If one places sex in "need" catagory, we can better know the sinister nature of LDS Inc. as they demand to fully control their members lives.

It's dirty! Sex is dirty!

Ghawd I love it! Especially now cuz she's dirty back at me!!

Evolutionarily -- a need.
Otherwise, there'd be no next generation.

WHO you have sex with...that's a want. Or sometimes a "settle for." :)

Gheco Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>... they demand to fully control their members lives.

Should be, "They demands to fully control their members' members."

I need and want it.

RB

Mormonism is just plain weird

Sex is funny in Mormon theology. It's the only act that in one context it's, "the sin next to murder in seriousness", but in another context it's, "the most beautiful thing you can do".

Members are to feel the most shame for participating it in before the "I dos", but are supposed to feel the most love and joy when participating in it after the "I dos". Talk about a mind fuck.

It's a strong desire for most people, but not an absolute need.

It also depends on how you define "sex." We need human touch and we need a release. We don't "need" intercourse on an individual level. I'd say masturbation/orgasm is closer to a need than sex is.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/30/2016 04:33PM by woodsmoke.

Science according to the Banana:
It's neither a want nor a need. It's a biological drive hard wired into our DNA- guaranteed to perpetuate the species. Try to deny a biological drive and you're asking for trouble. Try to work with it in the confines of the society you're living in : that's finesse. Unless you're in a repressive culture such as Mo-ism, then it's an exercise in frustration.

That's my evolutionary theory based opinion.
-The Banana

I see it this way...;
I Want it so tell the hapless target that I really NEED it, you'd be surprised how often that works.....

I say it's both a want and a need.

I WANT to have sex several times per day, every day.

I NEED to have sex once every 9 months or so for the sake of propagation. (Provided I only have 1 partner).

A little of column A and a little of column B.

I agree. The idea of nocturnal emissions taking place if one goes long enough without release during waking hours lends some credibility to a physical need for some sort of sexual release, though not necessarily intercourse. In my female reproductive organs course in med school, I read a documented study of women (not very many - something like ten) who were celibate who were observed in a laboratory sleep study setting experiencing orgasms in their sleep. This might point to a biological need for sexual release (again, not necessarily intercourse) in some women as well.

Because that sounds fascinating. I've experience a female nocturnal orgasm many times (with or with out regular sex) and I know several other women who do, but I wonder about more factors on this subject.


As to answer Gheco's question, it is and it is not. You don't HAVE to have sex to live, like air, food, water, or shelter, but it may impact your psychological and emotional well-being, which leads to toehr problems.

Evolutionary speaking, yes, we need it for our species to survive. That's really one of the main purposes of life is to reproduce in that sense.

Itzpapalotl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Because that sounds fascinating. I've experience a
> female nocturnal orgasm many times (with or with
> out regular sex) and I know several other women
> who do, but I wonder about more factors on this
> subject.
>
>
> As to answer Gheco's question, it is and it is
> not. You don't HAVE to have sex to live, like air,
> food, water, or shelter, but it may impact your
> psychological and emotional well-being, which
> leads to toehr problems.
>
> Evolutionary speaking, yes, we need it for our
> species to survive. That's really one of the main
> purposes of life is to reproduce in that sense.

I'll have to drag out my old med school laptop to see if it's still on there anywhere. It's been so long that I no longer have a clue. I believe is was either a Swedish or German study translated. I will try.

I have too, especially when single. Fun times.

It's a drive that keeps the species alive.

If people really had to have it then celibacy wouldn't exist (or be an option.)

Some people can't live without it. And some people do and can.

For the people it's a need to those who feel they can't live without it; and optional for those who can.

People who subjugate sexual drive for celibacy have found they have increased drive in other areas of their lives like artistic endeavors, or athletics. They channel that sexual energy in other pursuits that they take pleasure in or excel in, besides sex.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/30/2016 08:19PM by Amyjo.

When I was in my late teens and early 20s, I had a very strong libido, could not get enough sex, and universe help any man that tried to keep up with me (I also do not tie much emotion to sex unless I am in love with that person or at least deeply care for them, whatever their gender ID.)

As I've grown older, my libido has waned a bit, and I focus much more energy into intellectual and creative pursuits with a varying amount of success in each. Without all that crazed sexual energy that needed to be expended, I've become an accomplished cook/baker, student, artist, and now gardener, so you're onto something there. :)

According to Maslow, it's a base need.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs#Physiological_needs

While maintaining an adequate birth rate shapes the intensity of the human sexual instinct, sexual competition may also shape said instinct.

I think it's both a physical and an emotional need. If you get it when you want it, it's both physically and emotionally healthy for you.

Is sex a "want" or a "need"?

Hmmm, not sure... more research is needed!

[getbusylivin notices Mrs. getbusylivin puttering around in the kitchen]

Hon, got a sec? Could you please come in here and help me with some, uh, research?...

Don't forget to record the colour of the genitals at each stage.

It depends on how many drinks.

The Nazis must have considered it a need as they set up brothels for servicing their military.

For troops in the field, they are credited with developing the blow up sex doll, to discourage homosexual behavior (death penalty) or sex with the locals (death penalty if Jewish)

That's entitlement.

The church says that sex before marriage is next in seriousness only to murder. If they can keep the two sexes separated and keep both sides under control of the church and tax those interactions, they can control everyone. Controlling people in this manner is a sin next in seriousness to murder.

When an unplanned child results from sex outside of marriage, that's when you find out what your church and its leaders are really about. The decisions they make and force, or try to force on to people at that time are next in seriousness to murder.

Your church is only supposed to be your church, not your taskmaster. It's only supposed to be an organization that helps you to become a better person, not something that makes you unhappy, or a sociopath. The mormon church is rotten to the core. They treat everyone like children and don't want people to grow up. When you do your best and fail, that's when they exert the most manipulation and control over your life.

One who asks may never know.
One who doesn't, won't know the difference.

It varies on an individual basis, I think. For many people it's probably a little bit of both -- I mean without sex the species wouldn't continue. From an evolutionary standpoint it's a need. But for asexual people it's neither.

Totally agree on it being a prime method of control for TSCC and other religions, though.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/01/2016 04:03AM by oneinbillions.

Neither for me...just a memory.

Gatorman
3-1

We needs it. Oh yess and we wants it, yes my precious, we wants it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/01/2016 03:38PM by onendagus.

They have found that the most common position within mormon marriages is the doggie position. That's the position where the husband sits up and begs while the wife rolls over and plays dead

I laughed and then I passed it on!

Only if they "need" to procreate

My hope is that when hot women want sex they need it from me.

My hope is that I get sloppy seconds.

It most definitely is!!!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/01/2016 09:16PM by desertman.

Interesting subject.

I was researching this last year and ran across discussion by those who hate sex, mostly women.
And no, they are not all abused.
http://forums.webmd.com/3/sex-and-relationships-exchange/forum/9407?pg=1

They mention www.asexuality.org.

One of many comments:
"Thank you for this informed post. I agree that the majority of married women I talk to (privately) that they would be happy if they never had to have sex again. They go through the motions for their husbands and those that don't, get divorced. "

So many don't want sex, but it is a currency to be exchanged for money or other benefits. Search sexual economics.

Supply and demand affects the value of sex. Which is why many are attracted to the church's anti-sex message. It increases the value of their currency.

Never made sense to hear that the church suppresses sex to control its members. Why would anyone want to have pleasure denied?

The way the church benefits from sexual repression is this. Women want a monopoly over sex to get more value for what they have to offer. If their man is not allowed to get it elsewhere, or even look at porn, or feels guilty for any impure thoughts, her value is increased and she can get more benefits for less effort.

Which is why women more than men like the law of chastity, and restrictions on porn, and modesty standards, etc.

Partially explains why easier to get female conversions. Church is a source of power for women.

It's a good thing we have someone like you, who is so educated in sexuality and research methods, to show the rest of us who study these issues day in an day out and understand how research actually works, to show us the way. Truly, you are a paragon of wisdom and education on these issues and there is no reason to doubt you, because you clearly understand men and women, and never excuse the worst of their behaviours out of lazy thinking.

When I was much younger, and healthy, my spouse and I were "fruitful and multiplied." No health problems for me or my children.

