Is today’s society too open about sex?

People who don't control their sexual urges sometimes end up being rapists or child molesters... any second thoughts on controlling natural inclinations?

Yeah its not like we were talking about consenting adults. Fuck context.

This. We were never talking about going out and raping anyone, we were simply talking about being open about sex or less open about it. <.<

You and me aint nuthin' but mammals...

So let's do it like they do on the Discovery Channel!

I support this motion.

With ice road truckers!

I don't think I would consent to that...

Well, the only things on the discovery channel or history channel are shows about truckers, fishing, and auctions/ pawn shops.

How it relates to History I have no idea.

Pawn Stars is actually pretty informative, and is the only 'reality' show I enjoy.

I enjoy that show too.

Ya Pawn Stars is pretty good. But it shouldn't be on the History Channel. I liked the History shows on the History Channel better, but you know I guess they're hoping to give me my fix via Modern Marvals.

Yeah its one of the better reality shows.

How else can you promote immigration in a country with nucleardeathspiders?

Here's a counter argument for you, I'm just cooking this up as I go along.

Sex, and I think Freud agrees with this strongly, represents our most intimate cores. If we're all about sexual drives, then sex is what we're all about - it's what shapes us (identity or otherwise). Now passing the fact that I may or may not agree with this, I can't deny sexual attitudes will affect your outlook on life. The idea that we shouldn't repress it with a moral judgement sounds mighty fine, and I do guess modernity has picked up on that idea pretty strongly. The "free sex" outlook means we're less frustrated, more open, etc. Fine. But is that even a "good" thing? Why do we want a "freer sexual life"?

I'm not going to wave the banner of moral rigorism, but there are risks in this approach, and I think it's pretty obvious when we see what's going on around us. Concretely speaking, a lot of girls today loose their virginity at 14. This is completely abherent, in my opinion. You'll notice that the tables are now turned. Being a virgin is now sinful, when it was the other way around before. I don't think this is due exclusively to freudian thought, but it did contribute to it. Now you *have* to have an active sexual life in order to be considered a healthy, normal individual. I don't necessarly disagree with that, but this imposes a kind of normative rigorism that is very similar as the dogmas of religion. Kids today feel like they *have* to have sex in order to be "normal". There's a lot of useless pressure about that. Sex shouldn't all that important to a healthy individual, in my opinion. It's like eating, you shouldn't think about it that much. Well, now everybody thinks about it, don't they? It's all about being in a couple and doing it. If you're not doing that, then it must mean you're unhappy. And if you're doing it (correctly at least), then it must mean you're fully happy and don't need anything else. What does happiness have anything to do with sex?

The fact that this is now part of normative (moral) thinking represses a certain number of individuals and forces them to live a certain way. When someone is anguished, there's a good chance they'll be branded as sexually frustrated, whatever the state of their sexual life might be. This is good way to put the marginals in a corner and ignore them. Well, it is true that if you're really investing a lot in your sexual life, you'll be less inclined to be anguished. This is considered to be "good". But I don't see being anguised to be a bad thing. In fact, I find that any kind of pertinent artistic, philosophical or perhaps even scientific creation demands some kind of anguish (drive for something better). I find that the freudian paradigm, among many other things of course, makes all of this "flat". It seems to repress the individual for the sake of global "understanding" - which to me is reductive. If sex is something that represents us as individuals, that represents our very most intimate cores, then how can we make intellectual concepts about it? By definition, concepts are universal and go agaisnt what's individual. This is what I guess you could call "English, democratic thinking"

Food for thought

Here you go

You misspelled aberrant. Or abhorrent. Not sure which you meant to say.