Sexual repression

[Asguard]

I have been reading some very interesting articals by a women named Lisa S. Lawless, Ph.D and i found something rather sad

...

Right now in the U.S. there is no government assistance to companies that teach sexual education if they promote the use of birth control. Unless you are promoting abstinence only education, you are pretty much on your own to find funds to educate the public.


Do we really want to go backward? Do we really want people in our society to have no understanding of STDs, safe sex practices, pregnancy information, and simply how their body works sexually? It seems with the way things are going in our government that we do.

We have republicans trying to promote abstinence only and going after legitimate adult companies by inflicting ineffective laws all in the name of child porn protection. Meanwhile, you have democrats going after adult companies for outrageous things like a 25% "sin tax".

All of this is just unbelievable to me. Take the "sin tax" for example. First of all, my company would fall into the category of this and I frankly do not see what I do for a living as a sin.

Second, what you as the consumer may not know is that unless you are a wholesale distributor of adult products (including sex toys and better sex videos) you sometimes only make 25% to 35% profit. A tax of 25% of gross sales would put many small companies out of business (a fact I am sure some uptight, repressed politicians are all too happy to know).

Then look at child porn. We know that 99.9% of child porn does not occur within the mainstream adult industry, yet laws are targeted to impair companies in the industry, including ours. The laws are not helpful, and in no way prevent child porn as this kind of porn is done outside of mainstream companies by criminals who in no way follow the law to begin with. What makes the government think they are going to make criminals abide by regulations they are passing about producing sexual videos when what they are doing by filming children is illegal anyway?

...
http://www.holisticwisdom.com/sexual-empowerment.htm

Here in Australia we have some quite good laws and some very repressive ones. For instance there is a policy (as far as i know its only goverment policy rather than legislation which causes this one) which bans any foreign aid being given to an organisation which has family planning as part of its aid packages.

Further more there are laws banning "pornography" (which means anything containing enough nudity to warent a R rating) from being shown in aborigional communities to prevent family violence and "child abuse". Seems to me if you want to prevent family violence wouldnt it be better to stop VIOLENT TV shows rather than those which show the human body?

Then there are the silly laws which have banished anything which has the "indency" to show a breast or some pubic hair to the back of the store.

Why is it that as even a surposedly sexually liberated and enlightened sociaty we want to banish not only what is responcible for creating all of us but also what holds our relationships together to the some sort of dirty shameful place. Sexuality should be something beautiful, not something which can be equated to what some serial killer did to his (or her) poor victoms and certanly not something WORSE than what the serial killer did.

Further more why is it that sociaty generally (but women paticually) seek to demonise there own sexuality through comments like "dip your wick", bartering sex for household chores, comments like "Lie back and think of England", which acording to this artical not translates to "grit your teath and bare it" (not something that should be associated with sex). And last but not least women joking about withholding sex which is sad because its no different from witholding love and thats actually concidered to be emotional abuse in a relationship

This sadly goes so far that the other day i was with my partner and a female friend of hers walking through the shops and they started complaing that it was discussting that a women was walking along breast feeding her child. I mean seriously, what the hell are breasts for if not to feed kids yet because of how repressed we as a culture are its subconciously discusting to happen to have your breast out even if your feeding your child. Hell my partner is so bad that she insists all the windows be shut if I happen to be walking around in only underwear incase we get charged with public indecency IN OUR OWN HOUSE.

 

[KilljoyKlown]

I have been reading some very interesting articals by a women named Lisa S. Lawless, Ph.D and i found something rather sad



Here in Australia we have some quite good laws and some very repressive ones. For instance there is a policy (as far as i know its only goverment policy rather than legislation which causes this one) which bans any foreign aid being given to an organisation which has family planning as part of its aid packages.

Further more there are laws banning "pornography" (which means anything containing enough nudity to warent a R rating) from being shown in aborigional communities to prevent family violence and "child abuse". Seems to me if you want to prevent family violence wouldnt it be better to stop VIOLENT TV shows rather than those which show the human body?

Then there are the silly laws which have banished anything which has the "indency" to show a breast or some pubic hair to the back of the store.

Why is it that as even a surposedly sexually liberated and enlightened sociaty we want to banish not only what is responcible for creating all of us but also what holds our relationships together to the some sort of dirty shameful place. Sexuality should be something beautiful, not something which can be equated to what some serial killer did to his (or her) poor victoms and certanly not something WORSE than what the serial killer did.

Further more why is it that sociaty generally (but women paticually) seek to demonise there own sexuality through comments like "dip your wick", bartering sex for household chores, comments like "Lie back and think of England", which acording to this artical not translates to "grit your teath and bare it" (not something that should be associated with sex). And last but not least women joking about withholding sex which is sad because its no different from witholding love and thats actually concidered to be emotional abuse in a relationship

This sadly goes so far that the other day i was with my partner and a female friend of hers walking through the shops and they started complaing that it was discussting that a women was walking along breast feeding her child. I mean seriously, what the hell are breasts for if not to feed kids yet because of how repressed we as a culture are its subconciously discusting to happen to have your breast out even if your feeding your child. Hell my partner is so bad that she insists all the windows be shut if I happen to be walking around in only underwear incase we get charged with public indecency IN OUR OWN HOUSE.

Was there a question in all that verbiage? I couldn't find it. If your just expressing yourself, I do find myself sympathetic with what you said. Do you have a plan to change what you find wrong? If not do you have any useful ideas that might stir up this forum's creative juices? Just asking, I'm sure your hoping for some interesting dialog.

 

[Asguard]

The solution? Discussion itself is a good start. No I wasn't asking a question, I was expressing some frustations

 

[KilljoyKlown]

The solution? Discussion itself is a good start. No I wasn't asking a question, I was expressing some frustations

Well you've been around this forum for awhile, but my experience on forums tells me if you add at least one question to a rant, you tend to get a much better response. I just hate it when a good topic get ignored because the OP didn't do just a little to open the door for a dialog to start.

 

[visceral_instinct]

I totally agree with Asguard's sentiments.

How the hell did we arrive at a culture where feeding a child is obscene? 'Waaaah,' say the puritans, 'breasts are obscene'. No, they're child feeding organs. If you find them obscene it's because an entire messed up culture has grown around the human body.

Agreed on withholding sex too. If you're genuinely not in a sexual mood that's fine, it happens to everyone now and then and it's important to respect someone's 'No'. But deliberately withholding sex to get something you want? What the shit? That IMO is every bit as messed up as telling someone 'If you loved me you'd do X' or 'If you were my friend you'd do X'...

Sadly humans seem to either fetishize sexuality or deny it and hide it away, with no happy medium. How hard is it to treat sexuality as just another part of being human? Seriously?

 

[Asguard]

I totally agree with Asguard's sentiments.

How the hell did we arrive at a culture where feeding a child is obscene? 'Waaaah,' say the puritans, 'breasts are obscene'. No, they're child feeding organs. If you find them obscene it's because an entire messed up culture has grown around the human body.

Agreed on withholding sex too. If you're genuinely not in a sexual mood that's fine, it happens to everyone now and then and it's important to respect someone's 'No'. But deliberately withholding sex to get something you want? What the shit? That IMO is every bit as messed up as telling someone 'If you loved me you'd do X' or 'If you were my friend you'd do X'...

Sadly humans seem to either fetishize sexuality or deny it and hide it away, with no happy medium. How hard is it to treat sexuality as just another part of being human? Seriously?

it's worse that that though (for clarification by withholding sex I don't mean not in the mood) sure it hurts your partner but it also hurts yourself. Say for instance you say "we arn't having sex till you clean the bathroom", in your OWN mind you have just said that having sex is the equivalent or scrubbing the bathroom. Most people I know wouldn't concider that a pleasurable thing to do so is it any wonder women have trouble with labedo if they are subconciously thinking about it as a chore rather than a pleasure seeking activity for both partners?

 

[chimpkin]

Mmm...boobies*looks up*OH! hi!...Uh, yeah, the US has gotten very weird about breasts.

On one hand, if you haven't got tits at least the volume of a 2 cup-measure if they were squished into one, and if your breasts aren't nice and perky, you're made to feel inadequate.

On the other, women are having saline and or silicone bags put in their chest! That is really...weird.
I mean, if you fall down hard enough on your tits, those bags can rupture! OWW!

I would not even have implants if I had to have a radical mastectomy.

Also...women are supposed to feed their babies ..in a public restroom with ambient germs all over the place?!?!?

(I think wearing a huge t-shirt and a sports bra would be best-just stuff kid up shirt, pull out boob...)

Edited to add...the US uses sex to sell everything. Here it's exhaust pipes:

As far as the chore thing...

Men...do have a higher sex drive than women. When I was with a guy, there were a few times when I was like, "I'm not horny, but if I don't have sex with him I swear his head's going to explode..."
Mostly though, I was having fun too.

I like my tiny tits...cheap bras, no yoink-yoink-yoink when I run.

