Risks of cancer from oral sex

It is a minority. Otherwise I think a lot of species would have been extinct by now. I don't think a research is needed for that. If homosexual behavior was that common I think there could be a reason for that . Why do you think an animal would do such things ? Or have any intercourse that is not PVI frequently and excessively ? Are those motives similar to humans' ?

What confuses you about this statement exactly ?. To know what is intrinsic to an animal's instinct you need to consider some criteria ; Because you might even find dogs who try to copulate with cats for some unkown yet reason . It doesn't mean it is a part of a dog or a cat's innate nature. Does it mean that mating with some genetically distant specie is evolutionary beneficial or that it is compeltely "normal" ,even for this animal's standards?
Sure these animals weren't influenced by porn. But it doesn't mean they are acting without some foreign motivations or some deviant drive.
yes I did read your article on Wiki.it Never explicitly stated that those behaviors are common for those exact species . The average percentage of observed behavior ranges from 10 to 35% for all the species. Apart for some exceptions of course. Many of those so-called "homosexual behaviors" consists only of non-sexual pairing and interactions don't always include genital stimulation.
I think it's fair to considet them to be an exception or compensation. But an animal never loses it's natural inclination for vaginal intercourse with a female. In fact most of those species in the article above do prefer this adaptative and biologically adequate form of intercourse over any other type. They can't ditch it or their specie will go extinct.
I don't really agree it's a 'natural' phenomenon because to consider something natural other criteria must be involved beside superficial observations. Remember that even interspecie sex was observed (dog on cat is only one example). Many animal behavior could have been classified as homosexual if we only rely on observations to explain them.
Whether it is on the scale of one specie or on the large scale of all sexually reproducing species, weird practices such as oral anal or homosexuality never exceed the adapative PVI copulation. Hence why it is mostly considered an exeption to the general 'rule' of sexual living beings. Thus classiying it as 'deviant' is really the closest description to reality, even if it seems biased and 'bigoted'. Since it is a rarity to the general rule, not the rule itself.

 

Yes it existed in some periods of history. But it wasn't as widely spread as it is today. The greeks were known to practice it more than any other civilazation in history. But remember that their potteries portrayed even bestiality, homosexuality and oral seem mild compared to that.
I personally don't think oral or anal were spontaneous among the early prehistorical humans. A lot of the cave painting found until now mostly feature regular penetrative intercourse, some even in doggystyle. And they outnumber any type of homosexual depictions , oral for that matter.
I tend to believe the notoriety of those sexual practices in modern societies originate mainly from liberal medias, porn is one of them and possibly the most powerful of all.
Many people would have never thought about them at all if not pornographic or explicit influence.

 

I personally wouldn't be so sure.

 

You make such convoluted, nonsensical arguments I can barely understand what you mean.

1. Sex exists for procreation.
   
   
2. Sex also exists for pleasure.
   
3. Some humans and some animals do both.

These are facts, backed by evidence and scientific research. You cannot disagree with a fact.

If you want to have sex for procreation, in a monogamous, heterosexual relationship please go ahead. However, you are in a minority.

The majority of us will have sex for pleasure and bonding, whether we’re in same-sex relationships or polyamorous relationships or not.

Please, for the love of God, stop spreading misinformation. It’s really unhelpful.

 

Yes I fully agree with you. I believe both pleasure and procreation are crucial and equally important. Even more when they are paired.

I don't think I'm in a minority. I want to enjoy intercourse as well, even in a monogamous heterosexual relationship. I can't minoritary for such.

For the love of life, please try to understand me. All those three points above matter to me as much as they do to you and everybody else. I just happen to have a pragmatic view on life that's all. trust me there is a lot to gain from being pragmatic and relying mainly on logic. I don't think I said something illogical, maybe you have your reasons to think I did.

 

I’m in a monogamous, heterosexual relationship but my wife and I aren’t trying to procreate when we have sex. We have sex for pleasure and for bonding. For the majority of people in the West, I believe sex is used primarily for pleasure. If you are only going to have sex for procreation then I’d say you are in a minority, but that’s only my opinion and l could be wrong. There’s a heck of a lot of sex for pleasure in Game of Thrones and I presume you’re a fan of that show (judging by your profile picture)?

