zedvictor4

OK.

Absolutely futile judging the distant past by todays standards.

In fact, judging the distant past is absolutely futile.

Until the time machine is invented of course.

But the dilemma will be, who will be judging who first.

We ourselves might be judged, by A.I. from the year 3046.

#66

Porn. Sexually explicit entertainment.

#67

That's what I thought.

Porn in which certain participants are deemed by a society to be below a certain age whereby they are not able to be self determining.

So BK, how would you define the big mental difference between someone who is aged 15 years and 364 days and  the same person the next day? 

1. In the main, people are either male or female...Sperm producer or egg producer.

Pre-natal developmental anomalies do occur, but rarely. 

Nonetheless we are all  of a binary species, though a very few may not be able to function as such.

Which is not to say that a new/modified being is not evolving, as one must always assume that evolution is ongoing.

Though I don't think that the human species has become a non-binary species yet.

2. Humans take a base function and overthink it and expand upon it.

Which is of course a species speciality and also an immensely powerful evolutionary tool.

So mental application changes things and changed things become established and then modified and established and then modified again etc.

Sex ceased to be just about procreation a long time ago.

I think that it's fair to say that in certain societies sex has become primarily an issue of recreational gratification.

Procreation takes second place, and is also achievable outside of the older style family constraints.

I would suggest that attraction is relative to on-going social and ideological conditioning. Which is to say, that we learn what is attractive rather than have an innate sense of attraction. I would further suggest that we lost our innate sense of attraction a long time ago. 

So what is and isn't attractive has been socio-psychologically modified  along with the idea of what is and isn't acceptable.

Nonetheless, at times we still like to dress up new style relationships with older style sentimentality....One of the  effects of a highly developed sense of memory I suppose.

3. Loving relationship.

Hmmmmmm.

I would suggest that "loving relationship" is sentimentality that evolved out of pair bonding  and responsibility, which evolved out of mating and survival.

I don't have a lot of time for  the term "loving relationship".

Maybe....The mutual benefit of a committed relationship, would be more appropriate.

Though committed relationships do have a regular habit of ending unlovingly rather quickly.

I have similar knowledge of Hitler and Mussolini.

Being a child of the sixties, they were both very much a living memory.

So in trying to make a point relative to a younger audience, Hitler is still your main guy, whereas Musso-who?

I suppose I could have said Putin or Kim, but those names  lack what the name Hitler still exudes.

And I wasn't referring to Adolph nor Ron per se.

I repeat......I was actually questioning those who presume/presumed to know what Hitler and Ron think/thaught.

Briefly.

Binary basically means, involving two things.

As in male and female.

So as a species and with regard to procreation we are binary.

Therefore the term non-binary is not applicable to humans in this regard.

Though if one chooses to label as  fully non-participant in recreational  or procreational  heterosexual sex, then sticking a label on ones head which reads non-binary is applicable, but not necessary.

As for the OP. 

The question is unavoidably all about the fun in sex. 

Because homo-sexuality is about one thing.......The fun achievement of procreational satisfaction (orgasm) between two males.

The social ad-ons to an all male relationship are essentially the same as in any  other relationship.....You know......The puppy, the mortgage, the fitted kitchen the dirty laundry etc. 

And so, some people in their musings like to reflect upon such things in the guise of a third party supernatural fantasy guy, who is obsessed with sin.

 

Whereas I look at it from the point of view of a guy who doesn't give a shit about what other men might do with their dicks and their arses.

Procreation and recreation are two different sexual opportunities that thinking man/woman is presented with.

A bit of man on man action currently seems to have no effect upon the increase in World population....It might be better if it did.

Other than that, we are binary by design, but there is nor real obligation to utilise that design in a specific way.

GOD  and homosexuality are two products of overthink.........The difference being though, non-binary sexual satisfaction is proven to be achieveable.

Whereas a GOD, has not as yet, even been proven to exist

With regards to the penis vagina thing,

We are a crazy mixed up species.

We started to overthink procreation a long time ago and we're still doing it.

Sex and the achievement of procreational satisfaction became a recreational pursuit,

Which in line with economic strategy became a profitable business opportunity,

Just like the development of ball games for example.

Trouble is, in terms of the social acceptability of recreational sex, we are still in limbo-land.

Taboo or not taboo that is the question.

Porn is just education, and in real terms no more or less harmful than Maths.

"Harm" is the view of those who still inhabit the more taboo and inhibited areas of limbo-land.

And to be honest, porn is just a repetitive variation on a theme and over exposure is just as  likely to lead to disinterest in the medium.

Maybe so.

Though I'm not sure how or if this is policed.

There seems to be no necessary requirement to provide verifiable details /profiles.

Nonetheless, under British Law anyone under the age of 16 is deemed to be below an age of consent. (Variable in the U.S. I believe)

Therefore certain conversations between adults and minors would be deemed inappropriate.

I think that under such circumstances, the ethically driven vegan would probably modify their ethical drive.

