, you can't be the only person around. So my first question to you is what university did you learn this at? What course did you take, and what textbooks did you have to read? What degree did you graduate with?

 

[TheGoverness]

There is no guessing.

Each individual knows why he or she is having sex. Companionship, procreation, recreation, control, money.....every individual knows why they have sex each time they have sex. And the reason they have sex one day may be different the next day.

Not sure what all this guessing BS is about.

He has no idea what he's talking about (as usual).

That's what's going on here.