To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 17268
17267  |  17269
Subject: 
Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Wed, 17 Jul 2002 11:48:01 GMT
Viewed: 
2839 times
  
and denying instant pleasure now for a more secure life with
your spouse 'No dear, i never want to cheat on you, even if we all agree' is
the truly 'adult' thing to do.

The _truly_ adult thing to do is to _not_ deny any pleasure and still have an
ultimately secure life with your spouse(s) if you choose to elevate some of
your lovers to that status.  Why must you buy security with the coin of
pleasure?

This is why hypothetical situations fail, particularly when in relation to
members of the opposite sex :).  Thus far all that has been discussed is
based upon a series of hypothetical people who all think that sex is
something that is based purely around physical enjoyment.  But is this truly so?

Let me take a look at a case study.  Male A wants to screw Male B's wife.
Male A, B and their wives agree.  Male A is not in love with Male B's wife,
and she is not in love with him.  The only people who love each other in
this case study are Male A and his wife, and Male B and his wife.  So Male A
has sex with female B.  Three things can happen in this intercourse.  (1)
Male A finds Female B more enjoyable than his wife, (2) Male A finds Female
B less enjoyable than his wife, and (3) Male A finds Female B equally as
enjoyable as his wife.

Let's look at situation (1).  Male A finds Female B more enjoyable than his
wife.  In the best possible scenario, Male A is allowed to screw Female B
whenever he wants.  This leaves both Male B and Female A sexually
unsatisfied, unless they happen to be "allowed" to screw as well.  There is
three possibilities for this sexual relationship also (the three I listed
earlier).  In the best possible scenario (1), both males have effectively
swapped wives, their wives being excluded from what should be their closest
moments, and greatest times of joy.  Ultimately this will lead to an unhappy
marriage.

But if Female A and Male B do not find each other more enjoyable than their
current spouses, jealousy will erupt.  Even if Male A and Female B are not
allowed by their spouses to have sex again, there will be a jealousy in the
two marriages, and a longing from Male A and Female B to be together again.
Ultimately, the best possible scenario here is that Male A and Female B are
to live with the pain of knowing that there is better out there.  In the
worst possible case it could easily lead to a breakdown of both marriages
(not really worth the couple of hours of pleasure eh?).

Situation (2).  Male A and Female B find that sex is more enjoyable with
their spouse.  What was gained from their experiment?  Even if no jealousy
and curiosity ("am I as good as female B in bed?") develops, there was no
practical benefit to the sexual encounter.  It is MORE LIKELY that some
jealousy will erupt (women being women), which will cause some kind of
marriage problems.

Situation (3).  Male A and Female B find sex equally as enjoyable with each
other as with their spouses.  If Female A and Male B had sex, then all three
scenario's apply in reverse.  If they did not have sex, then several things
could happen.  No jealousy/curiosity on the part of the
non-sexually-interactive spouses.  In this case (the best possible) there
was nothing gained.  More likely however, jealousy will come into play,
which could ultimately lead to marriage breakdowns/difficulties.

In the case of sex outside of marriage, ignorance truly is bliss.  I'd also
like to add that if one found anothers wife more attractive/better in bed
than his own, I'd begin to ask what was wrong with the marriage.  After
years of being together, one would think that each partner knew exactly what
"turned the other on" so to speak.

I very much doubt that there are many women who would let their husbands
sleep with somebody else and not feel any jealousy.

-Stephen



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change)
 
You have so completely oversimplified the possibilities in your analysis that a complete evaluation would be quite lengthy. (...) No one thinks this. At least not any more than every feeling-complex is purely physical because our brain contains our (...) (22 years ago, 17-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change)
 
(...) Except those passed from mother to child, like HIV, right? And those with other transmision vectors right? And anyway, let's imagine that everyone on earth got an authoritative bill of health and a list of their transmissible infections was (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

225 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR