Why DO people have such busybody attitudes to sexuality? mod warning opening post

Femme_Fatale · 19-08-2013 04:19PM

Nodin wrote: »

I think the young folk refer to it as being "out of their head". It's a phenomena where people imbibe intoxicants (outrageous I know)

Not sure where I indicated I think it's outrageous to imbibe intoxicants. Why oh why must adults on this site go on like 18-year-olds and constantly pretend others are prudes/dry-arses for no reason?

Uriel. · 19-08-2013 04:21PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Why DO humans have such a busybody attitude to sex? Why do we regard it as our business what other people do, sexually? Why do we have so many hangups, believe that sex should be something secret and "naughty", and obsess so much over other people's sexual activity?

More interestingly, are we unique in the animal kingdom in this regard? I mean I doubt there's anyone who's never seen a pair of dogs humping in a park or out on the street, and I've never seen other dogs look away in disgust or ostracise the mating pair for being "filthy", "having no morals", etc. In fact even other primates seem to be very public about it, as anyone who's ever gone to the zoo and a monkey wandering around "with his lad in his hand" will tell you. Some animals which have mating seasons, particularly a few species of birds, pick an area for mating season and congregate on it, very publicly mating and picking partners etc (I know what you're thinking, Humans have Coppers for that)

Why is it that humans, seemingly uniquely among the animal kingdom, have such difficulty with their relationship to one of the most basic functions of living organisms, to reproduce? Why do we, unlike other animals, so often try to brush it under the carpet, pretend it doesn't exist, and jump in and attack anyone who refuses to tow that line? Where does this come from?

The people in the current "scandal" are heros in my view, not because of what they're doing, but because they're doing what they want, hurting nobody, and not giving a flying f*ck what anyone else thinks of them.

Why is human behavior so bizarre when it comes to this kind of thing?

I think you are focusing too much on the animal kingdom to be honest. Leaving aside your general argument, do you see difficulty with the "if it's ok for the animals, then why shouldn't it be ok for us?" tone of your debate?

There's plenty of good qualities visible in the animal kingdom, but I think we (humans) have evolved in some aspects which (positively) makes us different to other creatures.

Frankly, I'd have a serious problem with looking out my sitting room window to see an other human taking a sh1t in the driveway, and I think the vast majority of people would be in agreement with me on that.

Alf Veedersane · 19-08-2013 04:22PM

MaxWig wrote: »

But when you consider the cut of us mid copulation, we're like feckin goats or something. Nothin goin on upstairs so to speak.

Not true.

i'm usually working out how to manoeuvre her over to her side of the bed so mine is leakage-free.

Christ the Redeemer · 19-08-2013 04:34PM

Because most people are not intelligent, bitter and want nothing better than to prevent others having the fun that they have never had due to their low intelligence, lack of wit and bitterness.

pauliebdub · 19-08-2013 04:35PM

Sarky wrote: »

Bitterness, mostly. If you've never experienced the joys of getting jiggy with someone who not only thoroughly enjoys sex, but also likes trying interesting, perhaps taboo stuff during it, you'd demand nobody else get to enjoy it either out of spite. The catholic church, Iona institute, Youth Defence, all those horrible little organisations who spend altogether too much time thinking of the children, they all have a surprising amount of bile to slather on people having more fun than them.

Why else do you think the most vocal ones complaining about sex almost always appear to be the ones most in need of, pardon my French, a good solid ridin'? I've never met someone who promotes sexual freedom that wasn't also quite, quite satisfied in that regard.

I completely agree that its bitterness and a desire to control society that drives these people. There are elements within society that hate to see others being free to live their lives and gain as much enjoyment from it. However thankfully, their attempts at control and guilt tripping the nation largely falls on deaf ears.

Nodin · 19-08-2013 04:43PM

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

Not sure where I indicated I think it's outrageous to imbibe intoxicants.

I didn't say you did. I was pointing out the obvious with regards to this

But it's pretty skanky to be really public about it. I'm not talking about stuff
like taking a chance down a quiet side-street etc, but in a field in full view
of lots of people... put it away... go somewhere quieter. It's not a spectator's
sport. Have a bit of dignity ffs (male or female).

ScumLord · 19-08-2013 05:32PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Why DO humans have such a busybody attitude to sex? Why do we regard it as our business what other people do, sexually? Why do we have so many hangups, believe that sex should be something secret and "naughty", and obsess so much over other people's sexual activity?

I blame the Catholic church. For millennia humans lived on top of each other, the concept of privacy didn't really emerge until the corridor was invented in 17th century. Up until then people lived, eat, and had sex in the same rooms and probably in front of friends and relatives. In fact go back to tribal communities and they stood outside the door of your hut to make sure you did the deed.

