C&H sex discussion thread

KnifeWRENCH

Insect Overlord wrote: »

How many posters here have access to the S&S forum?

I used to.

But now I'm modless AND sexless on here. YAY! \o/

randylonghorn

Insect Overlord wrote: »

How many posters here have access to the S&S forum?

I do.

@ Knifey

Banjo Fella

Noel2k9 wrote: »

It's not possible for two fertile women to recreate.

Challenge accepted, anyone?

Actually, it is kind of sort of technically possible. Not directly, but - if I'm remembering what I read in NewScientist correctly - it could be if you were to engineer some male gametes from one of the women's stem cells. Provided people don't get too huffy about the "sanctity of motherhood being defiled noes" or somesuch, it should eventually be possible. T'would be really cool!

Craguls

Also re: the whole same sex in vitro reproduction it's something that could in theory be done within the next ten years.

Recently it's been possible to reverse engineer chromosomes from two male XY mice to produce crossovers of XO, XX(introduced from XO manipulations) and XY mice; which have been able to recombinate meitoically to allow for genetic crossover, thus inheritance between both fathers. Sexual reversal and sexual behaviors (and by extent determination) is actually less complex than you would probably believe in some organisms and is still an active area of research.

If you'd like to read more look up about the following genes in Drosophilia; Sxl, Dne, Fru.

illiop

I used to think sex was just intercourse. But then I started thinking about it. There's lesbian sex, and even gay men; I mean, yeah it's penetration or whatever but surely "sexual intercourse" as a scientific term requires boy parts and girl parts? But on the other hand if straight people did not have intercourse (dear god, I hate that word) then I certainly wouldn't count it as sex, as such.

...But then again it kind of is sex in a way. Agh, I don't know this is a confusing topic. Perhaps the definition of sex (in the anthropological sense) just differs depending on the people who are doing it?

Chuchoter

Its only sex if you can reproduce is an absolutely retarded definition of sex and tbh its actually kind of offensive. Obviously, there is sex for reproduction, thats a biological function but thats not really whats being discussed is it? Lesbian sex is a thing. Just because theres no penis involved doesn't mean its not a thing.

Also, as we're here, tribadism doesn't really exist a huge amount outside of Mr Garrison on South Park, just to let you guys know.;)

Grindylow

Sorry, I meant to say that I was stating the biological definition of sex.

Sure you can call any sexual contact sex depending on how you view it, but it mainly all comes back to biology

Chuchoter

Why are we discussing a biological definition at all then?

Grindylow

Because it's the real definition..

Sure I can say 'possible' means never going to happen, but it doesn't make it true. I'd look it up in a dictionary for the true meaning.

Likewise, I can say sex involves holding hands, so I'll look up the definition.

almostnever

Yeah, but specifying that you're going by the biological definition of sex implies that there are equally valid alternative definitions not entirely based on biology. If sex between two women isn't sex, then that would mean that a gay woman who exclusively slept with other women in her lifetime would always remain a virgin, that just doesn't make sense to me.

illiop

Noel2k9 wrote: »

Because it's the real definition..

Sure I can say 'possible' means never going to happen, but it doesn't make it true. I'd look it up in a dictionary for the true meaning.

Likewise, I can say sex involves holding hands, so I'll look up the definition.

Yeah but that's only what it means in the biological sense. Not necessarily the social or anthropological definition. Just like organic means something different in agriculture than biology or chemistry, neither of them are "wrong".

Besides language adapts to the world. Our sex-lives have changed drastically in the last 50 years or so, perhaps our language should too.

Davidius

What one classifies as sex in an informal context is entirely arbitrary. If you want to come up with a proper, formal yet non-biological definition then you're going to have to have to go to the finer level and see what basic points you agree upon in order to create something sufficient.

You could go with some general definition such as any activity between two (or more) people that involves the stimulation of the penis, vagina, breasts or anus for the purposes of pleasure. Of course then you'll have people complaining about it being not general enough, too general or that it simply doesn't fit.

It doesn't really matter that much, you'd want to be needlessly picky to say that a woman who's only ever had sexual contact with a woman is a virgin. I wouldn't worry too much about any paradox that might arise from using a flimsy definition in a colloquial context because it's not all that important.

Craguls

Noel2k9 wrote: »

Because it's the real definition..

The "biological definition" you quoted is the definition of gametic sex. Which would describe sex for reproductive purposes. Sexual intercourse, however would fit the definition that most people are looking for;

wiki definition wrote:

Sexual intercourse, also known as copulation or coitus, commonly refers to the act in which the male reproductive organ enters the female reproductive tract.[1][2] The two entities may be of opposite sexes, or they may be hermaphroditic, as is the case with snails. The definition may additionally include penetrative sexual acts between same-sex pairings, such oral intercourse, anal intercourse, and fingering, which are also commonly practiced by heterosexual couples.[2]

Grindylow

Craguls wrote: »

The "biological definition" you quoted is the definition of gametic sex. Which would describe sex for reproductive purposes. Sexual intercourse, however would fit the definition that most people are looking for;

But sexual intercourse still won't define female sexual contact. Females can't engage in "copulation"...

Ah edit, I just saw the bit on the end there..

Insect Overlord

Noel2k9 wrote: »

But sexual intercourse still won't define female sexual contact. Females can't engage in "copulation"...

Did you stop reading the definition after the first sentence?

Jamie Starr

I don't know about anyone else, but I can make women pregnant just by looking at them.

Grindylow

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Did you stop reading the definition after the first sentence?

Yeah I forgot to but then I wrote in the edit as soon as I did. My bad.

Banjo Fella

It's just semantics, anyway. The female-female type thingy is undoubtedly expressing the same thing between those two people, regardless of what definition you use to encapsulate it.

Insect Overlord

Agnostic Mantis wrote: »

I don't know about anyone else, but I can make women pregnant just by looking at them.

"My rhymes are so potent that in this small segment
I made all of the ladies in the area pregnant!" :cool:

SarahBeep!

Noel2k9 wrote: »

Because it's the real definition..

The meaning of words changes though. What did the word gay mean 80 years ago? What does it mean now?

Salty

Insect Overlord wrote: »

How many posters here have access to the S&S forum?

Nope! :pac::P

Insect Overlord

_meehan_ wrote: »

Nope! :pac::P

It's been dead for 3 years now anyway! tLL, tGC and this place have taken over.

Healium

Insect Overlord wrote: »

It's been dead for 3 years now anyway! tLL, tGC and this place have taken over.

Defo not becoming a subscriber now

Insect Overlord

Healium wrote: »

Defo not becoming a subscriber now

Being a mod is way cooler anyway. :pac:

Not sure if you've been following the FeedForward forum or not, but plans have been in the pipe-line for a new and improved S&S forum for a long time now.

Midnight_EG

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Being a mod is way cooler anyway. :pac:

Not sure if you've been following the FeedForward forum or not, but plans have been in the pipe-line for a new and improved S&S forum for a long time now.

S&S has some stamina :P

Insect Overlord

Midnight_EG wrote: »

S&S has some stamina :P

It's running out of patience though!

It used to be a much busier forum, up to about a year before I first got access.
It seems to have faltered after tLL, tGC and then C&H were opened up. A lot of threads that would have been moved on sight once upon a time are getting a much better airing in non-private forums now. The policy of reporting anything to do with the discussion of sex was way too strict though.

Healium

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Being a mod is way cooler anyway. :pac:

Not sure if you've been following the FeedForward forum or not, but plans have been in the pipe-line for a new and improved S&S forum for a long time now.

Never heard of that forum. Ever.

Is this some ninja mod forum?

Pigwidgeon

Healium wrote: »

Never heard of that forum. Ever.

Is this some ninja mod forum?

It's a private forum that subscribers and mods get access to.

shadowninty

Craguls wrote: »

Recently it's been possible to reverse engineer chromosomes from two male XY mice to produce crossovers of XO, XX(introduced from XO manipulations) and XY mice; which have been able to recombinate meitoically to allow for genetic crossover, thus inheritance between both fathers.

:eek:

UrbanSea

Must say I was disappointed with the lack of action over there when I subscribed.

Pardon the pun.

Salty

daviekelly123 wrote: »

no problem :L i guess alot of us will be losin our virginity this summer

^^Just came across the above in the LC forum.

I haven't a clue if this has been discussed or not, but, do people place importance on losing their virginity before going to college?

amacachi

Only the heathens.

Grindylow

Virgins for life to keep yourself pure and not infected tbh

Lawliet

_meehan_ wrote: »

I haven't a clue if this has been discussed or not, but, do people place importance on losing their virginity before going to college?

That's kind of a vague question, do you mean do people in general think it's important or do people personally thinks it's important?

Salty

Lawliet wrote: »

That's kind of a vague question, do you mean do people in general think it's important or do people personally thinks it's important?

Sorry:o

We'll go with personally!

amacachi

If someone's planning to sleep around as much as possible it may be a good idea to get some practice beforehand.

Salty

I just get the feeling that it's considered embarrassing by some to not have shed the v card before college.

amacachi

Depends on the person. If one feels that they're going to let it annoy them or feel like they're missing out then that's them.

LoonyLovegood

I wouldn't see it as something I HAVE to do before college. If I do, yeah, grand, but I won't be upset if I don't.

I'd prefer to be in a longterm relationship with someone I trust before giving up my v-card

degausserxo

Here. That Girls' Guide to 21st Century Sex on TV3 was absolute FILTH

shadowninty

I heard too much on IRC alright :rolleyes:

Insect Overlord

degausserxo wrote: »

Here. That Girls' Guide to 21st Century Sex on TV3 was absolute FILTH

Is that still on?! I saw half an episode one night last month. Graphic stuff!

Konata

I was sitting in our living room one day, on my laptop, totally engrossed when it came on on TV. I genuinely didn't notice till my Dad walked in, stopped and exclaimed "WHAT are you watching?!".

I looked up to see 2 people... going at it... quite vigorously >_> That particular scene was no different from porn, you shoulda seen the look on my Dad's face :P

shadowninty

I heard too much on IRC alright :rolleyes:

Insect Overlord

shadowninty wrote: »

I heard too much on IRC alright :rolleyes:

shadowninty wrote: »

I heard too much on IRC alright :rolleyes:

Go on then, I'll bite! What did you hear on IRC?

shadowninty

I've tried to forget

Duffy the Vampire Slayer

I love that fact Vincent Browne is on right afterwards. Sex and politics, its a winning combination for tv3.

Cakes.

We had a very descriptive discussion on IRC about it :pac:

I thought it was hilarious! :P

Insect Overlord

Cakesofrice wrote: »

We had a very descriptive discussion on IRC about it :pac:

I thought it was hilarious! :P

I'll have to ask for a copy of the logs. For, eh, research purposes... >_>

shadowninty

It involved old people sex