Jump to content

Arguing about sex with friend


Lad_Bloche

Recommended Posts

One of my friends and I have talked about this a couple of times. He says that sex and having children is a natural instinct and a want that needs to be fulfilled. I always counter this by saying "I want to buy the 500€ LEGO death star but wants don't need to be fulfilled. Just don't have sex. It's that simple."

He also said that most women who don't have children will end up deeply regretting it when they get older. I counter this by saying "most people end up regretting something, like not going to france, how is not having children any different."

I also think, and my friends disagree, that the amount of children a couple can have should be capped at 1 or 2 (depending on the country) because overpopulation might not be a problem right now but in the future it will be.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I mean I find that a lot of people that sex and having children is something that we have to do because a) we are taught that that is what species do in biology and b) that what people are taught to think they need to do with their life. As far as the women and children subject that's just some deeply heteronormative teaching. Women don't have to have children the same way not everyone needs to have sex. Hopefully with a little more talking with your friend you can help him drift away from what seems to be some pretty strict ideas about gender and sexuality in society. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Lad_Bloche said:

"a want that needs to be fulfilled"

Poor fella sounds confused.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Crazy Cat Lady
53 minutes ago, Lad_Bloche said:

He also said that most women who don't have children will end up deeply regretting it when they get older. I counter this by saying "most people end up regretting something, like not going to france, how is not having children any different." 

I also think, and my friends disagree, that the amount of children a couple can have should be capped at 1 or 2 (depending on the country) because overpopulation might not be a problem right now but in the future it will be. 

I knew what I was 15 that I didn't want kids. I'm almost 46 now and still don't want kids.

 

Overpopulation is a problem now. Wildlife is pushed out of their habitat for us. 😢 (And when there's conflict between the two, of course it's the animals that pay the consequences.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
To Each Their Own
57 minutes ago, Lad_Bloche said:

....

He also said that most women who don't have children will end up deeply regretting it when they get older. I counter this by saying "most people end up regretting something, like not going to france, how is not having children any different."

I also think, and my friends disagree, that the amount of children a couple can have should be capped at 1 or 2 (depending on the country) because overpopulation might not be a problem right now but in the future it will be.

Silly heteronormative dogma.  And how does he explain away all those unwanted kids in orphanages?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a need for SOME people, not all. Your friend just cant generalize well. Like I would regret it more than anything if I never have kids, but I understand why others wouldnt want any. Hell, I dont want any currently. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
FerlynnGoldbeard

This kinda reminds of sheep (among the hundreds of other animals that display non-heterosexual behavior). Several studies have been conducted around sheep that suggests sexuality is biological. They've witnessed sheep display preferences like we humans do. Some male sheep partner themselves with other males for example, and there are also some sheep that they think are asexual (or show asexual characteristics). Pretty sure none of them are having children, at least not their own. This is, of course not the only non human animal that have displayed these behaviors. I remember reading once that some elephants don't have children. It's not that they can't, they just don't try. They just raise the other baby elephants in their herd. 

 

Personally, I don't want children. I've known that from a young age. It's kind of frustrating that people assume that's the norm. I don't know understand what the fuss is about with having your own children or any at all. If I ever did have  a child, I would probably adopt like a 15 year old or something. Or a cat (definitely a cat).

 

Anyway, that's the end of that silly science rant. Take care, friend. 😊

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lad_Bloche said:

He says that sex and having children is a natural instinct and a want that needs to be fulfilled. I always counter this by saying "I want to buy the 500€ LEGO death star but wants don't need to be fulfilled. Just don't have sex. It's that simple."

Whilst I fully agree that for asexuals, sex is not a natural instinct, this is an inane analogy otherwise. A €500 Lego Death Star is not a fundamental component of human psychology. For 99% of us, and to vastly varying degrees of course since we're all differing individuals, our sexuality is a building block of who we are and being able to engage with it in a meaningful way is anywhere from relatively important to absolutely essential to our psychological wellbeing. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. You just gotta trust that that's true even if you don't get it on a personal level.

 

Stuff like this admittedly hits close to home and I find it hard not to get a little riled up at the attitudes and beliefs I see expressed on this site. No, just no. You don't get to tell us that our sexuality is optional. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
To Each Their Own
2 minutes ago, SecretCows said:

 I remember reading once that some elephants don't have children. It's not that they can't, they just don't try. They just raise the other baby elephants in their herd. 

 

Anyway, that's the end of that silly science rant. Take care, friend. 😊

No everyone that doesn’t want kids wants to (or is happy to) raise other peoples kids. I really hate it when people throw this around as the default for people that choose not to have children.  Some us just don’t want to be around kids...end of story. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
FerlynnGoldbeard
11 minutes ago, To Each Their Own said:

No everyone that doesn’t want kids wants to (or is happy to) raise other peoples kids. I really hate it when people throw this around as the default for people that choose not to have children.  Some us just don’t want to be around kids...end of story. 

Sorry, but I think you misunderstood what I said. I didn't mean that people having children or raising other people's children was default or required--only that that is what was observed. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, CBC said:

A €500 Lego Death Star is not a fundamental component of human psychology.

Why do you get to say what isn't a fundamental component to us, yet we can't do the same for you?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Philip027 said:

Why do you get to say what isn't a fundamental component to us, yet we can't do the same for you?

Lego has literally nothing to do with something as central to our psyche as our sexuality. For asexuals, I would say that being free to not engage sexually with others (unless they want to, to have a kid or willingly please a partner or whatever, just as a sexual person can voluntarily choose celibacy if they wish) is fundamental to their psychological wellbeing. Lego toys and innate human sexuality = apples and oranges.

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

Lego has literally nothing to do with something as central to our psyche as our sexuality.

Oh, now you're dictating what's central to my psyche? 😏

 

Don't fixate so much on Legos.  Replace Legos with any other sort of toy or amusement you Just Have To Have, and suddenly you've got something also generally considered "anywhere from relatively important to absolutely essential to our psychological wellbeing" -- you might otherwise classify it as fun.

 

I didn't always get my fun.  Sometimes it was too expensive.  Sometimes there was not enough time for it.  Sometimes I got brushed off, saying I didn't really need that thing that I wanted.  Of course I didn't need it; that's why it's a want.  Shit sucked at the time, but hey, I survived.

 

All I'm wanting to know is that if people are permitted to brush off the things I want on the basis that I don't really need them, what makes you or any other sexual folk think they should somehow be exempt from that?

 

Nobody needs sex to survive any more than a 3 year old whiny kid "needs" his Legos.

 

All in all, the whole "wants that need to be fulfilled" rhetoric is rubbish.  People just need to learn to use the terms properly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think fun and enjoyment are requirements for psychological health of course, yeah, absolutely. We need to engage with the things that make us experience joy and silliness and laughter and excitement and all that good stuff. A particular Lego toy, however, may be the very rough equivalent of a particular sex act that someone enjoys but maybe their partner really really doesn't, so it never happens. If someone can't afford a toy they want but they can engage their playful side some other way, it kinda sucks, but they still experience that fulfilment. They'll likely be ok. If someone doesn't get to engage in a particular sex act that interests them, but they're otherwise able to share their sexuality with others in a meaningful way, they'll likely be ok too.

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

A particular Lego toy, however, may be the very rough equivalent of a particular sex act that someone enjoys but maybe their partner really really doesn't, so it never happens. 

I'm pretty sure the OP wasn't intending for the analogy to go that deep, rather that he just chose a Lego set as his equivalent of "fun" in the same way that I would have said video games.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then it's a poor analogy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah, it's pretty spot on actually.

 

What actually doesn't make any fucking lick of sense, however, is describing something as a "want that needs to be fulfilled"

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will agree with you on that, yes. I get what's being gone for, but it's poor wording. Though something that's a need can also be wanted, so.

 

And I'm never going to claim that someone is going to die from lack of sex obviously, unless we wanted to get less direct and attribute something like suicide related to a failed relationship, in a mentally unstable person, to "lack of sex". You don't directly die from not getting off with someone else, so it's not that type of need.

Link to post
Share on other sites
No longer active
4 hours ago, Lad_Bloche said:

One of my friends and I have talked about this a couple of times. He says that sex and having children is a natural instinct and a want that needs to be fulfilled. I always counter this by saying "I want to buy the 500€ LEGO death star but wants don't need to be fulfilled. Just don't have sex. It's that simple."

He also said that most women who don't have children will end up deeply regretting it when they get older. I counter this by saying "most people end up regretting something, like not going to france, how is not having children any different."

I also think, and my friends disagree, that the amount of children a couple can have should be capped at 1 or 2 (depending on the country) because overpopulation might not be a problem right now but in the future it will be.

I have been having the stupid kid argument for over a decade now, since my husband and I decided definitively that we are not having kids. I have been told by SO many people that it was just a phase and I would get over it. Guess what! I haven't! This article from Time Magazine proves my husband and I are not weirdos.  

 

As for sex and Legos, well I love Legos, but you might try another analogy. Like, for me, having a job that is centered around helping people and making the world a better place fits both the criteria your friend is describing: it's a desire that needs to be fulfilled and I'd deeply regret it when I got older if I hadn't have done it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Pale_red said:

Yeah I mean I find that a lot of people that sex and having children is something that we have to do because a) we are taught that that is what species do in biology and b) that what people are taught to think they need to do with their life. As far as the women and children subject that's just some deeply heteronormative teaching. Women don't have to have children the same way not everyone needs to have sex. Hopefully with a little more talking with your friend you can help him drift away from what seems to be some pretty strict ideas about gender and sexuality in society. 

 

5 hours ago, SecretCows said:

This kinda reminds of sheep (among the hundreds of other animals that display non-heterosexual behavior). Several studies have been conducted around sheep that suggests sexuality is biological. They've witnessed sheep display preferences like we humans do. Some male sheep partner themselves with other males for example, and there are also some sheep that they think are asexual (or show asexual characteristics). Pretty sure none of them are having children, at least not their own. This is, of course not the only non human animal that have displayed these behaviors. I remember reading once that some elephants don't have children. It's not that they can't, they just don't try. They just raise the other baby elephants in their herd. 

 

Personally, I don't want children. I've known that from a young age. It's kind of frustrating that people assume that's the norm. I don't know understand what the fuss is about with having your own children or any at all. If I ever did have  a child, I would probably adopt like a 15 year old or something. Or a cat (definitely a cat).

 

Anyway, that's the end of that silly science rant. Take care, friend. 😊

Hello, a biologist here! :D 

We do have many sexual selection -type of lectures at uni, and what I've learned from them is, (among that there are interesting evolutionary lines born from the preferences of the choosing party) that yes, as a species, the objective is to keep the species alive, but that doesn't mean all individuals of the species need to have as many children as possible. Strictly speaking from a scientific perspective, having individuals that choose partners of the same sex or are not interested in having offspring of their own, increase the quality of the population by having possible fosters for other individuals' offspring in case of them dying or otherwise not being capable of taking care of their young. Also, if an individual has a lot of offspring, it increases the possibility of some of them being homosexual or asexual, because the genetic line is secure, and they increase the survival of the offspring of their siblings. 

In human terms, this doesn't mean everyone must have a kid to raise, be they biological or adopted, but what I'm trying to say is that it's biologically accurate and proven for a part of population of any species to be either homosexual or asexual (not talking about romantic preferences here) and it's not a fluke or abnormal, but just a part of survival as a species. 

 

Okay, so that was my rant about cold science stuff 😅 Personally, I think it's obvious everyone has their own choice in if they want children or not and it's annoying if people try and justify having a lot of "the sex" with science they don't understand. In my own mind, I personally might want children at some point, but would probably prefer adopting over having my own biological children. Also, I might be just as happy with hanging out with my sister's possible future kids, as that seems to be a thing that is going to happen at some point. I'm already pretty happy with my little cousin's son visiting every once in a while! So I don't see why it should be such a huge regret to not have your own children. :D 

Link to post
Share on other sites
everywhere and nowhere
7 hours ago, Crazy Cat Lady said:

I knew what I was 15 that I didn't want kids. I'm almost 46 now and still don't want kids.

 

Overpopulation is a problem now. Wildlife is pushed out of their habitat for us. 😢 (And when there's conflict between the two, of course it's the animals that pay the consequences.)

I was 5 when I first decided that I won't have children. Now I'm 37 years old and don't recall having ever desired to have children even for a minute. Childbirth feels ultra-terrifying for me (that was the primary reason for my decision at the age of 5, learning about human reproduction freaked me out and something inside me almost screamed: "No!!! I don't want my body to be tortured like this!"), much more than sex - and I'm very much sex-averse, my feelings are stronger than just "discomfort".

Link to post
Share on other sites
Anthracite_Impreza

Everyone has missed the most fundamental point here - what the fuck does it have to do with him anyway?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some people regret having kids when their kids turn out rotten and selfish, despite their efforts to bring them up right, also.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Fluffy Femme Guy
18 hours ago, Nowhere Girl said:

"No!!! I don't want my body to be tortured like this!"

I'm surprised this isn't more common among females.

Link to post
Share on other sites
everywhere and nowhere
3 hours ago, Fluffy Femme Guy said:

I'm surprised this isn't more common among females.

Me too, to be honest. I deeply want to respect other people's feelings, no matter how different they are from mine - but I really can't wrap my head around this: how could anyone desire to give birth... To me it's one of the most terrifying things possible.

Btw, I believe that surrogacy should be banned because it equals abuse - but I absolutely support development of an artificial womb.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Nowhere Girl said:

Btw, I believe that surrogacy should be banned because it equals abuse 

Uhh, mind explaining how?  For some people this is the only way they can have kids

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seconding Philip on that question...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Fluffy Femme Guy
5 hours ago, Nowhere Girl said:

Btw, I believe that surrogacy should be banned because it equals abuse

I'm fine with surrogacy as long as there is consent from all involved
Not trying to argue or anything like that, just my opinion.
 

 

5 hours ago, Nowhere Girl said:

I absolutely support development of an artificial womb.

I somewhat agree. Pregnancy and childbirth is actually a *very* dangerous process for many females.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fluffy Femme Guy said:

I'm fine with surrogacy as long as there is consent from all involved

Is it ever the case that there isn't consent from all involved? I'm not sure you call it 'surrogacy' if there isn't...

Link to post
Share on other sites
everywhere and nowhere
2 hours ago, Philip027 said:

Uhh, mind explaining how?  For some people this is the only way they can have kids

There's no such thing as a right to have children at any price. There is also adoption. Surrogacy is dangerous, it leaves women extremely vulnerable - often placed under severe restrictions, abused... What is consent when almost all surrogates are acting under financial pressure? These are very poor women.

I just believe that pregnancy cannot be made into a commodity.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...