The data on abstinence-only sex-ed? It does prevent some kids from having sex, but the ones that do anyway are more likely to do so unprotected. Thus the pregnancy rate and the std transmission rate is even.
Interesting, though, that states in which Christianity is the strongest (Bible Belt) tend to also have the highest rates of teen pregnancy...

Since I grew up in such a location? I'd say it's because there's often nothing to do but each other and drugs...hick towns are very boring places.

 

[Asguard]

Reconstruction after a radical masectomy takes one of the abdominal muscles and feeds it up to become the breast and then they move fat from the abdomen up over it. How do I know? Mum had one after having her breast removed because of cancer. Its completely different from a breast enlargement

 

[wellwisher]

If you repress a natural instinct, it is like damming energy within the brain. Eventually that energy will need to find others way to express itself. This is called sublimation, which if done right, can harness natural energy for productive uses. If it is done wrong it can lead to various disorders and compulsions beyond the natural.

Here is the analogy. We have a river that flows through the valley, with its flow rate changing between the seasonal rain storms and the dry periods. Repression is like a dam that we place somewhere along the path. The goal is to set up a hydroelectric plant in the brain, where the natural flow of water is converted to electricity. The dam is allowing the water level to get higher than natural. This can be used for any different things.

Although this harassing natural energy goal is all well and good, the proper dam design is critical, since a poorly constructed dam is an accident waiting to happen. If it is poorly designed and built, it may not be able withstanding too much hydraulic pressure as the water level goes higher than the natural flowo of the river. This can cause stress cracks and failures that can lead to a major flood; unnatural and/or obsessive behavior.

What has happened in modern cuture, is the dam is still introduced but the design is not as good anymore. The free market and media make a lot of money around the theme of sex. Even government agencies, like planned parenthood exist because of sex. These agencies can only expand if they can help make the problem worse. There net result is a mixed message with respect to the dam/sublimation which results in shorty construction and poor dam design. This increases the unnatural aspects of sexual sublimation which are very lucrative for these groups.

 

[Fraggle Rocker]

Here in America we have what I call the Pendulum Syndrome. In Europe, trends tend to play out in a few years and then their culture goes back toward a norm, or at least off in a different trendy direction. In America trends go on for decades until they reach a preposterous extreme, and then they roll back the other way, knocking down anybody who gets in their way.

In the Roaring Twenties we were a very libertine society. Then by the 1950s it had gone back to Puritanism. There were official codes for movies and even comic books that prevented them from being too suggestive, we all wore military haircuts and the girls had skirts that always covered their knees.

Then in the 1960s and 70s it went the other way again. Religion and patriotism were rejected, sex was a recreational hobby, nudity and profanity were everywhere, and all the drugs were for sale on the sidewalk.

Now we've reversed direction yet again. Even the liberals are coming down on sex, drugs and rock'n'roll because "it's bad for the children." Religion--the nastiest kind, fundamentalism-- has taken over the country and one state actually made creation "science" part of the school curriculum briefly. Patriotism is rampant, the government makes us take off our shoes in airports and piss in a cup in order to get a job, and anybody who complains is "supporting the terrorists."

Nonetheless, throughout all this, it does not appear that our sexuality has truly been repressed. They don't actually show intercourse in prime-time TV but hardly an hour goes by that someone isn't talking about just coming back from having it or planning to have it as soon as the commercial comes on. It's been said that pornography is a larger segment of the economy than regular films and TV, and although that assertion has been disputed it is nonetheless a really big business. Every second song on the radio has thinly-veiled references to "doing it," usually in more colorful language than that. "My chick bad, my chick good, my chick do things your chick wish she could."

Every study shows that teenagers are having sex at a prodigious rate, and even barely pubescent pre-teens are doing it. They don't even classify oral sex as really "having sex," that way they can all say they're still "virgins." And many of these kids admit to having done it in public.

And you only have to glance at page 2 of any newspaper to see how our political, business and religious leaders feel about illicit sex when it's about them doing it, rather than us. A married, ostensibly straight senator got busted for soliciting gay sex in an airport bathroom. A governor took his mistress to South American and paid for the trip out of the state treasury. Our prominent citizens are cheating on their spouses right and left.

And don't get me started on the "celibate" priests!

