 
Support Wrong Planet Awareness!
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
MissPickwickian
Phoenix
Joined: Nov 27, 2007
Age: 16
Posts: 953
Location: Tennessee
|
 Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 4:37 pm Post subject: The morals and ethics of promiscuity |
 |
|
I was just reading an excellent book on epidemiology which bears the cheerful title of The Coming Plague, and I got to the chapter about 1970s sexual practices this morning. Now, in our time we think about 1970s sexual practices the same way we think about the roaring twenties: impressed by such expressions of freedom but also melancholic, for we are acutely aware of how it all came crashing down. Eyewitnesses say that one could not, in the mid-to-late 1980s, walk down a street in San Francisco's Castro district without seeing at least one funeral procession.
I have never been one to say that sex is immoral, lewd, or shameful; it only takes on those qualities when human psychology gets its gnarled hands on it. As a leeeeeeberaaaal eliiiiiiiitist, I take no issue with homosexuality, interracial relations, premartial sex, or, when explored in a safe and contentious manner, the weirder practices. However, I think that promiscuous sex is usually an expression of a diseased mind, and is in many situations downright unethical.
At the center, sex is about two things and two things only: reproduction and love. Reproduction, of course, is a biological drive burned deep into our DNA. Love is what humans have lent to sex. Just as they did with eating, humans turned the biological mandate of sex into a sacred bonding activity. I mean, we're animals, but we're not, if you know what I mean (I am sure someone has put this better than I just did). Lack of the ability to love, lack of self-control, dissociation of body and mind, misogyny, desire for power, shallowness, and frivolousness break the sex-love connection, which is essential for psychological health. Promiscuity is rooted in neurosis, cruelty, ignorance, and emotional retardation.
On to ethics: promiscuity is rarely harmless. It spreads pestilence. It cheapens relationships. In heterosexual scenarios, whether the man or the woman is the aggressive party, it is the woman who is used and thrown away in the end ('Girls Gone Wild' gives female college students a power trip, but in the end they are rendered powerless, mere objects of a man's fancy). At the beginning of the AIDS epidemic, gay pride people were furious that the San Francisco city government and the Centers for Disease Control tried to shut down the bathhouses, regardless of the major threat to public health they posed. This was extremely irresponsible; if the house is full of Plague fleas, ya burn it down.
Sooooooooo, go do whatever you want, but one at a time people! 
_________________
It's the microbes' world. We're just living in it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Orwell
Outer Party Member
Joined: Aug 09, 2007
Age: 19
Posts: 4243
Location: Room 101
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 4:54 pm Post subject: Re: The morals and ethics of promiscuity |
|
|
| MissPickwickian wrote: | | I was just reading an excellent book on epidemiology which bears the cheerful title of The Coming Plague |
An excellent book; I enjoyed it.
_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH |
|
| Back to top |
|
monty
Phoenix
Joined: Sep 05, 2007
Posts: 2507
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 5:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with some but not all of what MP said. Having multiple partners increases certain risks. So do certain other behaviors.
Closing bath houses didn't reduce the rate that HIV was spreading in San Fransisco - it was getting people educated to behave in a way that was less risky.
HIV is not a 'venereal disease' - it is a disease. Some virologists call it is a 'blood-borne disease' that can also be spread by sex, although at a lower rate. The first two people I knew with HIV did not acquire the disease via sex. One was a hemophiliac who got regular transfusions of blood; the other worked in a hospital and was exposed to blood there doing her job. The 'house full of plague infested fleas' metaphor dictates that we should have shut down the hospitals and blood banks; instead, we addressed the question of risk.
All things being equal, the more partners one has, the greater the risk. But all things are rarely equal - someone who has several partners and is careful can be at a lower risk than a person who isn't careful but has only one or a few partners.
