What do you think caused your PA + religion question

I grew up with a very healthy view of sexuality. When I asked my grandma about sex all she said was it's fun, it's not dirty, it's a way men and women show affection for each other, but it's the best if you love that person. I was 10. She's didn't freak out nor did my parents if I had a question. I learned Sexuality was part of being human. My moms family is also very expressive so we hug everybody. My stepdad bought me my first pack of condoms. I think if you accept sexuality as part of life your view of sexuality is much healthier.

 

The idea that morals and encouraging even enforcing morals on people lead to porn addiction is I would like to say stupid, but it's beyond that to the point of perverseness or some kind of mental blindness. We are all here because our ancestors threw their morals away [ the 1960s sexual revolution ].

Sure lots of, probably most, "Christians" and probably most "religious" folks are very immoral. How does that prove that good morals lead to porn addiction or that loose morals prevent it? Some fake religious people make pretenses of morality and this someone how proves that the morals that have guided humanity for ages are wrong?

It's the prevailing idea of experimentation if it feels good do it and the rejection of the morals of our ancestors that have lead us to this. No porn addiction problems in Amish communities no sex addiction problems until morals are rejected.

Yet people want to continue to turn to the very thing that caused their problems [ modern social programming I'm not going to call it philosophy] and come up with bizzaro ideas like "shame causes porn addiction". That is like saying pain causes people to punch themselves in the head. This idea that the morals of old which guarded people against these evils are the cause when you have the cause staring you right in the face.

 

And what brings you to the forum?

 

My trainer at my work told me that you should never discuss religion/politics when talking to your guests.

 

You sound like the guy, who loves to have once a month missionary style sex, with your married wife to concieve children. Nothing wrong with that, but that just does not cut it for me. We didn´t evolve to be monogamous. I know that when you are christian, you are immune to science and evolution, but I´m going to post this artice anyway:
http://www.samwoolfe.com/2013/07/humans-are-not-naturally-monogamous.html
There are hundreds like it, if you google the subject.
Just look at ancient drawing or statues. There are a lot of them, which depict group sex. This was not a 1960s hippie invention. This was way before the church or even jesus existed (if he ever did, which I strongly doubt). And I know from my own experience that, while missionary style monogamous sex is fun, inviting someone else to the bedroom can really spice up your sex life.

The 1960s revolution was basically just one big push to shed all of those "morals" the church forced on humanity to control our mating habits. Sure the media and especially porn are doing their best job to view sexuality in very unnatural ways, so they are basically the other opposite of the church.

But there are other cultures, where the 1960s revolution did not happen. Take india for example. They have had a very sexually healthy way built into their religion.

Hahaha, yeah that´s a good one, try watching porn without electricity.

True, but we are not at a party here. And if you can´t do it at a party, you have to do it online, right?

 

As I have to keep repeating here over and over I'm not Christian or religious. I'm unaware of East Indians being sex freaks as far as I know they are pretty strict about marriage.

The study you posted is a bunch of crap. Did you see the reasoning he posted for his theory and you post this like it's fact?

The size of human testicles according to the psychologist who did the study is an indication that monogamy is not natural. He also thinks that the reason women moan during sex is to attract other men to come fuck them after the first guy is done. Are you basing your life off this moron's "theory" [bullshit]?

 

I'm christian and my family is very religious. I was raised with christian values and I feel God and the Bible were positive influences. I fell in to PMO and negative compulsive habits when I started to compromise my christian values. I'm here because I feel that PMO is harmful for me physically and spiritually and its time to end the habit. I don't see how someone discouraging someone else from masturbating would turn them into a chronic masturbator. If he was wanking it like that then clearly he wasnt too caught up in religion to begin with. It seems more logical that fundamentalist anti sex parents would turn their son into some type of 40 year old virgin. It sounds like your man just loved to jerk it and blamed religion.

 

You sure sound religious, because like I said: Immune to science. I´ll try again:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12962309

But everyone with a little common sense should know that humans are not monogamous. If we were, there would be no porn addiction, there would be no divorce, there would be no cheating, etc...
I´m basing my life on all scientifically evident "bullshit", and it sure as hell is fun

So if you are not religious, why are you so anti polygamy? Are you jealous of the people who live their sexuality to the fullest? Are you afraid if everyone did, you would not find a partner? Are you afraid of change in general? Just trying to understand it.

Ever had kids? If you specifically tell them what NOT to do, you can be sure that they want to try it even more. So you are religious, yet still you are on this forum. While I can not say religion harmed you, I can say that it did not help you either, otherwise you would not be here. And unfortunately there is a strong correlation with being fundamentally anti sex and being religious.
The USA are once again the perfect example for this. They claim to be the most christian nation on the planet, that is why they don´t need sex education. Because sex is bad anyway and the only way not to get pregnant or STDs is abstinence. And studies have shown how well this approach works:
http://www.insidermonkey.com/blog/1...s-in-the-developed-world-565721/?singlepage=1

 

Personally, I don't want my life to conform to my animal nature, enslaved to my DNA. There is potential for humans to be greater than animals, rutting with whatever female can be wooed through violence, flashy displays, or social dominance. Just look at the evidence you give that humans are not monogomous - porn addiction, divorce, cheating. I would much rather have a life without all those things.

I would rather live according to reason and love. With my faculties of reason I observe what a mess my polyamorous and promiscuous friends have made of their lives, shuffling kids back and forth with the exs that they despise. I remember the casual sex I had and recognize that it is as a candle to the sun that is loving union with my wife. You may not realize it, but Christians can have sex more than once a month and in various positions! And even better than any position - sex with my wife is an act of love which brings me lasting contentment and happiness.

