The pressure to have ***

[Sunless Sky]

No, I think internet just made it more obviously and things/ideas spread more fast there.
That time we could only guess, not like we discussed it a lot face to face (technically there was internet, but it was different that time).

They tried to add *** everywhere and it worked, so they started to add it more and more and more, and even if it doesn't work anymore, they will still go on, because can't think of nothing else and because it worked once. Maybe because before it had been a kind of a forbidden topic.

Probably **** makes it less desirable irl, at least for some people.

I think, secret agents should care about the missions. Not like anybody's asked me though.

my name means only "for no one", after a song

It is true that excessive **** usage makes real *** look boring by comparison.

 

[Unsigned]

I say, I say, that's what I like to hear boy. Spread dem cheeks. (If it's not obvious, that's foghorn leghorn)

I say...I say... I'm too fast fo' ya' boy!!!

 

[TheSkaFish]

Hey everybody,

I was just wondering about something and I could use other opinions and perspectives, especially western and/or European ones.

I noticed through both the media I consume as well as observations I made and people I have talked to that there is a societal pressure or push for men, and sometimes women as well, to have *** and virginity is looked down upon. This isn't some shocking news or anything, it's just that I come from a different culture and, while that pressure does exist in my culture, it is not the norm.

So, if anyone cares to share their opinion, why does that pressure exist and why is there a strong push from media like music and movies towards that idea? Do you think it is an overall good thing, a bad thing, or are you indifferent? Do you think this is a sign of progress or a sign of the moral degradation of society?

Also, I understand things were different in the old days, at least it wasn't so brazen and out there. So, if there are any older members, how were things back in your time in regards to this topic?

Just something that popped into my mind while I was on break at work.

Thanks for anyone who read the full post.

Take it easy everyone.

I think it's a couple things.

For one thing, acting adult, has always been seen as "cool". And it doesn't get more adult than *** (except perhaps for violence, or business/some kind of serious enterprise involving large amounts of money and risk, where you better know what you're doing).

I think about that sometimes. Why do we shield kids from not only ***, but also violence? I think that we want to keep them ignorant of certain things, from the nature of the world, because there's a certain kind of happiness to innocence - when you can believe in sincerity, and believe the world is not just a shallow, meaningless competition. Both ***, and violence, are competitive and cynical in a way. I miss that happiness through innocence myself. I'm glad I was never in a hurry to grow up, and being the oldest/having younger siblings, I had the perfect reason not to rush.

The other thing about ***, is power. This is where I think a lot of the peer pressure comes into play. If you're a man having *** - getting women to want you - it's because you have the power to make it happen, because women are the choosers. You have the power to get them to choose you. You're someone who gets what they want in life, instead of having to take sh*t from life. And for women, the fact that you're desired gives you power, as well as the power to be the chooser. These things give you power by default.

There was always something that bothered me about attraction, and I could never quite put it to words - but it's this, this imbalance, this unequal power dynamic.

I grew up in the modern world ('90s-'00s) so it was already like this for my whole adolescence. I didn't like it as a kid, it seemed cold, dark, cynical. I was always conflicted - on the one hand I wanted *** with women but on the other hand I also wanted to hang on to my innocence and sincerity. Honestly I'm still somewhat conflicted by it today. Part of me wants to wild out and have *** with women, and part of me wishes I could go back to the way things were. The problem is, already, the world I grew up with is gone, it's changed. I can't go back. I guess my best bet is find a woman that shares my values - someone who remembers how it was, and thinks it was a good thing.

I don't think it's a sign of progress, and I do think it's a sign of moral degradation/regression from being civilized, to base instinct - this brutish kill-or-be-killed competition, that I thought science, technology, and compassion would do away with, but instead that seems to have taken over everything. But I don't see it changing, because again, *** sells.

Just my two cents.

 

[user 191131]

..... there is a societal pressure or push for men, and sometimes women as well, to have *** ....... why does that pressure exist and why is there a strong push from media like music and movies towards that idea?

Because it sells. It has enourmous commercial value.

Do you think it is an overall good thing, a bad thing, or are you indifferent?

A bad thing.

Do you think this is a sign of progress or a sign of the moral degradation of society?

Moral degradation.

... if there are any older members, how were things back in your time in regards to this topic?

It was less obvious.

 

[Sunless Sky]

I think it's a couple things.

For one thing, acting adult, has always been seen as "cool". And it doesn't get more adult than *** (except perhaps for violence, or business/some kind of serious enterprise involving large amounts of money and risk, where you better know what you're doing).

I think about that sometimes. Why do we shield kids from not only ***, but also violence? I think that we want to keep them ignorant of certain things, from the nature of the world, because there's a certain kind of happiness to innocence - when you can believe in sincerity, and believe the world is not just a shallow, meaningless competition. Both ***, and violence, are competitive and cynical in a way. I miss that happiness through innocence myself. I'm glad I was never in a hurry to grow up, and being the oldest/having younger siblings, I had the perfect reason not to rush.

The other thing about ***, is power. This is where I think a lot of the peer pressure comes into play. If you're a man having *** - getting women to want you - it's because you have the power to make it happen, because women are the choosers. You're so powerful, that they choose you. You're someone who gets what they want in life, instead of having to take sh*t from life. And for women, the fact that you're desired gives you power, as well as the power to be the chooser.

I grew up in the modern world ('90s-'00s) so it was already like this for my whole adolescence. I didn't like it as a kid, it seemed cold, dark, cynical. I was always conflicted - on the one hand I wanted *** with women but on the other hand I also wanted to hang on to my innocence and sincerity. Honestly I'm still somewhat conflicted by it today. Part of me wants to wild out and have *** with women, and part of me wishes I could go back to the way things were. The problem is, already, the world I grew up with is gone, it's changed. I can't go back. I guess my best bet is find a woman that shares my values - someone who remembers how it was, and thinks it was a good thing.

I don't think it's a sign of progress, and I do think it's a sign of moral degradation/regression from being civilized, to base instinct - this brutish kill-or-be-killed competition that seems to have taken over everything. But I don't see it changing, because again, *** sells.

Just my two cents.

Thanks for your reply Skafish. Appreciate you.

So, in your opinion, what steps could be taken to reverse the negative effects of this degradation? Should the media push for more conservative values? Should **** be heavily restricted/banned? Should celebrities be required to be more morally upstanding?

 

[ardour]

The horse bolted with the sexual revolution and the availability of the pill. And I don't think most young people today would want what goes with social conservatism, even if they happen to have conservative views around ***. For eg. women being restricted to the domestic sphere, men working in a factory to support three kids by age 22. People want their youth, business makes money off of youth culture, so no, there's no returning to the social conservatism of yesteryear, not in the west, and the same process is inevitable everywhere.

 

[user 191131]

..... in your opinion, what steps could be taken to reverse the negative effects of this degradation?

FIRST: Ban the manufacture and use of Viagra.

SECOND: Concoct a new, highly contagious sexually-transmitted disease that is able to penetrate the materials used in producing condoms.

 

[TheRealCallie]

acting adult

Gotta stop you right there. ADULT means being mature and the people Sunless is talking about...no offense to those that are like this.....are NOT mature. They are shallow and vain and are acting more like children than adults. The entire problem with this world is people worrying too damn much about what is "cool." Because sorry, but people think is "cool," usually isn't.

Concoct a new, highly contagious sexually-transmitted disease that is able to penetrate the materials used in producing condoms.

Not all STDs are prevented with condoms. Only those transmitted though bodily fluids are and even then if the guy has the condom on, it won't stop the woman from spreading them. Also, if they can penetrate latex, they would also penetrate clothing, so anyone passing on the street could get it.....