Also, I have never been one for a long string of conquests, but I don't think there is always an 'aggressive' partner in a relationship. One or the other may initiate a relationship, some may be more altruistic than others, but a relationship can be mutually beneficial. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Awesomelyglorious
Destroyer of worlds, reaver of souls
Joined: Dec 18, 2005
Posts: 6120
Location: United States
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 5:25 pm Post subject: Re: The morals and ethics of promiscuity |
|
|
| MissPickwickian wrote: | | I was just reading an excellent book on epidemiology which bears the cheerful title of The Coming Plague, and I got to the chapter about 1970s sexual practices this morning. Now, in our time we think about 1970s sexual practices the same way we think about the roaring twenties: impressed by such expressions of freedom but also melancholic, for we are acutely aware of how it all came crashing down. Eyewitnesses say that one could not, in the mid-to-late 1980s, walk down a street in San Francisco's Castro district without seeing at least one funeral procession. |
Interesting. Never read the book.
| Quote: |
I have never been one to say that sex is immoral, lewd, or shameful; it only takes on those qualities when human psychology gets its gnarled hands on it. As a leeeeeeberaaaal eliiiiiiiitist, I take no issue with homosexuality, interracial relations, premartial sex, or, when explored in a safe and contentious manner, the weirder practices. However, I think that promiscuous sex is usually an expression of a diseased mind, and is in many situations downright unethical. |
When is there non-psychological sex? Such a notion is like a detached sexual organ in orgasm. It doesn't happen. What is a diseased mind? Do we refer to physical elements of the brain or the phenomenological? If the latter, then how does such a thing carry disease objectively? If the former, then how is there disease? What is the proper function of the brain? Not only that, but what shall demarcate the boundary between the ethical and the unethical? It seems to me that if we can randomly assign teleology and ethicality as we currently please, then anything could be diseased and unethical, diseased and ethical, healthy and unethical or even healthy and ethical.
| Quote: | | At the center, sex is about two things and two things only: reproduction and love. Reproduction, of course, is a biological drive burned deep into our DNA. Love is what humans have lent to sex. Just as they did with eating, humans turned the biological mandate of sex into a sacred bonding activity. I mean, we're animals, but we're not, if you know what I mean (I am sure someone has put this better than I just did). Lack of the ability to love, lack of self-control, dissociation of body and mind, misogyny, desire for power, shallowness, and frivolousness break the sex-love connection, which is essential for psychological health. Promiscuity is rooted in neurosis, cruelty, ignorance, and emotional retardation. |
We're animals, but we are animals that feel that we are much more. Can anybody love? What does it mean to love? Is it similar to having a favorite color or favorite cup? We can be attached to that cup, we seek the best for that cup, and we want to keep it safe, but is another person anything but an object? Why control the self? Why love women? Why not hate them for daring to exist? Why not desire power? Isn't power the ability to change the world in a manner that one desires? Are we to argue that frustrating one's own desires, or even negating the self such to desire nothing are healthier and better? Is the world not shallow and frivolous? What is life other than a game to be played? What are other people? We can never communicate our phenomenal experiences, and those are the most essential to us, aren't we already alone in a shallow, frivolous world? What is the proper level of emotion if one can be emotionally retarded?
| Quote: | | On to ethics: promiscuity is rarely harmless. It spreads pestilence. It cheapens relationships. In heterosexual scenarios, whether the man or the woman is the aggressive party, it is the woman who is used and thrown away in the end ('Girls Gone Wild' gives female college students a power trip, but in the end they are rendered powerless, mere objects of a man's fancy). At the beginning of the AIDS epidemic, gay pride people were furious that the San Francisco city government and the Centers for Disease Control tried to shut down the bathhouses, regardless of the major threat to public health they posed. This was extremely irresponsible; if the house is full of Plague fleas, ya burn it down. |
It spreads pestilence, but only amongst those willing to take the risks. Shall we attack gambling for hurting checkbooks? How about dishonesty? At least that way you protect the fools who did very little wrong. Relationships are cheap anyway, they are not transcendent connections with the divine that people like to think they are, but rather ugly little things, creations more of chemistry than of anything higher. Of course the women are used, men are designed to use women, could it be any other way? Aren't the bath houses a problem for the gays? If they want AIDS then they can use them, if they fear AIDS they can avoid them. It isn't as if this is a matter of massive externalities, if it is consensual then there is nothing external, only the possibility of surprises.
| Quote: |
Sooooooooo, go do whatever you want, but one at a time people! |
Why should we limit ourselves by your recommendations? I do what I want, period.