I am a Christian who loves science. It has always been my favorite school subject - I just took human anatomy and physiology and absolutely loved it. When you make generalizations about a population of a billion people spread throughout the world - you're bound to be wrong about many of them.

I'm sorry to hear about that relationship with the pastor - that's too bad. Many Christians do not live up to their calling. I grew up in a very sexually liberal household and I can assure you shame had nothing to do with my porn viewing. I started looking at it because it's what my role models, my dad and step dad, did - they left their porn lying around. It wasn't shameful at all - it was accepted. I wish I had grown up in a family with a healthier view of sex. My dad used to encourage me to be promiscuous - encouraging me to "get em while their young and stupid".

I wouldn't trade the sex I had last night with my wife for any other sex in this world - go ahead - use your imagination. The kinkiest, dirtiest, groupiest, wildest sex with the hottest girls you can think of - I would refuse it. I would refuse it for years if it meant I could have one more loving embrace with my wife. Marriage, done properly, is living your sexuality to the fullest

 

Ever had kids? If you specifically tell them what NOT to do, you can be sure that they want to try it even more. So you are religious, yet still you are on this forum. While I can not say religion harmed you, I can say that it did not help you either, otherwise you would not be here. And unfortunately there is a strong correlation with being fundamentally anti sex and being religious.
The USA are once again the perfect example for this. They claim to be the most christian nation on the planet, that is why they don´t need sex education. Because sex is bad anyway and the only way not to get pregnant or STDs is abstinence. And studies have shown how well this approach works:
http://www.insidermonkey.com/blog/1...s-in-the-developed-world-565721/?singlepage=1[/QUOTE]
-
Your assumption that my religious education and spiritual practice not helping me because I engaged in PMOs very presumtious and incorrect because my relationship with God is what prompted me to begin abstaining. The OP's boyfriend came from a fundamentalist background but he was clearly not anti sex if he was jerking off all the time. I dont doubt that this guy rejected his fundamentalist background but its illogical to blame a religion that does not condone sexual immorality on his PMO when its the secular world view that promotes the anything goes mentality. Youre suggesting that this guy masturbated just to rebel against his parents. Like tits and ass were not part of the equation at all.

 

Seems to me you just want to agitate at this point or you are angry?

The first "study" you posted clearly wasn't science as there was nothing scientific about how he came to his conclusions.

The next study you posted while I don't understand the significance of any of the data shown in the study they claim that it means that people in the past [ although I see no dates] were largely fathered by a small percentage of men. This doesn't correlate with your free love theory or the other study that you posted. This says that if you have 100 women and 100 men that 5 of the men fathered children with 100 of the women and 95 didn't. [ I'm just making up the % as I don't think the study gave actual numbers]

I'm not raising or feeding these women's bastards. I don't intend to be a slave to the 5 men who force me to labor to feed his many wives and children, and it seems unlikely that they would only enslave the men. Apparently the king or slave master only passes his estate to a small % of his children as the majority of them [95%] need to become slaves to raise the other 5%'s children to keep the cycle going.


I'm not sure if you know what "polygamy" is although we are online and you can just google it? It's the practice of having multiple wives. The majority of people are against it, and I didn't know that this discussion was about that.


The last thing I'm jealous of is people having sex. I'm not a teenager and I don't view sex with awe or place much value on it. As for my being against polygamy [ which I am] which I don't think I ever mentioned or addressed in my previous post. I don't think the practice of men having multiple wives is a healthy one although some people do it. I believe Mormons have multiple wives and it's in some weird religious sects. The few people I've met that lived in polygamous unions were, to say the least very weird and off putting and had that cult feel to them and they liked to be isolated from strangers and the outside world.


Sounds like your kids don't listen. I've seen and met plenty of children who do listen to and do what their parents tell them. They often become honor roles students, scientists, and great composers, etc. Of course, sometimes kids have bad parents and they should not listen to them.

Your example of the USA is yet another fallacious example. They have not only had sex education for years they are teaching about homosexuality and transgenderism to children. There is even talk of getting rid of "heteronormality" in preschools. The USA is capitalist and a warmongerer it's anything but Christian which is against greed, the love of money, and war.

 

Lol I´m 23, I´m far from having kids. And well becoming honor roles students, scientists and great composers does not sound like your average kid.

Fully agree with you on this one. But they sure act like it. And I hate hypocrites.

Also does not sound like the average sex education in the USA. I´m from Germany, so I don´t know it first hand, but from what I remember only half of the states have mandatory sex education. Parents can even opt their child out of it.

 

Want a Druid opinion?

 

It sounds alot less to me like a religion thing and alot more like lack of education and good parenting.
With any way to drive guilt (they took the path of least resistance - Christianity) possible.
He didnt get a sex talk or sexual education and was left alone too much.
Why wasn't he being watched or played with?
Or helped with homework?
Friends?
And yet.... Didn't access porn until married to you?
This is all kinds of, what? To me.
Did he only live with you and home with mom and dad?
Cuz if he lived anywhere else I doubt a single guy living with friends would hold onto his mother's religious preferences while in college... Usually that conditioning dips off before coming back, especially in the heights of addiction. (just saying)
So, I have follow up questions, I guess

 

Yeah that sounds like a abuse used to crutch with religion excuse.
Not addicted because of religion.
Addict because of abuse.
Abusers are just using religion.
For him religion is two steps away.
It's cyclical, but it's not directly related to His cause
It's because he never dealt with the abuse problems properly

 

What was the attraction from your end? It seems like that would have been such a mismatch.