 

[Asguard]

FR I fail to see how I'm advocating taking this to a "ridiculous extreme". Currently we have pollies and others advocating to ban head scaves because there culture "forces" women to wear them while at the same time we have laws on our books which state that if a women chides not to wear a shirt and bra or anyone chides to walk around naked then they can be tried and convinced of being a sex offender and amongst other penelties can never work with children again because they are a danger to society, for being naked! My partner is scared that we could be charge with that because I walk around IN MY OWN HOUSE naked but don't shut the curtains

Oh and for anyone who thinks women's sexuality isn't repressed read the thread on female teachers raping underaged male students paticually Skeptical's posts. His\her attitude is that females are victims of sex unable to be atracted to or want sex, but rather its the males taking advantage of the poor innocent females while female teachers are just doing what male students want. Further more Skeptical argues that a 15 year old female student has more to lose as she could get pregnant but the male student had nothing to lose. I mean it's not like the girl could chose to have an abortion where as the 15 year old male student could be forced to surport his rapist and her baby because she decideds "who cares about him, my clocks ticking and I want a child".

 

[420Joey]

You want schools to teach the use of birth control? & less-strict rules when it comes to nudity? We are allready in an over population crisis. We shouldent advocate this behavior.

If a old 400 lbs lady was feeding her baby right in front of you where you and your girlfriend was eating dinner it would not please you. You might be outright disgusted. Not so much because there just breasts but where would the line be drawn.

If my nuts itch is it okay to take my pants off to scratch em more conviniently.

 

[Asguard]

You want schools to teach the use of birth control? & less-strict rules when it comes to nudity? We are allready in an over population crisis. We shouldent advocate this behavior.

If a old 400 lbs lady was feeding her baby right in front of you where you and your girlfriend was eating dinner it would not please you. You might be outright disgusted. Not so much because there just breasts but where would the line be drawn.

If my nuts itch is it okay to take my pants off to scratch em more conviniently.

Umm why do you think YOUR meal is more important than the babies? Infact you could probably skip a few meals with no harm where as a baby definitely couldn't. Oh And birth control is there to PREVENT pregnancies

 

[cosmictraveler]

Parents are the ones who should be opening dialogue between themselves and their children, not the government. Sex should be talked about with their children when they reach 6 years old I'd say because sex is discussed everywhere else anywhay. Music, TV, radio magazines and so on are all showing sex one way or another. So parents should be the ones who are the key role players in their own childs development and sex is just another part of that.

I do not see why, but openly support, the teaching of sexual education in public schools. Birth control should be a part of that education and from what I've heard it is but abortions are not covered.

 

[Asguard]

I have to say I dissagree cosmic, and my argument is this. Should parents be alowed to take children out of science classes if they teach evolution because they want to keep to kids ignorently beliving religious dogma? No we have a Duty to the children as a society to ensure they are taught certain things and science is one of those things. Sexual education is even MORE important because its concivable that the child could go through life without caring about science And get on fine but most people will have sex and its to important to let parents fuck it up through there own embarrassed or religious stupidity. See post 12 and ask would you want that taught to ANY kid?

 

[cosmictraveler]

I have to say I dissagree cosmic, and my argument is this. Should parents be alowed to take children out of science classes if they teach evolution because they want to keep to kids ignorently beliving religious dogma? No we have a Duty to the children as a society to ensure they are taught certain things and science is one of those things. Sexual education is even MORE important because its concivable that the child could go through life without caring about science And get on fine but most people will have sex and its to important to let parents fuck it up through there own embarrassed or religious stupidity. See post 12 and ask would you want that taught to ANY kid?

As I stated:

I do not see why, but openly support, the teaching of sexual education in public schools.

 

[Captain Kremmen]

Breast feeding is good and natural.
But why should the baby get it all?
Come on women, let's all have some!

 

[420Joey]

Umm why do you think YOUR meal is more important than the babies?

I didnt say that. I said that woman shouldent show there breast in public. What. You don't think I should take my pants off and scratch my nuts even though it could hurt me? Stop the hyperbole. Women could privately do it or bottle there babies breast milk. What is your problem?

Infact you could probably skip a few meals with no harm where as a baby definitely couldn't. Oh And birth control is there to PREVENT pregnancies

Birth control taught at school would be condoning sex and outcasting responsible youths. Are you implying that people are retarded and dont know about birth control allready? Who is saying to not feed a baby?

 

[YoYoPapaya]

People should have more sex. It makes us all happier.

 

[Asguard]

I was watching this UK show on foxtell http://www.endemoluk.com/programme/the-sex-education-show

THIS is the way sexual education should be done. First it allows students to ask whatever they want to know privately in a camera Booth. Then they try to answer the questions in a big school assembly type. They use real naked models to show kids what bodies really look like. Right down to what a clit is.

When we got sex ed it was usless, this is a penis and girls come into another room so.we can discuss whatever.