But as I became older, I developed a nasty skin condition "down there" (which can turn cancerous, so I have to be seen at intervals in a dermatology clinic, and treat the area with steroid creams.) It cannot be reversed.

it is a good thing that I have had a hysterectomy, along with removal of ovaries, as a standard GYN exam would tear me to pieces "down there." No, I am not exaggerating. It would be a bloody mess and take days to heal.

And sex is the same way. My husband and I have tried every way possible, with lubricants, even prescription ones that numb the area - and the result is the same. Blood everywhere, because the skin has hardened and cannot stretch.

We have to resort to more creative ways to express physical pleasure, and I am grateful that I have such a thoughtful, kind husband who understands my limitations. It is frustrating.

I'm sorry that you've been with women who didn't enjoy sex, but that's no reason to inflict your BS "research" on the rest of the population and state your woman-hating personal experiences as universal fact. It's harmful to both men and women to think that way. The vast majority of women enjoy sex and have watched porn. And most don't join Mormonism to "get power," they join Mormonism because they were born into it like everybody else. I've known some women who think about all men like you do about women. It didn't help them much in their lives.

Yes, a conversation on a forum that confirms a misogynistic bias constitutes as peer reviewed, in depth, well documented research.

Not a damn thing could be wrong about those conclusions and methods and that research deserves a Nobel Peace Prize.

I literally don't have to read the name on his posts to know who it is. It's always about women being greedy asexual golddigging prudes.

Lol, I didn't notice the forum.

There actually are more women than men who identify as asexual, though there are many men as well. There are many reasons why that is-- shaming of women's sexuality, increased sexual trauma experienced by women that can dull their enthusiasm and sensory pleasure, and the greater sexual fluidity and willingness to explore by women in general (many more women identify as bisexual, for example). Because of societal expectations of men and sexual aggression, asexual men would also likely not be as willing to share that openly or might feel pressured to behave sexually to fit in, whereas a woman who isn't sexual is the (unfair) expectation of many anyway.

That would be an interesting conversation. But that's not the one he wants to have. Lol



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/02/2016 02:00PM by woodsmoke.

Well-

Do you want it or do you need it?

It can be both.
In Mormonism, there is only one acceptable "recipe" for sex and its mostly vanilla.

In the real world, you discover that with an amazing partner there can be a marvelous eight course gourmet dinner, homecooked "comfort", fast food, snacks, exotic, etc....lol.

That is the diet talking.

Sex is an individual thing there is NO "one size fits all".

I don't miss my LDS sex life at all. It was periods of long abstinence (In marriage due to a spouse who had huge hang ups) mixed with his "need" to not sin and "self love". I would be neglected for months from all affection, then expected to put out with the hopes of being knocked up.

Years later, I had a committed relationship where I felt totally secure physically. Looking back, I needed that emotionally. I needed someone to really WANT me. It rebuilt my self esteem. The relationship did not work out, but I am grateful for that experience.

I have also fallen deeply in love, where a physical relationship became impossible due to his medical condition. I would have accepted the relationship without all the physical advantages, because there are other ways to show physical affection. HE couldn't do it, because he didn't feel like a man anymore. I didn't NEED the sex, but losing the relationship broke my heart.

The right partner is going to also look at your desires and needs...and love being with you. They will let you go to be happy with someone else if they cant meet those needs.

Selfish partners withhold affection and make you feel like a degenerate for missing affection.

Don't be afraid to speak up about your wants AND your needs!


PS..there are studies that some people DO need and thrive on physical touch. This does not always have to be sexual in nature. Just FYI.

RMM

Part of this depends on how you classify "sex" (for instance, I'm a lesbian mostly interested in making out) and of course it varies between individuals.
I had one roommate at BYU-Idaho, before I transferred to a different college and left the church, that seemed to have a sex addiction. She was actually a prostitute. For her I'd consider sex more of a "need," although I worry her prostitution made her relive childhood abuse.

As I recall, according to Maslow's hierarchy of needs, sex is classified as a 'need'.

Yes, but way up there. Above safety, below esteem.

As a mormon, you're lucky to ever get above the bottom rung. I thought I'd be stuck there for life.

Do I need it? Yes, lots. Do I get it? No.

In Maslow's needs, sex is a technical "need," required for creative purposes. Just like in Mormonism. Unless you're Joseph Smith.

Is dinner a want or a need? You want it, but you will also be hungry without it.