Pornography Poll: Personal Issues

[_just me]

...If you were a man who was not able to perform sexually or a woman who's partner was not able to perform sexually I imagine that Viagra might have quite a lot of redeeming value.

I know believers who have tried it.

again, i ask...what "redeeming value" ?
Before viagra, if a man and a woman loved each other and had a wonderful sex life together, and then as the grew old together the man was less and less capable of performing, much to the dismay of his adoring, and post-menopausal, wife, was she suddenly justified in her abandonment of him? was somehow the love and intimacy of their life together in jeopardy of a bitter demise?
Was a great universal injustice being imposed upon her?

again, what is the "redeeming value" (a.k.a. virtue)

To be able to make love to your partner. If you don't see the value in that I really can't help you.

Of course, the great news is there are more ways to have sex than intercourse. He can manually stimulate her, he can perform oral on her, they could get a toy to use. Lots of ways to continue to be intimate together. But, if he wants to explore ways of correcting his erectile dysfunction so that he can continue to have a fulfilling sex life then he should because it is no different than being treated for any other dysfunction.

[_Buffalo]

The link is to the Kinsey Institute, which has been relentlessly pursuing Kinsey's original vision, ideology, and perspective since his death without interruption. The Kinsey Institute has no credibility. None, zero, nada. Kinsey's sexology as carried on by the institute that bears his name is still what it always was, an ideology of social reconstruction and Kulturkampf wrapped in the folds of social science.

For some reason, our culture cannot grow up intellectually with regard to Kinsey any more than it can grow up with regard to Marx, Keynes, and Dewey.

Droopy's vigorous objection to the source is he's afraid that too much factual information on sexuality will force him to confront his own sexual orientation.

[_subgenius]

To be able to make love to your partner.

so, obviously no "redeeming value" in masturbation....correct?
This seems to be a reversal in your previous argument, which centered on self-satisfaction, now it is about something else?

Of course, the great news is there are more ways to have sex than intercourse. He can manually stimulate her, he can perform oral on her, they could get a toy to use. Lots of ways to continue to be intimate together.

agreed, as noted in my earlier posts...that a physical decline with genitalia does not exclude acts of intimacy

But, if he wants to explore ways of correcting his erectile dysfunction so that he can continue to have a fulfilling sex life then he should because it is no different than being treated for any other dysfunction.

Not sure that i see the natural aging process as a "dysfunction", so i have to disagree with that point.
Nor can i agree to your current ambiguity with what constitutes a "fulfilling" sex life.

[_LDSToronto]

But, if he wants to explore ways of correcting his erectile dysfunction so that he can continue to have a fulfilling sex life then he should because it is no different than being treated for any other dysfunction.

Not sure that i see the natural aging process as a "dysfunction", so i have to disagree with that point.
Nor can i agree to your current ambiguity with what constitutes a "fulfilling" sex life.

Subgenius,

Cardiovascular disease, cancer, arthritis, cataracts, osteoporosis, type 2 diabetes, hypertension and Alzheimer's disease are a few examples of aging-associated diseases. What are your thoughts about treating these diseases, seeing how they are highly-correlated to the natural aging process?

H.

[_just me]

To be able to make love to your partner.

so, obviously no "redeeming value" in masturbation....correct?
This seems to be a reversal in your previous argument, which centered on self-satisfaction, now it is about something else?

If you are going to willfully misinterpret me is there really a purpose in conversing?

YOU are the one who brought up Viagra. YOU are the one who thinks it needs to be redeemed. Not me.

If a man with erectile dysfunction wants to use Viagra to masturbate I think that is fantastic and a redeeming quality unto itself. GOD BLESS VIAGRA! Afterall, frequent masturbation can help protect against prostate cancer.

Of course, the great news is there are more ways to have sex than intercourse. He can manually stimulate her, he can perform oral on her, they could get a toy to use. Lots of ways to continue to be intimate together.

agreed, as noted in my earlier posts...that a physical decline with genitalia does not exclude acts of intimacy

Yes, and I'm talking about actual sex acts that would include orgasm and are non-procreative. *gasp* I think that a man with ED deserves to have orgasms, too.