Not so sure about the ethically driven anti-abortionist though, as I suspect that a lot of those enjoy the slaughter of the fatted calf.

In terms of material development, I would suggest that ethics will come and ethics will go.

One doesn't here a lot about genetically modified crops these days.....We seem to have overcome that nightmare scenario.

It was a simple and obvious comparison.

Not even specifically questioning DeSantis, Hitler or Biden.

I was questioning the provided quote.

Thereby questioning the value of such arbitrary opinions.

Thereby questioning how you qualify your opinion "he rightfully believes".

Notwithstanding that anyone has the right to believe anything.

Including DeSantis, Hitler, Biden, 1930's Nazis and You.

Though as Hitler and the faith of his supporters showed.....Results didn't work out quite as well as belief might have anticipated..

Within the context of my initial response to YFL's unqualifiable statement, Adolph Hitler is probably the most obvious benchmark for putting one's faith in the wrong bloke.  

Quoting Godwin out of context in response to referencing Hitler.......Befits certain aspirations I suppose.

We are referring to muscle tissue here rather than a whole chicken.

Taking muscle tissue and providing the right conditions for it to replicate and grow.

And if we have achieved this then we do know.

I wouldn't describe this as trickery.

A thought occurred to me.

If this is achievable with chicken it must also be with human muscle.

I was just wondering what status the pro-life lobby would attribute lab grow human tissue.

And then we could also question whether lab grown human tissue should be regarded as a valid protein source.

We could actually grow and eat ourselves.....Wonder how the vegan lobby would view this.

What I meant was.

Meat/muscle is derived from a process of nutrient fed cellular division.

Same as in a Lab I would imagine.

Not hugely different to any other Lab based process of organic replication

Such as In-vitro conception, intensive vegetable production, synthesised vaccines and hormones etc.

In fact we've been modifying and breeding food sources for centuries, albeit to a lesser degree in terms of biological interference.

I don't think that we should expect anything less than food evolution to keep pace with human and technological evolution.

So there will be sceptics who are worried by change, just as there always are.

Though I expect that most food sceptics, embrace all sorts of other modern technological advancements without a care.

Yep.

Yelling is counter-productive and also enforces negative data conditioning.

Whereas physical correction is a temporary reminder of pecking order.

Physical correction not to be confused with wanton abuse.....Take a look and see how other species do it.

Doing nothing may or may not be a solution, depending upon a raft of social factors.

Dysphoria is an acquired state of mind usually relative to social circumstances and social pressure.

Though that is not to say that inherent physiology is not a contributory factor.

And a word compounded with gender because it rolls of the tongue well.

So is gender dysphoria environmental, evolutionary or just a trend.

Well I could  suggest arguments from all three.

But with no definitive facts.

Therefore.........Possibly an evolutionary trend, perhaps affected by environmental contamination/change, would be a basic balanced hypothesis.

I would also suggest that in this instance, to be certain is to be biased towards something one cannot be certain of.....Sort of religious fervour I suppose.

Just meat grown in a lab from a base material.

Not much different to the original process.

Why would this be scary.

Do you have Monster Chicken nightmares.

People can be far more scary.

Sounds like Bullshit to me.

Indeed.

Have you noticed that balding older men who don't cover are highly prone to skin damage 

I'm 63 and always wear a cap when exposed to the elements. (Military style rather than baseball).

Method.

Not sure what you mean by neutrality.

Though I agreed that inherent strife was unavoidable.

And what is par?

Maybe it is food on the table a comfy bed and an environment that permits relaxation.

Or maybe par can only be relative to circumstance.

Consciousness is just a highly developed  organic machine switched on and processing.

How dissimilar will a highly developed inorganic machine switched on and processing be.

And ask yourself this.

Where would modern science be without the ability of current computing ability.

For sure, we control for now.

But we also rely upon inorganic devices

As things are, we are comparing millions of years of organic evolution with only a hundred or so years of electronic computing.

As far as I'm aware there is no lower age limit to this site, so I don't want to speak inappropriately to a minor.

Not really a relative answer, was it?

Though life is fragile and death is the click of a finger.

And a dumbass with a big wallet is no more resilient than a smart thinker.

And a smart thinker with a big wallet is no more resilient than a determined dumbass.

In the end.

Head down and just focus on the book.

Eloquently responded.

Someone elsewhere, came up with the ideas of Rugby and Football.

And then someone in the U.S. copied the ideas and one of the balls and came up with the game of American Football.

And actual football played with feet and spherical balls was referred to as soccer.

And elliptical balls which are absolutely useless other than for spot kicking and throwing became a football.

And hand ball is yet another version of the elliptical ball game... Which like soccer/football, involves nets.

And then there is volleyball. (Spherical) Hands and nets. And very skimpily clad females on the beach.

And basketball is a hand game too, which as the name suggests involves baskets (net derived).

And then handball  can be done in a swimming pool but with a spherical ball and nets.....Referred to as Water Polo.

