Furry sexual promiscuity

[Selene Aries]

I did say most, not all. XD After all, some people are asexual.  

[Pixeliciousness]

Actually, I'm primarily attracted to people I find non threatening. I'm more frequently attracted to women, but this is because I don't find them physically imposing usually. Effiminate guys are a plus too.

I've noticed furries are frequently labled as sex freaks, but I actually wonder if furries are just more chatterboxes.

Most cultures in less 'advanced' times seemed to be quite open about sex. It was normal. Then for some reason alot of religions began repressing sexuality, for....some reason, and then people stopped talking about it.

Outside of some of the odder fetishes, most other fur's I've spoken to thus far seem to actually have a simmilar or lesser degree of libido then I do, though most, at least online, seem much more forward then I can manage unless I really have an itch to scratch.  

[Selene Aries]

Is like it has been said over and over again, furries are not any more sexual than anyone else, we are just very open about our sexuality.  

[Pixeliciousness]

I haven't been one long as long:3

I never had much of a preconcieved notion, but I admit, the openess with sexuality surprised me for a little bit. Then I went on FA and DA a while, now I don't think about it.  

[Cassidy Peterson]

Selene Aries

I still hold to the belief that most people are inherently bisexual and it is just the taboos of society that prevents exploration and experimentation of one's sexuality.

In my case it's 'cause I think vaginas are yucky. surprised  

[Shaviv]

Cassidy Peterson

Selene Aries

I still hold to the belief that most people are inherently bisexual and it is just the taboos of society that prevents exploration and experimentation of one's sexuality.

In my case it's 'cause I think vaginas are yucky. surprised

all genitalia look kind of silly. "Who designed this, anyway?" that kind of thing.

Putting them to good use, however, can be fun.

What "good" means depends on you...  

[Cassidy Peterson]

Shaviv

Cassidy Peterson

Selene Aries

I still hold to the belief that most people are inherently bisexual and it is just the taboos of society that prevents exploration and experimentation of one's sexuality.

In my case it's 'cause I think vaginas are yucky. surprised

all genitalia look kind of silly. "Who designed this, anyway?" that kind of thing.

Putting them to good use, however, can be fun.

What "good" means depends on you...

Oh, aye. I'm just saying I'm not shy about experimenting - I just don't wanna.  

[godhi]

Selene Aries

I still hold to the belief that most people are inherently bisexual and it is just the taboos of society that prevents exploration and experimentation of one's sexuality.

Science actually backs me up on this.

Speak for yourself, Lady Selene.
"Mongo Straight."  

[Selene Aries]

godhi

Selene Aries

I still hold to the belief that most people are inherently bisexual and it is just the taboos of society that prevents exploration and experimentation of one's sexuality.

Science actually backs me up on this.

Speak for yourself, Lady Selene.
"Mongo Straight."

I believe I was speaking for myself. blaugh

Once again, I said most, not all and this is taking in account the entire human population.

The percentage would also be higher if people did not grow up with the stigma that there is something wrong with being attracted to the same sex. This is especially true with me whom are raised in a way that even showing emotion and affection is a sign of weakness.  

[Psycho Lee]

Selene Aries

I still hold to the belief that most people are inherently bisexual and it is just the taboos of society that prevents exploration and experimentation of one's sexuality.

Science actually backs me up on this.

Hey now, this may be more true for women, but I doubt it's that true for men. I wouldn't even consider 1/3rd of the male population gay or even leaning bi.

I myself have no interest in the male appendage. I even avoid porn with it because I'd rather feast my eyes on the beauty of the female then have some uninteresting male in the way because he has her bent over.

I'd be interested in seeing these "studies" that claim most humans are bi...I think they're bull. Bisexuality would be an aberration, there's no evolutionary advantage to porking the same sex.  

[Cassidy Peterson]

Psycho Lee

I'd be interested in seeing these "studies" that claim most humans are bi

Crap, I had an article the other day that said some portion of men who identify as completely straight still may cheat on their wives with other men...

Lemme see if I can find it. There was a thread about it in Extended Discussion, I think...

edit: Thread

edit 2: fff-- article is a dead link, shall resume searching

edit 3: Article

If the article doesn't work, do a Google search for article "Gay sex is for straight men"  

[Sunegami]

Psycho Lee

there's no evolutionary advantage to porking the same sex.

Clitoris. The evolutionary purpose. 500 words or less. Go. razz

Also, why is the prostate considered the "male G-spot"?  

[Garek Maxwell]

Psycho Lee

Hey now, this may be more true for women, but I doubt it's that true for men. I wouldn't even consider 1/3rd of the male population gay or even leaning bi.

I doubt that's true. I agree that there are probably more bisexuals out there than admitted, how many is disputable though. Now of course there's always going to be people who just aren't interested in the same/opposite sex at all. However, I do also agree with Selene that there ARE probably more out there than current estimates report.

Much for the same reasons she had said before, fear of admitting it keeps many from ever doing it. And while I can't speak for most people or bisexuals out there, I would think it's a lot easier to just pretend to be straight than face the many stigmas attatched to homosexuality. I know I've pretended and hid my sexuality, but I never once expressed actual interest in the opposite sex. "Oh, hey, she looks nice" , "Oh, hey, it's Jane Fonda", etc. Pretty easy things to say and get away with to cover up your sexuality, especially if you try really hard to not exhibit any stereotypical behaviors (which in my case has, I suspect, influenced my distorted view of what I should be like. ...Mentally and physically. This is no different than anorexic women trying to be more like the extremely thin models.)