But, if he wants to explore ways of correcting his erectile dysfunction so that he can continue to have a fulfilling sex life then he should because it is no different than being treated for any other dysfunction.

Not sure that i see the natural aging process as a "dysfunction", so i have to disagree with that point.
Nor can i agree to your current ambiguity with what constitutes a "fulfilling" sex life.

See LDSToronto's post.

For men with ED who seek medical attention I would wager that a fulfilling sex life is one in which they can become hard, orgasm and ejaculate. That seems to be the component they are missing.

[_Droopy]

http://www.drjudithreisman.com/


Feel free to peruse the entire website regarding Kinsey himself, his legacy, the institute and its continuing influence and activities, pseudo-scientific "research," and the monumental perverseness of his own life that was the core of his scientific pursuits and public positions.

"Reisman has said that she believes that a homosexual movement in Germany gave rise to the Nazi Party and the Holocaust, she endorses The Pink Swastika, which elaborates on this view and has compared modern youth groups for gays to the Hitler Youth." ~wikipedia

Ya, ok....

Oh... here's the sweetest thing - her PhD is in Sexuality. Um, wait a second, no it's not, it's in Communications! Next thing you'll be using Dr. Laura or Dr. Peterson's "research" to back up your assertions.

H.

In other words, let's translate this thin - and long standard for the Cesspark - ad hominem circumstantial dance around the sources and the arguments therein, which, I'm quite sure, none of you will ever bother reading (well at least, unlike Kish, Gad, and Buffalo, you aren't wishing for the burning of Riesman's work), "I have nothing. I cannot refute or rebut your arguments, or hers, and have no intention of doing any homework outside my comfortable, ticky tacky little leftist intellectual cubicle, and I have no intention of familiarizing myself with her work, as I have no intention of challenging my preexisting prejudices and nostrums by expanding my knowledge of other's perspectives."

Got it.

Now, what the hell a degree in "sexuality" would be, I have no idea (but I'm sure you can acquire one at Berkley)

Reisman's specialty is content analysis. Do you know what that is, Toronto, and why she's become distinguished in her work in the analysis of the written work of others across multiple subject areas?

This is so transparent. This credentialist ploy is exactly the same rigged game played by the AGW cultists to discredit any scientist - even distinguished scientists in disciplines intimately allied with climatology - who make educated criticisms of the neo-Lysenkoist orthodoxy even though perfectly qualified to do so.

Now we come to "social science," which isn't "science" at all in the sense of the natural or hard sciences, and within which theory, speculation, and frequently, personal ideology overwhelmingly dominate the various fields which, by their very nature and the nature of the subject matter of their study, are not amenable to the kinds of scientific methodology as are the objects of study in the natural world.

"Sexology," as it is, is an academic discipline that, like the "studies" programs of the modern academic Left, is the official academic manifestation of an ideology, in this case, the ideology of the sexual revolution for which degrees are granted by academic departments dedicated to promoting the philosophy as an academic discipline.

The Kinsey Institute has never backed away or backed down from its defense of Kinsey's ideology of pansexual promiscuity as science in all the intervening years since the publication of his major work (though some of his closest associates did break with him and denounce his research).

Dr. Laura Schlessinger has a Ph.D. in Physiology from Columbia University's College of Physicians and Surgeons, and did post-doctoral work in Marriage, Family, and Child Counseling the University of Southern California. She was on the faculty of USC and Pepperdine.

I think Dr. Schlessinger is more than qualified to critique the work of Kinsey. I'm not precisely sure what your qualifications are to determine what either Schlessinger or Kinsey are qualified to say or teach.

Have you ever read The Pink Swastika? No, I didn't think so. I've got it right here on my hard disk. Its an interesting read, and heavily footnoted.

But I understand that, as a leftist, you have little interest in knowledge per se.

[_Droopy]

Droopy's vigorous objection to the source is he's afraid that too much factual information on sexuality will force him to confront his own sexual orientation.

I hold out little hope, at this point, that you will ever contribute something, whether you agree with me or not, of intellectual substance to any discussion.

Every now and then, however, I may ask you, just one more time, to try.

[_Droopy]

Of course, the great news is there are more ways to have sex than intercourse. He can manually stimulate her, he can perform oral on her, they could get a toy to use. Lots of ways to continue to be intimate together. But, if he wants to explore ways of correcting his erectile dysfunction so that he can continue to have a fulfilling sex life then he should because it is no different than being treated for any other dysfunction.

You see, subgenius, if she hadn't told you all of this, you never would have known it, would you?

What would we do in a world without liberals to educate us all about sex, drugs, rock n' roll, and and lava lamps.

[_Droopy]

Afterall, frequent masturbation can help protect against prostate cancer.

I also hear it helps build strong bodies in 12 ways.

[_LDSToronto]

In other words, let's translate this thin - and long standard for the Cesspark - ad hominem circumstantial dance around the sources and the arguments therein, which, I'm quite sure, none of you will ever bother reading (well at least, unlike Kish, Gad, and Buffalo, you aren't wishing for the burning of Riesman's work), "I have nothing. I cannot refute or rebut your arguments, or hers, and have no intention of doing any homework outside my comfortable, ticky tacky little leftist intellectual cubicle, and I have no intention of familiarizing myself with her work, as I have no intention of challenging my preexisting prejudices and nostrums by expanding my knowledge of other's perspectives."

Got it.

Now, what the hell a degree in "sexuality" would be, I have no idea (but I'm sure you can acquire one at Berkley)

Reisman's specialty is content analysis. Do you know what that is, Toronto, and why she's become distinguished in her work in the analysis of the written work of others across multiple subject areas?

This is so transparent. This credentialist ploy is exactly the same rigged game played by the AGW cultists to discredit any scientist - even distinguished scientists in disciplines intimately allied with climatology - who make educated criticisms of the neo-Lysenkoist orthodoxy even though perfectly qualified to do so.

Now we come to "social science," which isn't "science" at all in the sense of the natural or hard sciences, and within which theory, speculation, and frequently, personal ideology overwhelmingly dominate the various fields which, by their very nature and the nature of the subject matter of their study, are not amenable to the kinds of scientific methodology as are the objects of study in the natural world.

"Sexology," as it is, is an academic discipline that, like the "studies" programs of the modern academic Left, is the official academic manifestation of an ideology, in this case, the ideology of the sexual revolution for which degrees are granted by academic departments dedicated to promoting the philosophy as an academic discipline.

The Kinsey Institute has never backed away or backed down from its defense of Kinsey's ideology of pansexual promiscuity as science in all the intervening years since the publication of his major work (though some of his closest associates did break with him and denounce his research).

Dr. Laura Schlessinger has a Ph.D. in Physiology from Columbia University's College of Physicians and Surgeons, and did post-doctoral work in Marriage, Family, and Child Counseling the University of Southern California. She was on the faculty of USC and Pepperdine.

I think Dr. Schlessinger is more than qualified to critique the work of Kinsey. I'm not precisely sure what your qualifications are to determine what either Schlessinger or Kinsey are qualified to say or teach.

Have you ever read The Pink Swastika? No, I didn't think so. I've got it right here on my hard disk. Its an interesting read, and heavily footnoted.

But I understand that, as a leftist, you have little interest in knowledge per se.

Droopy, you know what would impress me? If you actually *read* the study that Just Me cited, and attacked it on it's methodology and conclusions, rather than taking an askance look at the founder of the organization that published the study.

But, I completely understand that you and subgenius are not equipped with the intellectual tools necessary to make a scholarly criticism of this study, and hence the non sequitur ad-homs.

H.