 

[TheRealCallie]

men working in a factory

In my area, that is primarily where people work, children or no children, man or woman. That is rural America and if they didn't have people in factories or driving truck, no one would have anything. Those aren't worthless jobs, they are vital jobs, even if they aren't fancy or glamorous.

 

[Sunless Sky]

FIRST: Ban the manufacture and use of Viagra.

SECOND: Concoct a new, highly contagious sexually-transmitted disease that is able to penetrate the materials used in producing condoms.

Wait, how would banning viagra do anything? Are you saying it would make have *** harder so people would have less of it? Viagra, when not abused, is very important with people struggling with erectile dysfunction. What about those people?

 

[Sunless Sky]

The horse bolted with the sexual revolution and the availability of the pill. And I don't think most young people today would want what goes with social conservatism, even if they happen to have conservative views around ***. For eg. women being restricted to the domestic sphere, men working in a factory to support three kids by age 22. People want their youth, business makes money off of youth culture, so no, there's no returning to the social conservatism of yesteryear, not in the west, and the same process is inevitable everywhere.

You know, the way you talk here matches your profile picture. Like a hardboiled detective who's seen it all talking to his rookie partner at the bar. You even have the cigarette and everything.

Now regarding businesses benefiting from people wanting to hold on to their youth. There has been a spike in plastic surgeries as of late. I always thought that was kinda silly. There is nothing wrong with getting older and people should just accept that with grace. I see these actresses who have the head of a 60 year old and the body of a 20 year old. I get it, they're actors and actresses so their image is their bread and butter but I believe it inspires the wrong message for the lay people.

 

[4No1]

There is nothing wrong with getting older and people should just accept that with grace.

Nothing wrong but it's very sad.
It feels like you are standing on peak of the hill and your only way from there is down. There is no more dreams, no more tomorrow. For me it's quite complicated to accept it with... just to accept it in general. I had so many dreams, and my hill is so small. But I don't think a plastic surgery can really help, so I'm just very angry about it

 

[Unsigned]

Wait, how would banning viagra do anything?

Insofar as young people, viagra would only be necessary if drugs are being used, like cocaine. Or excessive drinking.

Otherwise, it's only for old guys.
And I think really old guys, like 65+.
I've not needed it...yet...

 

[Sunless Sky]

Insofar as young people, viagra would only be necessary if drugs are being used, like cocaine. Or excessive drinking.

Otherwise, it's only for old guys.
And I think really old guys, like 65+.
I've not needed it...yet...

I would think cocaine would you give you a raging boner. Or is that meth? They are both uppers after all.

 

[user 191131]

I would think cocaine would you give you a raging boner. Or is that meth? They are both uppers after all.

A nice *** on a woman does it for me.

 

[Unsigned]

I would think cocaine would you give you a raging boner. Or is that meth? They are both uppers after all.

Meth.
Coke is the exact opposite effect.

 

[TheSkaFish]

Thanks for your reply Skafish. Appreciate you.

So, in your opinion, what steps could be taken to reverse the negative effects of this degradation? Should the media push for more conservative values? Should **** be heavily restricted/banned? Should celebrities be required to be more morally upstanding?

Hey, thank you too, I'm glad

As for what steps can be taken to reverse the negative effects of this degradation?
I don't know.
What I do feel, though, is that pushing values, and banning things, doesn't really work too well. We had Prohibition after WW1, but it didn't make people stop wanting alcohol. All it did was push it underground, and the market for alcohol that was going to exist anyway, just ended up enriching organized crime. The same thing happened with the War on Drugs - it didn't make people stop wanting drugs, eliminate the demand for drugs. It just enriched the gangs dealing the drugs, which made the gangs more competitive, which ended up increasing the violence and dysfunction.

I feel like banning things like alcohol, drugs, gambling, ****, whatever, won't eliminate demand, but will push them underground and only end up succeeding in turning them into very lucrative revenue streams for criminals.

