Jump to content
Telecaster68

List different kinds of sex (All the TMI, hopefully...)

Recommended Posts

Jade Cross
9 hours ago, Telecaster68 said:

Clearly there are STDs, and it's sensible to take precautions, but it often seems to me that the dangers are overplayed by asexuals. Most sex doesn't result in an STD, and like any risk, the likelihood and consequences need to be managed rather than become a sole cause for never doing something when the chances of an adverse outcome are fairly low, and that outcome itself isn't necessarily that bad, and generally not irrecoverable.

Dont most people usually go in regardless of the risks? If a sexual has the need for sex, aside from some severe cases, wouldnt most at the very least try sex?

 

As for me, may being an ace is the reason but I worked at a lab for some time and saw more than my share of STD cases so I dont believe I would be to prone to trying sex even if my orientation were otherwise.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NoLongerActive1234
5 minutes ago, Homer said:

That's not the point.

 

drei-aepfel-341x256.jpg

 

This is a picture of three apples. And while humans came up with the idea of pictures, calling these things "apples" and counting to three, this still is a picture of three apples, very objectively. It is not my personal opinion, but an objective definition.

Well only if you agree to the basic definition of that that is an apple. And no people aren't forced to have to view that as an apple if they don't want to lol. What if you grew up in a parallell world let's say where instead of having those things be called apples they were in fact called bladebloblees. If you went to visit that world it could still be apples to you and why would that not be perfectly fine for you to think of them as such. It wouldn't mean that you would propagate that the rest of that word had to change how they saw it. You'd probably get fed up with anyone trying to assimilate you into changing how you personally think of it though. And even in this comparison it doesn't quite explain because a definition or word used for oneself as a person is a lot more subjective and personal than objects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NoLongerActive1234
11 minutes ago, Homer said:

That's not the point.

 

drei-aepfel-341x256.jpg

 

This is a picture of three apples. And while humans came up with the idea of pictures, calling these things "apples" and counting to three, this still is a picture of three apples, very objectively. It is not my personal opinion, but an objective definition.

You can tell me that all you want I still don't see it the same way you do. It is just what you think, there is no universal truth that everyone must abide to it unless it starts breaking laws. The concept is made by humans, so it can also be altered by humans. Unless you wish to change that by force or creating laws against it I am saying it is unnecessary, pointless and possibly damaging to point fingers at others for not seeing it in the same way for them personally.  It doesn't matter how logic you might think it to be that that is an apple. If it has a different subjective meaning to me it is within my power to change it for myself and me alone. It comes down to this: One group of people getting annoyed about other people not wanting to acknowledge something in the same way they do. I'm trying to say that one can just leave it be and accept a different perspective. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Homer
19 minutes ago, MistySpring said:

Well only if you agree to the basic definition of that that is an apple.

That's what language is about. That's the very core of it. People communicate through words they know other people understand as just that. I mean, you just replied to my post and I can tell that it relates to my post and I get what you're trying to say. It works :)

 

OTOH, the analogy of apples / bladeblobblees doesn't work at all. It's just a different language. "Three apples" in German is "drei Äpfel". Now you can ask me to find a picture of "drei Äpfel" or "three apples" and I might show you the exact same picture. It doesn't matter what you call it. All that matters is that people agree on the concept of counting and what apples are - which, again, is just how language works. You can call this a picture of garbl bnffhat 9kk if you like, nobody's going to stop you - but nobody will understand you either.

 

If words mean whatever I as an individual want them to mean, they lose their purpose.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NoLongerActive1234
Just now, Homer said:

That's what language is about. That's the very core of it. People communicate through words they know other people understand as just that. I mean, you just replied to my post and I can tell that it relates to my post and I get what you're trying to say. It works :)

 

OTOH, the analogy of apples / bladeblobblees doesn't work at all. It's just a different language. "Three apples" in German is "drei Äpfel". Now you can ask me to find a picture of "drei Äpfel" or "three apples" and I might show you the exact same picture. It doesn't matter what you call it. All that matters is that people agree on the concept of counting and what apples are - which, again, is just how language works. You can call this a picture of garbl bnffhat 9kk if you like, nobody's going to stop you - but nobody will understand you either.

 

If words mean whatever we as an individual want them to mean, they lose their purpose.

It is not black and white like that, I totally disagree. One can still communicate with the chosen language and still decide to have words or definitions mean something to yourself personally when it does not affect anyone else negatively or is preaching. Stepping away from that does not mean the debolishment of language. And even if let's say it were, what's to say it isn't just evolving language and words? How do you know that isn't what it is leading towards. It isn't that dramatic, and the meaning of words don't go lost because people have subjective personal meanings attached to them. It really is not a crisis. And even if I believed that they would lose their meaning I do not care...it matters more to me that people have the opportunity to use their own mind and make things up for themselves as they see fit and not be forced into assimilation if they do not wish to. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Homer
9 hours ago, MistySpring said:

One can still communicate with the chosen language and still decide to have words or definitions mean something to yourself personally when it does not affect anyone else negatively or is preaching.

That's just not how language works. You can have a personal "meaning" to words and phrases in addition to the "official one" - peer groups do that all the time and it's basically how inside jokes work... but.

 

If a recipe says:

 

500ml of water

2 tablespoons of milk

3 eggs

 

and you make it

 

thisbridgestone-s322-77t-tt-165-65-r13-tubet, this chicken_1f414.png and this matches.pngbecause that's what you personally want these words to mean, where is that going to get you? You cook this recipe for yourself, so nobody else is harmed or preached.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NoLongerActive1234
Just now, Homer said:

That's just not how language works. You can have a personal "meaning" to words and phrases in addition to the "official one" - peer groups do that all the time and it's basically how inside jokes work

 

If a recipe says:

 

500ml of water

2 tablespoons of milk

3 eggs

 

and you make it

 

thisbridgestone-s322-77t-tt-165-65-r13-tubet, this chicken_1f414.png and this matches.pngbecause that's what you personally want these words to mean, where is that going to get you?

We'll have to agree to disagree. I understand what you're saying but I have a different perspective. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Homer

It's not a matter of perspective - we're talking about completely different things.

 

Of course the concept of words is man-made. Mankind came up with the idea of calling these things tyre, chicken and padlock. There could just as well have been completely different words for any of those. That's what I believe your point basically is and I have no doubt about that. Yet in order for all this to work, people need to agree on what things mean. How else do you think would we be able to communicate right now if there was absolutely no certainity in the way I'd have to interpret the way you arrange these signs that appear on my laptop screen?

 

Receipts, speed limits, sports results, laws... the list is endless. Sports results are actually great to illustrate what I'm saying. Let's make up a basketball result.

 

Objective: Warriors at Knicks 104-95.

Subjective I: Warriors won away 104-95

Subjective II: Knicks lost at home 95-104.

 

No matter which of these subjective approaches you take, either one leads to the objective "Warriors at Knicks 104-95".

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NoLongerActive1234
15 minutes ago, Homer said:

It's not a matter of perspective - we're talking about completely different things.

 

Of course the concept of words is man-made. Mankind came up with the idea of calling these things tyre, chicken and padlock. There could just as well have been completely different words for any of those. That's what I believe your point basically is and I have no doubt about that. Yet in order for all this to work, people need to agree on what things mean. How else do you think would we be able to communicate right now if there was absolutely no certainity in the way I'd have to interpret the way you arrange these signs that appear on my laptop screen?

 

Receipts, speed limits, sports results, laws... the list is endless. Sports results are actually great to illustrate what I'm saying. Let's make up a basketball result.

 

Objective: Warriors at Knicks 104-95.

Subjective I: Warriors won away 104-95

Subjective II: Knicks lost at home 95-104.

 

No matter which of these subjective approaches you take, either one leads to the objective "Warriors at Knicks 104-95".

Well if some people use words in differnt meanings than the general consensus like I said I highly doubt the established words and communication would fall apart. And people do not have to agree to abide by these communicative or language rules if they really did not want to unless by law or forced to, no matter if we imagine an utter chaos where no one communicated via language. There is nothing that says every human being has to agree to what each word means or what language is. Just as how no one has to agree to abide by any religion or philosophy. And again I care not if I'd not understand any of what you just said...I believe in people using their own minds and making up what they think. Sure they can be presented with what the general view is or what the unpopular view is but they get to decide and there is no need to push anyone to change their mind if they know what they think and it won't change. Maybe it would change at some point, their call, but it is up to them and has nothing to do with anyone else. 

I'd rather have this imagined chaos and world falling apart from language and words vanishing (super likely...) instead of pushing people to think how you think when clearly they have decided for themselves. If it happens so be it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Redshirt Jim
6 minutes ago, MistySpring said:

Well if some people use words in differnt meanings than the general consensus like I said I highly doubt the established words and communication would fall apart. And people do not have to agree to abide by these communicative or language rules if they really did not want to unless by law or forced to, no matter if we imagine an utter chaos where no one communicated via language. There is nothing that says every human being has to agree to what each word means or what language is. Just as how no one has to agree to abide by any religion or philosophy. And again I care not if I'd not understand any of what you just said...I believe in people using their own minds and making up what they think. Sure they can be presented with what the general view is or what the unpopular view is but they get to decide and there is no need to push anyone to change their mind if they know what they think and it won't change. Maybe it would change at some point, their call, but it is up to them and has nothing to do with anyone else. 