It's not so much that humans think sex is dirty it's just as with any other animal the stakes are high and the whole community could benefit from any offspring. Humans only have one child, it can take years of preparation to get to the stage of having a child and as the saying goes "it takes a village to raise a child", humans are the least clingy of all the apes when it comes to children, we're very open to handing them off to other humans even ones that aren't directly related to us. You won't see that as much with any of the other primates.

You'll find many species that want strict regulation of who gets to reproduce, especially creatures that live in a community like humans.

Why is human behavior so bizarre when it comes to this kind of thing?

Because humans are a bizarre animal. It takes a decade at least to raise a child to some level of self dependency, alliances can be life or death in human culture so we often want to make sure we're allied through family links which puts an additional objective into breeding.

average hero · 19-08-2013 05:33PM

Personally I believe we should have a more liberal attitude towards sexuality (something similar to the continental European view of things).

HOWEVER, I do believe that we must still have certain standards of what is acceptable and what is not. A liberalisation of our views does not a free-for-all mean.

RDM_83 again · 19-08-2013 05:51PM

Sarky wrote: »

Yes, focus on the throwaway part instead of the actual point.

Its just fcuking boring thanks whoring adding those throw away parts and adds nothing to your post. Its the intellectual equivalent of saying Your Ma

Ok to respond to your original point, I don;t think people most people have a busybody attitude to sexuality, being a busybody implies that you go out looking to interfere or judge, its very different judging something done in public or thrust in your face.

Interestingly you use the word taboo in your post, you should be aware that its actually the social "unacceptability" of the action that makes it appealing.
If one is truly completely a blank slate or completely open minded, these things wouldn't be "taboo", and as such they would probably loose some of there appeal.

In short to get enjoyment from the simple fact something is taboo means you have to have some social hangups about sex in the first place (like everyone has to some extent).

smash · 19-08-2013 05:53PM

average hero wrote: »

I do believe that we must still have certain standards of what is acceptable and what is not.

DVDA?

RDM_83 again · 19-08-2013 05:56PM

Nodin wrote: »

...running through woods after game with an exposed penis would be an extreme sport few would care to try. The idea that people would be naked all the time is a bit mad - its not practical for a range of reasons.

Thats a relevant point if these cultures only dressed when hunting or carrying out those sort of activites. The simple fact that complete nudity is so rare (in everyday life,not referring to ritual events ) globally says something about the deeper human condition that can not be simply blamed on the western european tradition

ScumLord · 19-08-2013 06:18PM

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Thats a relevant point if these cultures only dressed when hunting or carrying out those sort of activites. The simple fact that complete nudity is so rare (in everyday life,not referring to ritual events ) globally says something about the deeper human condition that can not be simply blamed on the western european tradition

There's also the fact human females are in heat once a month and sexually active at any time they see fit, some species can go two years between bouts of being in heat. We possibly are too sexually active for our own good and had to make attempts to distract ourselves from a constant sexual drive. We have more sex than most animals I'd guess.

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo · 19-08-2013 06:24PM

It's definitely something to do with controlling women and knowing who the father of the child is.

Tribal communities marry off virgins, the Muslims in Saudi Arabia and other places make women wear the veil and we get/got the CC and so on around the world.

Putting it bluntly, men couldn't trust 'village bicycles' over virgin good girls as it heightened the chances that 'their' child was actually genuinely their child. Humans have to put an enormous amount of time, money, commitment ect. into the raising of a child so women who don't ride around possessed the best chance a man had of passing on his genes, that's why we're here right now sure.

Contraception, DNA testing and the welfare state are the three main reasons why society doesn't put so much weight on the importance of chastity and all that as much as we did.

People here are posting like sex is taboo in this day and age, it certainly was but I really don't think it is now.

endacl · 19-08-2013 06:29PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Why is it considered "indecent" in the first place by humans though? I can't think of any other mammals who behave in the same way.

Actually.....

Wibbs · 19-08-2013 07:41PM

Uriel. wrote: »

There's plenty of good qualities visible in the animal kingdom, but I think we (humans) have evolved in some aspects which (positively) makes us different to other creatures.

We've evolved far beyond the animals in many respects.

Attitudes to sex have varied throughout time and different cultures. It can be a fine line too. Ditto with nudity. We might look at an Amazonian tribeswoman only wearing a belt with literally all on view to see* and think "naked" in the western mind. She nor her culture would see her as naked at all. However if she took off that belt in public it would be a scandal. Similarly we'd look at a woman or indeed a man in a pair of shorts in the heat and think nada of it, yet a devout Muslim would see semi naked.

Public sexuality seems to have varied too. Roman's at times, particularly at high days and festivals largely turned a blind eye(though it might have been considered common in many quarters). The Greeks would have been more behind closed doors. Well their women were after they married, rarely leaving the gaff. European travelers in 18th century London noted with sniffy derision that the parks and public gardens were so full of fornicating couples you'd be stepping carefully in the longer grass. While Catholicism is an easy target to blame particularly in Ireland, the Protestants could be equally or more stilted in their attitudes to the sexual act. After all Puritans weren't a Catholic sect**. Much of the "indecent" art and literature was hailing from the Catholic lands. The doorty feckers.

More primitive societies vary a lot. Some keep it very much indoors, whereas others are right out in the open. EG the sentinelese of the Andaman islands seem to use public shagging as a means by where the women calm the men down from aggressive behaviour. A passing ship attempting contact(which they fiercely resist) noted this. When the men got riled up at the intrusion, the women came out of the bushes and shagged their guy and this soothed the group. As it would.

*in one tribe the men sing songs about the beauty of a favoured ladies pudenda, the fleshier the better.

** though privately they were mad for the nookie. At least in the US. Shagging and reproducing for Jesus, meant they had about the biggest birthrate in the world at the time. The Monty Python song every sperm is sacred would fit them better.

Roger_007 · 19-08-2013 08:14PM

Uriel. wrote: »

I think you are focusing too much on the animal kingdom to be honest. Leaving aside your general argument, do you see difficulty with the "if it's ok for the animals, then why shouldn't it be ok for us?" tone of your debate?

There's plenty of good qualities visible in the animal kingdom, but I think we (humans) have evolved in some aspects which (positively) makes us different to other creatures.

Frankly, I'd have a serious problem with looking out my sitting room window to see an other human taking a sh1t in the driveway, and I think the vast majority of people would be in agreement with me on that.

The biggest mistake that we humans make is that we think we are somehow 'different' from all other species of life. We are not. We are subject to the same laws of nature like every other species of life on earth.
The first priority of every form of life is to reproduce. All other species try to reproduce as soon as they are sexually mature. That is how nature works. That is how evolution works.
We can make all the rules we like, we can think that we are different, but in the end nature always wins. If it didn't, we would be extinct long ago.
As to the person taking a sh1t in your driveway, you may have a problem with it but nature doesn't. In nature waste is evenly spread throughout the environment so that it can be broken down and recycled. We intelligent humans seem to think it's a good idea to concentrate massive quantities of waste in one location and thereby cause massive pollution problems.

Nodin · 19-08-2013 08:18PM

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Thats a relevant point if these cultures only dressed when hunting or carrying out those sort of activites. The simple fact that complete nudity is so rare (in everyday life,not referring to ritual events ) globally says something about the deeper human condition that can not be simply blamed on the western european tradition

...its not practical to be nude all the time. It can be dangerous. I don't think theres much more to it than that.

oppenheimer1 · 19-08-2013 08:37PM

ScumLord wrote: »

I blame the Catholic church. For millennia humans lived on top of each other, the concept of privacy didn't really emerge until the corridor was invented in 17th century. Up until then people lived, eat, and had sex in the same rooms and probably in front of friends and relatives. In fact go back to tribal communities and they stood outside the door of your hut to make sure you did the deed.

It's not so much that humans think sex is dirty it's just as with any other animal the stakes are high and the whole community could benefit from any offspring. Humans only have one child, it can take years of preparation to get to the stage of having a child and as the saying goes "it takes a village to raise a child", humans are the least clingy of all the apes when it comes to children, we're very open to handing them off to other humans even ones that aren't directly related to us. You won't see that as much with any of the other primates.

You'll find many species that want strict regulation of who gets to reproduce, especially creatures that live in a community like humans.

Because humans are a bizarre animal. It takes a decade at least to raise a child to some level of self dependency, alliances can be life or death in human culture so we often want to make sure we're allied through family links which puts an additional objective into breeding.

Is there anything AH won't blame the Catholic Church for? I suppose that explains why attitudes are similar across the planet?

Human sexuality, is for the most part derived from evolutionary responses.

Czarcasm · 19-08-2013 09:09PM

Roger_007 wrote: »

The biggest mistake that we humans make is that we think we are somehow 'different' from all other species of life. We are not. We are subject to the same laws of nature like every other species of life on earth.
The first priority of every form of life is to reproduce. All other species try to reproduce as soon as they are sexually mature. That is how nature works. That is how evolution works.
We can make all the rules we like, we can think that we are different, but in the end nature always wins. If it didn't, we would be extinct long ago.
As to the person taking a sh1t in your driveway, you may have a problem with it but nature doesn't. In nature waste is evenly spread throughout the environment so that it can be broken down and recycled. We intelligent humans seem to think it's a good idea to concentrate massive quantities of waste in one location and thereby cause massive pollution problems.