And celebrities, I don't think requiring them to be upstanding would work, because the celebrities become celebrities, because a lot of people buy into them. If a lot of people buy into anti-social celebrities, that means there's a lot of people out there that approve of that person, and the way they are. It's just like a product - if a lot of people buy a product, that means a lot of people like that product, and want more of it. Celebrities don't become big because nobody likes them. If that was true, they wouldn't blow up to begin with. I think if a lot of people like non-upstanding celebrities, then it says something about society, rather than just that individual celebrity, because a lot of people are, "celebrating", that person. Why do they celebrate the person? Do they celebrate them in spite of their bad traits? Because of them? Why do so many people approve of, and celebrate, a supposedly bad person? They must be reflecting something that a lot of people in society are feeling.

When one party attempts to push values on another, or to ban or restrict things, it often doesn't solve the problem, but just breeds resentment instead. I think the best thing, is to try to get people to see how adopting more conservative values, is in their own best interest. It's hard to force people to act a certain way, but it's a lot easier if you can get them to think it's in their own interest, or that it's their own idea. This is something I've observed in myself, many times.

TL;DR I think the best way to appeal to people, is to appeal to their own self-interest/vanity

 

[TheSkaFish]

Gotta stop you right there. ADULT means being mature and the people Sunless is talking about...no offense to those that are like this.....are NOT mature. They are shallow and vain and are acting more like children than adults. The entire problem with this world is people worrying too **** much about what is "cool." Because sorry, but people think is "cool," usually isn't.

I actually agree 100%. I never thought the people who seemed to be acting overly "mature", were really mature. They just seemed selfish, obnoxious, and overall unpleasant instead.

On the one hand, I couldn't buy into that, but on the other, most of the time I didn't really want to. It seemed cold, mean, backwards.

 

[Sunless Sky]

I feel like banning things like alcohol, drugs, gambling, ****, whatever, won't eliminate demand, but will push them underground and only end up succeeding in turning them into very lucrative revenue streams for criminals.

So, from a safety perspective, should all drugs be made legal so that criminals will have nothing to deal, thereby reducing crime and increasing personal safety?

 

[TheSkaFish]

So, from a safety perspective, should all drugs be made legal so that criminals will have nothing to deal, thereby reducing crime and increasing personal safety?

I don't know. It's hard to say that some drugs should be legal.

But then again, I think we have to take out our bias and look at the evidence.
Haven't they decriminalized drugs in Portugal, and other countries or places in Europe?
And haven't they gotten positive results? I'm not sure.

It would take away a lot of revenue from criminals - it would help to make crime less profitable, too risky for too little return, and give people less of an incentive to get into it.

Also, if drugs were legalized, they could be regulated, which (theoretically) should make them safer for consumers.

I still think that, as with cigarettes, people should be taught not to do certain drugs.
I do believe there are certain drugs that you're just better off abstaining from.
But we know that there will probably always be demand for drugs regardless, so in the interest of safety and saving lives, it would be better if they were regulated, and we know criminals won't do that - they won't do anything to decrease their short-term profits, or put any work into their "product" any more than is necessary to sell it.

Also hopefully it would concentrate people doing dangerous drugs in certain locations. Like it would be better to have a center where, if people HAVE to shoot up, they could do so in a safe environment, using clean equipment and not sharing, being monitored for overdosing, and offered treatment if they desire. Hopefully that would keep people from just shooting up in the street, leaving their dangerous equipment laying around to be hazardous to others, being unsanitary, or just dying in the street. And again hopefully it would reduce overall street crime.

I think that drugs should be seen as a public health issue, rather than a criminal issue.

Dealers, on the other hand, I have less sympathy for.
Your neighborhood weed man, I don't care about that guy. As long as it's just weed or other soft stuff, I don't see it as a problem.
Hard drug dealers though, I would say absolutely are criminals. Them, I would say, really are causing damage to their communities.