The problem starts when the other human has problem, and ask for help. Cooperation requires understanding. And if the human insist on their own defintion while asking help, it'd be difficult for others to help. 

 

That happens on left handed/right handed. Left handed is 10% because it needs to balance the advantage of competitiveness and disadvantage in cooperation. A bit far, but I think it tpuch the subject matter. 

 

🌻🔥LLAP🔥🌻

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Homer
4 minutes ago, MistySpring said:

Well if some people use words in differnt meanings than the general consensus like I said I highly doubt the established words and communication would fall apart.

Your point was that

 

1 hour ago, MistySpring said:

Well only if you agree to the basic definition of that that is an apple. And no people aren't forced to have to view that as an apple if they don't want to lol.

which means that everyone can interpret any word in any way they like. If that's not complete abolishment of the idea of language as a tool of communication, I don't know what is.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NoLongerActive1234
Just now, Homer said:
1 minute ago, Redshirt Jim said:

The problem starts when the other human has problem, and ask for help. Cooperation requires understanding. And if the human insist on their own defintion while asking help, it'd be difficult for others to help. 

 

That happens on left handed/right handed. Left handed is 10% because it needs to balance the advantage of competitiveness and disadvantage in cooperation. A bit far, but I think it tpuch the subject matter. 

 

🌻🔥LLAP🔥🌻

 

1 minute ago, Homer said:

Your point was that

 

which means that everyone can interpret any word in any way they like. If that's not complete abolishment of the idea of language as a tool of communication, I don't know what is.

My response works for both of your posts. I do not care about the issues it could possibly create...but I still do not see this being a problem at all to that magnitude that you do. 
So yeah Homer the idea of language as a tool of communication is not more important to me than people getting to have the facts and ideas presented to them and then for them to make up their own mind and have their final decision be respected no matter what they pick and to not have anything else pushed upon them when they won't change their mind anyhow. Unless it actually goes against laws (those shared consensus that humans have actually truly decided to abide by or suffer the official consequences). It is entirely pointless. I am all in on this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Redshirt Jim
7 minutes ago, MistySpring said:

My response works for both of your posts. I do not care about the issues it could possibly create...but I still do not see this being a problem at all to that magnitude that you do. 

Help varies in magnitude. Asking for water is asking for help. If for some reason you are incapable of achieving on your own, but you want the water, isn't better to ask for help?

7 minutes ago, MistySpring said:

So yeah Homer the idea of language as a tool of communication is not more important to me than people getting to have the facts and ideas presented to them and then for them to make up their own mind and have their final decision be respected no matter what they pick and to not have anything else pushed upon them when they won't change their mind anyhow.

It is not about respect. It is about understanding communication. Respect and understanding differ. 

7 minutes ago, MistySpring said:

Unless it actually goes against laws (those shared consensus that humans have actually truly decided to abide by or suffer the official consequences). It is entirely pointless. I am all in on this. 

Laws changes over political circumstances. Desicion should have based on ethics, fundamental philsophy of good and bad behaviour. What is ethical is more improtant than law at times. Don't you agree?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NoLongerActive1234
1 minute ago, Redshirt Jim said:

Help varies in magnitude. Asking for water is asking for help. If for some reason you are incapable of achieving on your own, but you want the water, isn't better to ask for help?

That doesn't have anything to do with what I am talking about. Of course it is good to ask for help. What I am saying is that I believe more in people always getting to decide on their own. Outsideofthebox thinking is not wrong when it is not hurting anyone. It may just be progressive and a sign of good change, not bad.

1 minute ago, Redshirt Jim said:

It is not about respect. It is about understanding communication. Respect and understanding differ. 

Laws changes over political circumstances. Desicion should have based on ethics, fundamental philsophy of good and bad behaviour. What is ethical is more improtant than law at times. Don't you agree?

No because if someone else understands communication to be seen differently there is no way you are going to slam your way into their mind if they think of it differently. Communication in its foundation does not have to be universal or to not be questioned or used differently. Free will is more important, getting to see the world and deciding for yourself is what is important and it goes for this topic as well. I do agree about that sometimes ethics and morals one would want to be followed when the law doesn't back that up but there it is still up to the person deciding. There is a key difference there too though which is huge. What you talk of as far as good or bad behavior.....that will affect another human being negatively, to harm them. Using words in your own way does not do that and is a whole different thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Philip027
Quote

It is not black and white like that, I totally disagree. One can still communicate with the chosen language and still decide to have words or definitions mean something to yourself personally when it does not affect anyone else negatively or is preaching.

Someone attempting to call the picture "four oranges" or whatever would affect me with their stupidity.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Redshirt Jim
17 minutes ago, MistySpring said:

That doesn't have anything to do with what I am talking about. Of course it is good to ask for help.

And how do you propose asking without communication?

Quote

What I am saying is that I believe more in people always getting to decide on their own.

They do. But there are consequences of said choices. Example are what I amd Homer listed above.

Quote

Outsideofthebox thinking is not wrong when it is not hurting anyone.

I agree. But it has consequences. 

Quote

It may just be progressive and a sign of good change, not bad.

It is, but again, consequences. 

Quote

No because if someone else understands communication to be seen differently there is no way you are going to slam your way into their mind if they think of it differently.

But it is not how I want it either. 

And yes, you can choose. But there are consequences of that choice.

Quote

Communication in its foundation does not have to be universal or to not be questioned or used differently.

Uhm......I am sorry. But this is confusing. Universal part, you can question and use it differently but universal part is essential.

Quote

Free will is more important, getting to see the world and deciding for yourself is what is important and it goes for this topic as well. I do agree about that sometimes ethics and morals one would want to be followed when the law doesn't back that up but there it is still up to the person deciding. There is a key difference there too though which is huge. What you talk of as far as good or bad behavior.....that will affect another human being negatively, to harm them. Using words in your own way does not do that and is a whole different thing.

No. Your own way of interperting words can harm others regardless of your intention. It can. I am living proof of it. And I believe there are more than enough others as evidence. I did it, and have it did it on me. I urge you to not do the same mistake I made. 

🌻🔥Live Long and Prosper🔥🌻

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NoLongerActive1234

Fine well scratch what I said about it never being possible to cause harm. If I look at it as a scale then what tips over more as far as damaing? Well my opinion is that losing to respect people's final decision to use a word differently in their own personal way, by telling them not to use it over and over, when it isn't causing another person harm is more important. Losing it is more harmful than the harm done to you when you get annoyed by someone using it differently @Philip027 

 

@Redshirt Jim I have a huge suspicion that we are talking about different things. I don't know your personal story. And my views on this matter does not reflect a personal agenda of defense of using a word in my own way or something. Regardless you live long and prosper as well! :):cake:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Philip027

There's things that are potentially debatable (example: whether or not asexuality is a sexual orientation) and there's things that are not (example: that picture contains three apples)

 

"Using a word differently" is (potentially) fine in a former example.

 

Doing so with a latter example isn't a sign of your creative individuality; it's just you being wrong.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Homer

There's actually a pretty interesting philosophical spin to it. While we might agree that the picture shows three apples, I can never be entirely certain that you see the same thing that I do. It doesn't make any practical difference though, since we were taught to interpret this picture as "three apples".

 

Also - even if I want to think "outside the box" on purpose, I have to be aware of the meaning of the words "think", "outside" and "box" and the concept behind it. There HAS to be something we agree on.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GLRDT
13 hours ago, NoLongerActive1234 said:

You can tell me that all you want I still don't see it the same way you do. It is just what you think, there is no universal truth that everyone must abide to it unless it starts breaking laws. The concept is made by humans, so it can also be altered by humans. Unless you wish to change that by force or creating laws against it I am saying it is unnecessary, pointless and possibly damaging to point fingers at others for not seeing it in the same way for them personally.  It doesn't matter how logic you might think it to be that that is an apple. If it has a different subjective meaning to me it is within my power to change it for myself and me alone. It comes down to this: One group of people getting annoyed about other people not wanting to acknowledge something in the same way they do. I'm trying to say that one can just leave it be and accept a different perspective. 

I feel like you're being very philosophical. Which is cool to think about things in new ways. However I feel for people here in this thread most don't have that same goal they are going for and that's why they are debating with you. If you made a thread about the philosophy of what is truth and what does it mean, I think that would be cool thread to read.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GLRDT
12 hours ago, NoLongerActive1234 said:

Well if some people use words in differnt meanings than the general consensus like I said I highly doubt the established words and communication would fall apart. And people do not have to agree to abide by these communicative or language rules if they really did not want to unless by law or forced to, no matter if we imagine an utter chaos where no one communicated via language. There is nothing that says every human being has to agree to what each word means or what language is. Just as how no one has to agree to abide by any religion or philosophy. And again I care not if I'd not understand any of what you just said...I believe in people using their own minds and making up what they think. Sure they can be presented with what the general view is or what the unpopular view is but they get to decide and there is no need to push anyone to change their mind if they know what they think and it won't change. Maybe it would change at some point, their call, but it is up to them and has nothing to do with anyone else. 

I'd rather have this imagined chaos and world falling apart from language and words vanishing (super likely...) instead of pushing people to think how you think when clearly they have decided for themselves. If it happens so be it.

I agree with you and also everyone else on the other side. I think however your point of view definitely has a case by case approach of when to use your own meanings and what's societally acceptable depending on what is important for you to get across. I also think it is important to have certain words that mean very similar or the same things to each person as far as understanding each other. If you have a personal meaning attached as well or a different word to describe it then good for you! However, I think it wouldn't be a good idea to only recognize your meaning as what universal truth is ( which I don't think you're making that argument). I vote for personal meanings and words and knowing when to use them while still being aware how to interact in society if you so choose in a way that is understandable.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GLRDT
17 hours ago, NoLongerActive1234 said:

My response works for both of your posts. I do not care about the issues it could possibly create...but I still do not see this being a problem at all to that magnitude that you do. 
So yeah Homer the idea of language as a tool of communication is not more important to me than people getting to have the facts and ideas presented to them and then for them to make up their own mind and have their final decision be respected no matter what they pick and to not have anything else pushed upon them when they won't change their mind anyhow. Unless it actually goes against laws (those shared consensus that humans have actually truly decided to abide by or suffer the official consequences). It is entirely pointless. I am all in on this. 

So are you saying you feel it's more important for someone to be able to understand and communicate with themselves than with others? I'm want to understand your perspective.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Homer

I once had a boss who said "The truth isn't what person A says, but what person B understands." Biggest pile of horsepoop he could possibly have come up with. Needless to say, we didn't get along that well :D

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chimeric
3 minutes ago, Homer said:

I once had a boss who said "The truth isn't what person A says, but what person B understands." Biggest pile of horsepoop he could possibly have come up with. Needless to say, we didn't get along that well :D

They teach a diluted version of this in business management courses.  Usually the next part of the lesson is "make sure you're communicating effectively, so everyone is on the same page," but it sounds like your boss may have missed that part of the lesson. :lol:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Snao Cone

Or smoked a lot of weed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
9 hours ago, Homer said:

I once had a boss who said "The truth isn't what person A says, but what person B understands." Biggest pile of horsepoop he could possibly have come up with. Needless to say, we didn't get along that well :D

In which case, it's objectively true that he's full of crap.... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
roland.o
9 hours ago, Homer said:

"The truth isn't what person A says, but what person B understands."

Truth is a three-edged sword. (Babylon 5)

 

When communicating with someone, it's important to be aware of the other's filters. Everyone has filters, which might cause them to understand something else than what's intended, or to ignore what's being said. But calling that "truth" is ludicrous.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Philip027
Quote

I once had a boss who said "The truth isn't what person A says, but what person B understands." Biggest pile of horsepoop he could possibly have come up with. Needless to say, we didn't get along that well :D

You're probably interpreting it a little too literally.  (I mean, if we really want to get technical, neither of those is the "truth" -- the truth is C: what actually happened)

 

It's just a fancy ass philosophical sounding way of saying "how you communicate matters if you don't want to get misread" which is absolutely true.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
praetorius

to provide a space for the off-topic but interesting questions on the nature of truth, I have created a thread for your enjoyment and edification: 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jade Cross

I believe this thread is an accurate representation of how the issues will remain by and large.

 

Unless an astronomical attemp is make to regulate all form of media and their depcitions on sex as well as another enourmous amount of effort is made to correctly instruct people on sex, which we all know is not going to happen; this problem will persist on and on. Id say let it die.

 

Whoever wants to understand their partner or sex will make the effort and eventually reach the conclusion that its an individual experience and noone will ever be able to make a unversal rule.

 

All in all, I would say that the attitude that culd be had towards sex is: curious? Go and try it. Liked it? Do it again. Didnt like it? Its not an obligation so go and find something else to do. Someone tries to tell you that it should/must be done? Tell them to f**k off. The world isnt going to die out just because someone doesnt want to have sex.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...