Stating that you rely on logic is absurd considering your previous statements. I still don’t really understand your agenda or motivation. Please enlighten me- what exactly is your end goal here?

 

Even in my homeland sex is practiced for pleasure. But the main reason behind the existence of such activity is procreation, subconsciously speaking. Let me tell you that pleasure and bonding also serve procreative purposes, for example, in men oxytocyn enhances their fertility. It's also the hormone of bonding and empathy, it helps women release more substances that are way friendlier to the sperm. This hormone is produced during orgasm in both genders and is associated with intense pleasure. Bonding can't be dissociated from procreation, we are meant to create life ,perpetuate it and preserve it.
Yes, there is a lot of sex for pleasure in Game of thrones, just like many other shows. but it doesn't mean It has an influence on me. It's good since you point out this, medias have an influence on people.

What exactly in my previous statements contradicts logic ? At least to your perspective. I don't have a clear goal in mind right now, I just speak what I feel and crosses my mind. Sometimes I'm wrong, other times I'm right. Beside I ended up knowing people who do understand me and some of them even feel like I do. That is why I told you that it takes more than one statement to understand who someone is.
I don't always sound PC, but it is only in terms of appearance. I tend to judge people, but I don't hate them at all.

 

Obviously procreation is essential for the survival of a species but the main drive towards sex in both humans and animals is pleasure. Animals don’t know they are procreating when they have sex- they do it because it feels good. This goes back to my previous point, there are lots of things humans do which we weren’t biologically designed for. But that’s how evolution works.

Some scientists believe, in as little as 30 years, that sex will no longer be used to procreate and that parents will choose from a range of embryos created in a lab with their DNA. This practice exists now but their argument is that it will become much cheaper and more common as a means to prevent diseases.

Same-sex couples bond using sex and they are unable to procreate when they do so, so your “logic” falls flat again. I do not have the time or energy to highlight every illogical statement you have made, but there are a lot.

Are you a recovering PA or an SO of one? If not, why are you on this site? There must be a reason. I’m guessing you’re here to spread misinformation about the sin of alternative sexual practices, but maybe you have had a bad experience with this in the past?

I do not judge people. I did in the past, but my behaviour and the hurt and pain I’ve caused my wife have caused me to rethink the way I see the world. I don’t judge you for having beliefs, even though I completely disagree with them. I just hate it when people act as if their beliefs are anything more than a belief (especially when there is no evidence to support the claims). And don’t mention being non-PC, that’s such a cop out.

 

I already said the whole process is subconscious for animal, but not so much for humans. Yes, we do acts we aren't biologicially designed for, but it doesn't mean those acts won't go through the filter of natural selection.

I think you dont understand my logic at all. The whole aspect of pleasure was a little "trick" of our own biology. So we seek copulations more and more. Obviously, humans twisted this to far-fetched practices with a higher ratio than other species; which doesn't favor our specie and that aren't very much healthy in the long run.

I'm a recovering PA. I admit it, I'm also as inexperienced with real sexual relationships as you can imagine. So, I never had a negative experience with anyone in real life. It's not about the 'the sin of alternative sexual practices', why is everyone who points out the abnormity of those classified as religious by default. No, I'm not religious but secular. There are secular individual who see them as flawed as well.
I think religion offers a narrow alternative as a moral anchor, a very fragile one in fact. That can be hijacked my massive hypocrisy.

I already know about your past experiences and your problems with your partner.I'm also aware that you were attending therapy only recently before the massive lockdown. But not every belief can be considered as a belief and nothing more, some are but a lot aren't.

It depends on what is an "evidence" to you. And how much you are willing to seek confirmation for that evidence.

 

If your point about copulation is true why is a man’s “G-spot”, the prostrate, in the anus?

To be honest, I wasn’t expecting you to be a recovering PA. That puts an interesting perspective on things. How’s your recovery going so far?

I find it a little bit strange that you know about my personal problems with my wife but I suppose that’s the nature of a public forum. I’ve been shrouded in shame for too long so I choose to keep it public for that reason. I’m still doing check-in meetings with my therapist and the group so it hasn’t stopped completely.

I don’t understand what you mean about beliefs not being beliefs. Evidence to me is exactly what it sounds like... evidence.

 

This doesn't mean that anal sex is meant to be widespread or not meant to be an exception to the general setting of biology.
Remember that the anus doesn't lubricate naturally, the vagina does.
The anus isn't meant to be used as a substitute vagina in my opinion. Even if the prostate is stimulated it doesn't mean the pain is non-existent. Especially for women.
Also men have nipples beside not being able to breastfeed.

that is interesting, because the man who conducted this wiki study was a canadian biologist who happens to be homosexual. Long before he wrote his essay about homosexual behaviors in animals.
I think you should consider that additional factor concerning those study redults. One thing is for sure, is that non-reproductive sexual behavior is always the exception to the rules in the animal kingdom. It doesn't conform to this animal's sexual standard. otherwise bestiality might be deemed acceptable if we rely on the fact that inter-specie sex is very much real. I don't know how you feel about this.

Honestly, I am not complaining at the moment. Sometime it is hard to endure it, sometime it is easier and not overwhelming.

 

Then why does it feel good? Evolutionally speaking, what benefit does making stimulation of a man’s prostrate feel good? Oh and interestingly enough male nipples can actually produce milk.

Do you mean Bruce Bagemihl? Where exactly did you find out that he was homosexual and can you please share the source? I looked it up but can’t find this information anywhere.

Personally I don’t consider bestiality to be equatable to anal sex, oral sex or homosexuality.

 

I looked into the french version of the Wiki article. I'm a francophone. You can look for it yourself and translate it.

Why ? is there a reason for it. People who have sex with their dogs might use it as a defense against you, as well as necrophiles. Homosexuality , oral and anal sex all consist as using reproductive organs for a purpose they aren't meant to serve. Or putting them in a place they aren't supposed to be. All without valuable damaging consequences, both psychologically and physiologically.
Necrophilia and bestiality, or inter-specie sex ,doesn't seem far-fetched from this list.

There is very little information about this. I have wondered about this for a long time, maybe it's something related to feotal developpement.
The vast majority of men don't produce milk , unless they are under some psychiatric drug or have a serious condition called prolactinoma; which might be cancerous.

 

Hold on a second... You do realise that saying gay people practice sex in an unnatural way is not okay?

You really need to take care of your own issues, if you don't mind me saying that. Cuz, you have got some glaring ones.

 

Do not bother arguing with her, she's hell bent on genitals being unclean, and full of idealised bullsh!t about how everyone else is supposed to use their own genitals according to what her scientific reading says. I would have went ahead on a limb to call her a homophobe by virtue of her own statements against homosexual people doing it the way they like to, but I don't know if it really is the case.

In any case, it's highly stupid, judgmental and inappropriate thought process. We can't change it either.

 

It is not the virus but your immune system that determines wether you get the throat cancer or not.

 

Seeing how you behave right now makes me wonder how you are in real life with others. Why are you so angry ? I don't remember saying anything that insults you or disrespect you.

Yes, the same way it is with Covid-19. But no sane person will take that gamble. It isn't only a matter of throat cancer.

 

You made a borderline homophobic statement. That made me angry. Plus you keep riding a moral high horse, which isn't a good thing to do. I am not exactly angry at you. But I hate bad science. And I hate people who want everyone to live their way, and I don't exactly like people who say gay people practice unnatural sex and shouldn't be gay.

 

Being homophobic never came to me while sharing those intimate thoughts. Because I don't really hate gays. But I don't really feel their behavior is sensible enough for a highly sentient being. there are gay people in my homeland, and many of them didn't start out as "gay" as it widely defined in the west. they were just curious teenagers who wanted to explore their bodies, but it quickly got out of their control. My aunt told me about a girl who used to show attraction to her female classmates. If that girl lived in a liberal country she would have gotten all the wrong and misleading "advices" she needed the least, but right now she is married and probably enjoys sex with her husband.

 

That's another homophobic statement.

That may be the case for a select few, but then there are people who do it to both males and females. They see no boundaries about whom one should love. It still doesn't give you any right to belittle their ways of existence.

So your aunt interfered (or someone else) in that girl's sexual life. Now I see where your enthusiasm for controlling what people should do in their bedrooms comes from.

Don't do it. That's all I am going to say. It is wrong.