Human beings though aren't as subject to the folly of nature as you're making out, and that IS in part thanks to evolution, but also due to the fact that we're far more adept than animals at adapting our environment to suit our needs, the example you give above being a case in point of how "intelligent" we are. Animals wouldn't think of that. They shìt everywhere (well, they pick a spot, mark their territory, but if there isn't a convenience nearby, they don't hold back).

Part of this is also to do with civilisation. That's why we don't club each other over the head any more either, nowadays we use far more sophisticated techniques to bump each other off. We don't do a whole lot of that any more either- civilisation.

I DO wonder sometimes the more we become civilised and the more society evolves intellectually (the pyramids were a one off marvel of engineering in fairness, but the Egyptians were a very advanced civilisation all the same), the more we'll move away from our primitive roots, the less we'll physically interact with each other, and that's a scary thought for those who remember films like "Strange Days" or "Demolition Man" (never did find out how to use the three shells!

), but, the idea being that there would be almost no physical interaction between human beings. "Wall-E" was actually a good example of where humanity might end up if we don't have stupid people doing stupid things.

As much as it might be annoying and as much as those who think they are superior intellectually speaking as they "despair" or "weep for humanity", be grateful for stupid people, they're doing a lot more for the evolution of humanity than you are!

endacl · 19-08-2013 09:12PM

Czarcasm wrote: »

As much as it might be annoying and as much as those who think they are superior intellectually speaking as they "despair" or "weep for humanity", be grateful for stupid people, they're doing a lot more for the evolution persistence of humanity than you are!

FYP

They sort out the numbers. We do the quality.

:D

cletus van damme · 19-08-2013 09:13PM

what is this continental liberal stuff i keep reading on boards?

they ride each other like mad things and nobody cares?
well in ireland beyond a few parochial fcuk wits - it's pretty much the same.

People are fairly liberal and I doubt the old brigade of Europe are much different to the older brigade here.

The catholic card is over played and incorrectly used ... human nature and a horn beats any doctrine hands down.,

efb · 19-08-2013 09:15PM

Catholic Guilt. And Nosiness

Czarcasm · 19-08-2013 09:18PM

endacl wrote: »

FYP

They sort out the numbers. We do the quality.

:D

Isn't symbiosis wonderful?

Yep, persistence fits much better, and without a more intellectual perspective I wouldn't have come up with that myself

Czarcasm · 19-08-2013 09:21PM

efb wrote: »

Catholic Guilt. And Nosiness

Catholic guilt my arse, sure it's only in the last few decades people are having LESS sex, not more! :pac:

endacl · 19-08-2013 09:22PM

Czarcasm wrote: »

Isn't symbiosis wonderful?

Yep, persistence fits much better, and without a more intellectual perspective I wouldn't have come up with that myself

Fecks sake. That wasn't a serious post. :mad:

How will I ever be taken seriously on here if people don't know when I'm messin'?!?*

* May or may not be messing.

:pac:

P_1 · 19-08-2013 09:27PM

Czarcasm wrote: »

Catholic guilt my arse, sure it's only in the last few decades people are having LESS sex, not more! :pac:

It's an interesting juxtaposition of Catholic guilt when you think of it. I'd imagine in the eyes of many conservatives (when it comes to sex) that sex for procreation is good (keep at it ladies and gents, the more babies the better) but sex for pleasure is verbotten.

Fox_In_Socks · 19-08-2013 09:47PM

cletus van damme wrote: »

The catholic card is over played and incorrectly used ... human nature and a horn beats any doctrine hands down.,

Very nice! Works the other way as well...doctrine hands beat many a trumpet down.

oppenheimer1 · 19-08-2013 09:59PM

efb wrote: »

Catholic Guilt. And Nosiness

I suppose Catholic guilt is responsible for the same attitudes in North America, Europe and the middle east too.

I wonder is there any societal ill that the ill informed of AH will not attribute to the Catholic Church?

endacl · 19-08-2013 10:00PM

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

I wonder is there any societal ill that the ill informed of AH will not attribute to the Catholic Church?

Inconsiderate parking.

Wacker The Attacker · 19-08-2013 10:01PM

I love fanny

Why DO people have such busybody attitudes to sexuality? *mod warning opening post*

Comments

Why DO people have such busybody attitudes to sexuality? mod warning opening post