whats wrong with nudity?

[walrus]

If we were ment to be naked we would have been born that way!!!

 

[Howard]

Threads like this never end up useful.

 

[DougK62]

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: DougK62
It doesn't have anything to do with nudity. Just a passing comment to a portion of your post that was incorrect that could have been ignored. If you think circumcision is not mutilation then you are unclear on the meaning of at least one of the words.

Public nudity can't be allowed in America for the same reason that you think circumcision isn't mutilation: A one-sided story has been pushed for so long that as soon as you try and talk for the other side people are up in arms.

Does circumcision affect anyone other than the circumsized in any way? NO
Does public nudity affect others than the ones nude? YES

Nice job trying to change the subject, and thanks for proving my point.

 

[pinion9]

Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy
I think you hit the nail on the head, he definately shows interest towards girls but seems very embarrased when the wife or I are around. I also think he feels guilty when he sees nudity

That is normal. I am 25, married with 2 kids. I still don't like sexual discussions with anyone related to me.

 

[tfinch2]

Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy

Originally posted by: tfinch2

Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy
My teenage son literally runs from the TV if a cable station comes on showing female nudity

Maybe he's running to goto his room and jerk it.

But seriously, I did the same thing. I wouldn't want to be around my parents with anything that would influence a discussion about sex because I didn't want them to start pestering me about it asking me about my private decisions. It would be easier to avoid it.

I think you hit the nail on the head, he definately shows interest towards girls but seems very embarrased when the wife or I are around. I also think he feels guilty when he sees nudity

Hey, don't worry about it. There are a lot worse things in life that could happen.

Just don't try to be one of those macho dads that tries to push their son into girls and sex. I've had a lot of friends that had dad's like that, and they all ended up being pretty f'ed up. Just let him be.

 

[pinion9]

Originally posted by: DougK62

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: DougK62
It doesn't have anything to do with nudity. Just a passing comment to a portion of your post that was incorrect that could have been ignored. If you think circumcision is not mutilation then you are unclear on the meaning of at least one of the words.

Public nudity can't be allowed in America for the same reason that you think circumcision isn't mutilation: A one-sided story has been pushed for so long that as soon as you try and talk for the other side people are up in arms.

Does circumcision affect anyone other than the circumsized in any way? NO
Does public nudity affect others than the ones nude? YES

Nice job trying to change the subject, and thanks for proving my point.

Change the subject, which is public nudity in America.
And what is your point? That the circumcision debate rages on? Wow, thanks for making such an obscure point. I never would have known that without you here.

Please go read the topic of this thread.

 

[secretanchitman]

vida guerra is posing for playboy in this months issue (july 2006).

enough said.

 

[Fraggable]

Originally posted by: pinion9
What is wrong with sex with first cousins? Tests show that there is no real genetic problem with it and chances of having a healthy normal kid are same as two people unrelated. There is a social norm in our society. Same as the Muslim women who don't show their faces and in some African tribes women walk around topless, etc.

Very few social norms are universal (pedophilia is a universal negative, for example.)

No, there actually is a slightly better chance that children of first cousins will have birth defects, but only because their genes are taken from a smaller gene pool than they would normally be. There's better chances that 2 recessive bad genes would be chosen than that a dominant good and recessive bad be chosen.

Society doesn't tolerate nudity and certain types of relationships. That's why it's wrong. Simply because people think it is wrong when you get right down to it.

 

[DougK62]

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: DougK62

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: DougK62
It doesn't have anything to do with nudity. Just a passing comment to a portion of your post that was incorrect that could have been ignored. If you think circumcision is not mutilation then you are unclear on the meaning of at least one of the words.

Public nudity can't be allowed in America for the same reason that you think circumcision isn't mutilation: A one-sided story has been pushed for so long that as soon as you try and talk for the other side people are up in arms.

Does circumcision affect anyone other than the circumsized in any way? NO
Does public nudity affect others than the ones nude? YES

Nice job trying to change the subject, and thanks for proving my point.