_________________
Destroying reality since the end of time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Orwell
Outer Party Member
Joined: Aug 09, 2007
Age: 19
Posts: 4243
Location: Room 101
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 5:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| monty wrote: | | HIV is not a 'venereal disease' - it is a disease. |
HIV is not a disease, it is a virus. The disease it causes is called AIDS.
_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH |
|
| Back to top |
|
Haliphron
Phoenix
Joined: Jan 29, 2008
Age: 27
Posts: 1006
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 5:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Awesomelyglorious wrote: | Why should we limit ourselves by your recommendations? I do what I want, period.
|
And you'll take the consequences of your actions. PERIOD. This is not directed at anyone here personally, but you're promiscuous and/or dont practive safe sex and you get AIDS, WHO'S fault is that? No, its not the fault of the Universe for being "unfair" to you? It is YOUR OWN DAMN FAULT for being careless, selfish, and thinking "it cant happen to me".
I dont understand for the life of me why many gay men are promiscuous AND why they dont take Extra precautions like NEVER
letting oneself be buggered by a stranger without a condom  . I associate promiscuity with Narcissism, selfishness,
self-indulgence,apathy, and in neurosis in the cse of bipolar people who are notorious for it when they're having a manic episode. Bear in mind that I do NOT think homosexuality is bad or wrong, but I dont approve of "free love" and sleeping around No Matter WHO you are. |
|
| Back to top |
|
MissPickwickian
Phoenix
Joined: Nov 27, 2007
Age: 16
Posts: 953
Location: Tennessee
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 5:59 pm Post subject: Re: The morals and ethics of promiscuity |
|
|
| Awesomelyglorious wrote: |
Why should we limit ourselves by your recommendations? I do what I want, period. |
Because I say so.
No, seriously, a moral judgment (how fun they are!) does not equal a proposed set of rules. I think that hairless dogs are irredeemably creepy, but I am not about to vandalize the homes of those who own them.
_________________
It's the microbes' world. We're just living in it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
LKL
Phoenix
Joined: Jul 22, 2007
Age: 32
Posts: 1081
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 6:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It can also be associated with depression, low self-esteem, and (in the case of sex workers) extreme poverty.
I know a woman who worked in Honduras as a teacher for a while, and while there she met a man who was pimping himself out to tourists in order to pay his way through medical school. There were no school loans there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Awesomelyglorious
Destroyer of worlds, reaver of souls
Joined: Dec 18, 2005
Posts: 6120
Location: United States
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 6:04 pm Post subject: Re: The morals and ethics of promiscuity |
|
|
| MissPickwickian wrote: |
Because I say so. |
Wait.... you mean that your will is universal law? I thought that was only a property of my will.
| Quote: |
No, seriously, a moral judgment (how fun they are!) does not equal a proposed set of rules. I think that hairless dogs are irredeemably creepy, but I am not about to vandalize the homes of those who own them. |
I disagree with your assessment of moral judgments. Morality is referent to a set of rules above mankind. Your notion seems to suggest that morality is just emotive, however, that does not seem to be reflective in how people relate to morality at all. Morality seems to be a different category, so it is not a matter of creepiness, but rather evil. If you think that hairless dogs are inexcusably evil, then you *would* vandalize the homes of those who own them, and perhaps even attempt to kill the animals on sight.
_________________
Destroying reality since the end of time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
monty
Phoenix
Joined: Sep 05, 2007
Posts: 2507
|
|
| Back to top |
|
cruachan
Sea Gull
Joined: Jul 18, 2007
Age: 19
Posts: 207
Location: Hungary
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 7:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Morals and ethics of promiscuity...hmm. I don't think there are any, but then again, i don't think any relationship has any connection with these. Morals and ethics are unwritten rules that are based on old written laws (like Ten Commandments) which are extremely outdated for nowadays' technological and social environment.
I'd say get the government out of the bedrooms; if there'd be a law or custom that says "promiscuity is a citizen's duty", the general situation would be the same as for certain people monogamy is mandatory, but for other people only promiscuity or another thing (BDSM, polyamory, etc.) works. And there are people who like sex in all its forms. So why go all "good and evil" on that?
Besides, AIDS is a real risk, and also are all other STDs. But hey, I'm a virgin and I've been accused of spreading the HIV virus intentionally! (I'm not even infected - it was just my bio teacher going overenthusiastic about the dangers of cutters in the classroom.) So I think everybody should take care of xyrself but it's no person's business other than the people engaging in the given sexual act themselves. I don't understand why everybody is either careless or paranoid - while there is a reasonable attitude towards STDs. And everything else, I guess.
_________________
"...unless you have a morbid fear of dying." |
|
| Back to top |
|
Haliphron
Phoenix
Joined: Jan 29, 2008
Age: 27
Posts: 1006
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 8:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cruachan wrote: | | And there are people who like sex in all its forms. So why go all "good and evil" on that? |
Sex in All its forms? 
What about Rape? Or pedophilia? I hope you see the point Im trying to make here.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
Awesomelyglorious
Destroyer of worlds, reaver of souls
Joined: Dec 18, 2005
Posts: 6120
Location: United States
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 8:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Haliphron wrote: | | cruachan wrote: | | And there are people who like sex in all its forms. So why go all "good and evil" on that? |
Sex in All its forms?
What about Rape? Or pedophilia? I hope you see the point Im trying to make here.... |
GET THAT GOVERNMENT OUT OF OUR BEDROOMS!!! 
_________________
Destroying reality since the end of time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
NeantHumain
Phoenix
![]()
Joined: Jun 25, 2004
Posts: 3717
Location: St. Louis, Missouri
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 8:34 pm Post subject: Re: The morals and ethics of promiscuity |
|
|
| MissPickwickian wrote: | | At the center, sex is about two things and two things only: reproduction and love. |
You forgot pleasure, which is very important for any accurate analysis of human sexuality. |
|
| Back to top |
|
techstepgenr8tion
cleveland audio assassin
Joined: Feb 07, 2005
Age: 29
Posts: 5670
Location: That's for me to know and for you to find out.
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 8:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Here's a book you may want to check out; Hooked by Dr. Freda McKissic Bush:
http://www.amazon.com/Hooked-Science-Casual-Affecting-Children/dp/0802450601/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1221266742&sr=8-1
I heard her interviewed on it and from what she's said there's an interesting situation with human biology. Part of us of course, given in to the short term, wants to be promiscuous (or at least with guys - with girls I think the habits are less nature and more cultural conditioning). The whole concept that the more relationships you have and the more sexual intimacy means that your giving pieces of yourself away until nothing is left has some biological merit. If you cry wolf to your own brain so many times it adjusts, recalibrates, and at that point your stuck in a position to where actually having a healthy intimate bond with someone becomes either much harder or even impossible in some cases. At that point its about adrenaline, sometimes that's having sex in public places, other times its other forms of exhibitionism. Kind of reminds me of what people say about rolling (ecstacy) - you build a tolerance toward the seeming extended effects and once that tolerance is built it not only lasts a long time but taking the same dose you get little more out of it than the speedy effect.
I think if anything this goes to show that a lot of the older world religions, when they called for modesty or sexual abstinence before marriage, I'd tend to think a lot of their broader rules, didn't even need God at the center - it was more about enforcing rules for the strongest societal engineering that they could achieve (God or no God, its funny how a lot of these things seem to work out). I sometimes think as well, if even nature tended guys to be planting seed everywhere they could it would stand to reason that women would outnumber men in a noticeable ratio; even with natural selection considered. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