Anyway, In general, I agree with Selene... Just wanted to point out and make sure that she wasn't saying that -everyone- is bisexual to some degree... Just that there are more than previously reported. ...I think... Correct me if I'm wrong here Selene. sweatdrop

Psycho Lee

Bisexuality would be an aberration, there's no evolutionary advantage to porking the same sex.

Let's not get into evolution. It's complex, and it's arguments like this that support unfounded arguments that homosexuals are inferior.

For one, humans have altered the course of evolution since the beginning. From verbal communication becoming more standard and thus supporting a change to encourage more vocal sound range in order to support more language development, to making certain organs no longer as necessary as they once were (appendix, etc...). Not only this, but the "usefulness only" argument is one that is also often used to support eugenics and very questionable "breeding practices" amongst people.

However, when it comes down to homosexuality, evolution has no place in this. Why? Because a homosexual person does not inherently lack a contribution to the well being of the "tribe". An adult that is childless can be a significant asset to any early society. For one, they can take care of children for other mothers who are too stressed (yes, even early societies suffered from this). In addition, instead of child care a childless adult could perform other things such as food gathering/hunting, or even religion rituals. In many societies, homosexuals held key religion positions that were seen as sacred. They would perform rights and rituals no one else could, such as blessings, curses, and even making decisions for the tribe or tribal leaders. It varies significantly upon the culture, but this is the basic idea.

Thus, a homosexual is not inherently useless "evolutionarily" speaking. In today's society with overpopulation problems, it could be more easily argued that homosexuals are more of a benefit to the propagation of the human species than heterosexuals. Fewer people over consuming resources (especially in the US) would be more of a benefit to the world, the human species, and the future, than continuing the path of more and more people. Of course, it could be argued other ways. More people means a stronger economy with more purchases made. But that's besides the point, which I also trailed off of somewhat.

Obviously, I've been talking a lot about homosexuality. That's because it drifts heavily into this argument which is dumb to begin with. Sorry, but it is dumb to say "this group of people are useless evolutionarily speaking!" Evolution doesn't always follow the path of usefulness. Now, about bisexuality. This is probably more advantageous if you want to get down to an "evolutionary" argument. Why is it more advantageous? Because if there aren't enough women and too many men, then perhaps a man who just isn't interested in women can, along with the bisexual man, still experience the grand emotions of love. And don't go saying these have no impact on you physically. They do, it's been shown many many times. They're shown to be beneficial time and time again. While you might not be leaning towards arguing against that, I just want to make it clear than love is very advantageous for simply how it makes people feel.

Now aside from that, it could also just be good stress relief. Partner too busy or not around? Pick another! Not any of one sex available or don't want to have another child? Try the same sex! Problems solved. 3nodding

I don't want to go off topic too much, as I'm tempted to go into other subjects that use pretty much the exact same argument... But I won't and stick to just this and sexuality. I certainly hope this helps however.  

[Psycho Lee]

Garek, I was saying that homosexuality, from a pure evolutionary viewpoint, does nothing to evolve a species because you're not spreading genes. Thus a gay animal would be a genetic dead end... genetic suicide. There would be little purpose for him to exist as he would not produce offspring or seed the universe with his genetics. So it wouldn't make evolutionary sense for any animal to be gay, if the whole purpose for an animal's existance is to make offspring. And yet there are gay animals, gay humans. Does this mean being gay is a genetic.... I hate to use the word defect... well it may be.

That doesn't mean that gays would be entirely useless, especially in a social society like our own. In animals who are entirely anti-social, it may be. That doesn't mean it's a bad thing either. In animal populations, having gay individuals may serve it's own purpose. Perhaps a form of population control, since they won't breed.

But as we're more advanced than animals.. so instead of being genetic mutants that don't further the animal's existance, gay humans can actually have a purpose in their existance. They can do social things like raise children and stuff.

But in a pure logical way, there is no reason for gays to have evolved in animal populations. They serve no purpose that we have discovered yet. Maybe we will find a purpose in the future, but for now they're like the human appendix.. they don't serve a purpose in evolving a species, but they're still there.

I don't know why you think I'm trying to figure out ways to make gays look bad. I'm not doing this to condemn gays, I'm just looking at this from a scientific view and saying it makes no sense for gays to have evolved in lower animals. But they did, and it happened, and at least in humans, they can live full useful lives.

Sunegami

Psycho Lee

there's no evolutionary advantage to porking the same sex.

Clitoris. The evolutionary purpose. 500 words or less. Go. razz

Also, why is the prostate considered the "male G-spot"?

Don't know about the male g-spot, and I've always wondered about the clitoris. I know many mammals have a clitoris, but I'm not sure about other animals. The best thing I could see for it's purpose is to make sex more enjoyable. You certainly wouldn't want sex to NOT be enjoyable, as if it was extremely painful or something, then animals would mate less, if at all.

Have you ever wondered why sex is so pleasurable in the first place? I would assume it would be to make it so animals mate MORE, thus having more offspring and spreading their genes more.

So having a clitoris may not make sense at first, but if it's purpose is to make sex as pleasurable as possible so animals want to mate more often, it makes sense.  

[Jungle Boots]

Sunegami

Psycho Lee

there's no evolutionary advantage to porking the same sex.

Clitoris. The evolutionary purpose. 500 words or less. Go. razz

Also, why is the prostate considered the "male G-spot"?

cause it is.