Change the subject, which is public nudity in America.
And what is your point? That the circumcision debate rages on? Wow, thanks for making such an obscure point. I never would have known that without you here.

Please go read the topic of this thread.

Well I had thought that my point was clear, but let me dumb it down just for you: You think public nudity is bad because you've been conditioned to think that way - just as you've been conditioned to think that circumcision is good and/or not mutilation, regardless of the truths. The fact that you think public nudity "affects" others is proof to that point.

I think you're bringing a knife to a gun fight.

 

[JacobJ]

Originally posted by: secretanchitman
vida guerra is posing for playboy in this months issue (july 2006).

enough said.

damn...thats gonna be bad! real bad

 

[JDrake]

fap fap

 

[JulesMaximus]

Nothing. Ultra-Conservatives are the devil.

 

[imported_LoKe]

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned or not, I'd rather not read the whole thread to find out...but it's what people are allowed to see. In some countries, women aren't allowed to show their feet, so the men there are really, really turned on by feet. Now, women aren't allowed to walk around showing their breasts, butt, etc, so that's what we want to see, what we can't see.

 

[Atheus]

Originally posted by: Aharami

Originally posted by: CPA

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: CPA
Um, don't some cultures wed off their children to older people? I would be very surprised if men who were forced to marry little girls because of tribal custom didn't take advantage of the situation.

Pedophilia is the sex with children that have not developed at all. No hair, no period, etc. Generally for kids under 10-12. Got period = not a pedophile. So, unless you have some specific examples, I can't really answer your question. In most cultures of this nature, the girls is considered a woman at first period and can be married off.

I read where some religious sect in India married away a 3 year old daughter to some guy. I think it was part of some judgement against the other family.

trust me man. people in india are a lot more uptight about this stuff than here. couple years ago a movie came out which dealt with the love affair amongst two women. and the public outrage against it was much much worse than what we saw with brokeback here. there were people (mostly women) tearing town the movie posters from walls in the streets. there were mass protests outside movie theaters, etc.

does stuff like what you mentioned exist? id be lieing if i said no, but in this day and age, that kinda stuff is very rare and only exists in remote villages. does pedophilia exist in US? is it the norm? no. same goes with marrying off liitle girls in india

I saw a BBC documentery about this yesterday - they said it was _extrememly_ common. Yes, only in rural areas, but much of India is rural. There was a 6 year old girl getting married to a man, and an 11 year old boy getting married to a teenage girl.

 

[CalvinHobbs]

Originally posted by: CPA

Originally posted by: pinion9

Originally posted by: CPA
Um, don't some cultures wed off their children to older people? I would be very surprised if men who were forced to marry little girls because of tribal custom didn't take advantage of the situation.

Pedophilia is the sex with children that have not developed at all. No hair, no period, etc. Generally for kids under 10-12. Got period = not a pedophile. So, unless you have some specific examples, I can't really answer your question. In most cultures of this nature, the girls is considered a woman at first period and can be married off.

I read where some religious sect in India married away a 3 year old daughter to some guy. I think it was part of some judgement against the other family.

yes the do get married but they won't live together until much later when the girl's grown up and her body is developped imho

 

[imported_Lucifer]

Originally posted by: Fraggable

Originally posted by: pinion9
What is wrong with sex with first cousins? Tests show that there is no real genetic problem with it and chances of having a healthy normal kid are same as two people unrelated. There is a social norm in our society. Same as the Muslim women who don't show their faces and in some African tribes women walk around topless, etc.

Very few social norms are universal (pedophilia is a universal negative, for example.)

No, there actually is a slightly better chance that children of first cousins will have birth defects, but only because their genes are taken from a smaller gene pool than they would normally be. There's better chances that 2 recessive bad genes would be chosen than that a dominant good and recessive bad be chosen.

Society doesn't tolerate nudity and certain types of relationships. That's why it's wrong. Simply because people think it is wrong when you get right down to it.

Yes slightyly. The risk of having a birth defect from a cousin marraige is only 4-6%, where as a marraige with someone who is a not a relative is only 3-5% Text

EDIT: corrected info.