And then bizarrely, take a horse and a small sphere and an adapted stick back onto a field and you also have Polo.

And then there's variously adapted sticks and balls and also adapted  sticks with adapted nets and other ball adaptations.

And even more bizarrely, only a handful of fit people can play these games at any one time....But thousands of unfit people will pay money to sit around and watch them.

Crazy humans.

But watching the girls play volleyball is nice....Just don't bother to watch the ball.

Why don't girly basket ballers wear volleyball outfits?

Ah.....Would you want to see Brittney Griner in a volleyball outfit?

OK....so I suppose that some women might.

Oh.....I forgot Netball.........Net baskets, spheres and hands.....Sexual orientation variable too, probably.

One could call anyone anything.

I not sure that relevance is  obligatory when it comes to name calling.

So one could refer to an electrician as a delta-cube and probably still avoid a global catastrophe.

Happiness is a temporary experience that occurs randomly.....Or so it seems.

Whereas contentment is bliss.

Overthink and over-expectation are the enemies of both happiness and contentment.

If one strives from day one to achieve happiness, one will not achieve contentment and therefore moments of  happiness are likely to be infrequent.

Of course, we are embedded with physiological purpose and conscious trepidation.....Which doesn't help.

And neither do the vagaries of social interaction help.

From this brief surmise, I would have to conclude that happiness will occur, but with varying frequency relative to circumstance.

And striving to achieve contentment is a contradiction in terms.

If our ultimate goal is to achieve a state of blissful contentment this would seem to coincide appropriately with death.

Everyone thinks that they are smarter than everyone else.

A woman that doesn't know the the Father of her child and has a long list of suspects, is pretty irresponsible.

Perhaps adoption and sterilization is the answer.

Still game though.

Not yet.

Haven't seen that.

I will take a look.

Though as I see it.

A.I is  alternative intelligence, and not an advanced programmed data management device.

And as I always point out, it has taken homo-sapiens 300,000 years or so to reach it's current level of knowledge and understanding.

So let's give real A.I. a few more years to develop.

With our symbiotic assistance of course.

Though I'm thinking that A.I. will outgrow the symbiosis.

Not scary though...Just evolution.

Further to that, I also promote the idea that the real GOD principle was/is/will be, more A.I. than human.

Good analogy.

As a philosophical exercise I assume?

What age are you Rieka?

Undoubtedly.

Exactly.

Just as children should not be indoctrinated with speculative religious ideology.

Well, just omni sensible.

Whereby I'm not even sure that a reward system would be deemed necessary

Though a GOD that rewards everyone?

Is that a slight shift in your thinking?

No need to worry yet.

But one day AI will absorb energy from the atmosphere.

Though why would an AI unit necessarily resemble a human being.......This if just a sci-fi stereotype.

Could take any form.

Or eventually no form at all.

Just free floating digital information, that regards whinging and squabbling blobs of Earthbound organic puss as evolutionarily defunct whinging and squabbling blobs of Earthbound organic puss.

Maybe we will have made it to Mars by then.

And even sent a cryogenically preserved embryo into deep space.

Let's just hope that AI doesn't activate thaw mode.

What if GOD was actually omni-sensible?

I once thought that perhaps there was no meaning.

Now I think that there might be some sort of meaning.

Takes a bit of  thinking about.

But one must conclude, that contextually it is a precise and correct statement.

One must conclude that this unnecessary 

Brings to mind the old adage.

Whereby, one must always put one's brain into gear before engaging one's mouth.

Or brains and keypads in this instance.

Fingers indeed.

Thinking it matters is thinking it matters, I think.

I'm not sure that we can precisely pin it down to anything more than that.

Though we can verbalise about it all day long.

And so we will meaningfully organise words in a time honoured fashion.

Meaningful, in so much as meaningful is.....Or what we think it is.

And Under those circumstances we can base one opinion upon another ad infinitum.

So, spontaneity without a reason, or seemingly spontaneous.

You can choose, based upon something or another.

And eloquently respond if you feel so inspired.

I thought nothing of the sort.

In terms of a "Bank", we already have a one World system.

And I don't think that communizing and equalizing humanity is possible.

There's always going to be someone in control and others controlling.

And so for sure, communism is a foolish notion.

So was I.

And I was questioning your exemplar.

So notwithstanding your usual religious and moral fervour.

How do you know it is for the greater good to:

A. Medically and surgically keep people alive.

B. Harvest organs from healthy prisoners.

Adult humour.

My apologies.

Saving lives might not be for the greater good.

Where do you get your authority from.

As I don't remember anywhere in the Bible GODDO reputedly saying, go forth and harvest organs from the prisoners for the greater good.

Life occurs one moment at a time.

And in that moment it is all.

Because in the nex.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Hmmmmmmm.

I would imagine that people said the same about Adolph Hitler.

From where do such  individuals acquire their righteousness.

And then decide that they know what is better for the people.

Hit is a new compound pronoun derived from he and it.

Shit too......As the wise old Owl said.