Date: 2008-06-24 12:25 am (UTC)
Um, no. SEX is for procreation.

Literally, as created by Nature at lower levels of the developmental chain, that's true. But we are now a lot more than even little scurrying "dumb animals" who wear no clothes, eat berries off random bushes, and hump at will.

Sex, for civilized sentient creatures who have complex lives and emotional needs and can sustain others (and the species as a whole) without being directly "parent of", is also for RECreation. :p (With the obvious side benefit of possible procreation, preferably governed by the concept of CHOICE.)

But you know the bigots object to gay sex, using the claim that "it doesn't procreate". Well, neither does elderly-people sex, or het-couples-who-don't-want-children sex. Even the most restrictive social structures haven't managed to stop people from enjoying recreational sex. I'd say that Nature intended that TOO (because happy satisfied people are beneficial for the continuation of the species as a whole), and the bigots can stuff it.
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

March 2016

S M T W T F S
  12345
6789101112
13 141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 24th, 2025 02:57 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios