I never thought I'd read something like this, especially since religious extremists typically extol the "virtues" of breeding like rabbits, as though having children is somehow the zenith of one's contributions to society. Now, I don't know Leonore's religious leanings, but the dearth of scientific understanding, especially from a psychologist, is incredulously astounding.

I initially found the link on Bioedge, which is essentially MercatorNet's purely medical section (although there are frequently bioethics issues and ignorance of trans issues and the origins of homosexuality/bisexualty on MercatorNet itself).

http://www.bioedge.org/pointedremarks/view/v-is-for-victory-for-pin...

One of the most trenchant critics of the medicalization of women's sexual issues is Leonore Tiefer, a psychologist at New York University School of Medicine. She suspects that demand for the drug has been manufactured:
"People fed a myth that sex is 'natural'—that is, a matter of automatic and unlearned biological function—at the same time as they expect high levels of performance and enduring pleasure, are likely to look for simple solutions. This sets the stage for disease mongering, a process that encourages the conversion of socially created anxie

One of the most trenchant critics of the medicalization of women's sexual issues is Leonore Tiefer, a psychologist at New York University School of Medicine. She suspects that demand for the drug has been manufactured: 

"People fed a myth that sex is 'natural'—that is, a matter of automatic and unlearned biological function—at the same time as they expect high levels of performance and enduring pleasure, are likely to look for simple solutions. This sets the stage for disease mongering, a process that encourages the conversion of socially created anxie

Edit: Sorry. I didn't mean to paste the quote so many times. The text didn't show up on Mozilla, so I thought there was a bug.

Views: 330

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Everything human beings do after puberty is sexually orientated. From dress preference to dancing to smiling, all involve a subconscious appeal to attraction. If it's unnatural then so is breathing.

Effective contraception, freeing male-female couples to enjoy the pleasure of sex without making babies, was a major public health triumph of the 20th century! (Those who portray it as a "disaster" want to keep us obedient and controlled.)

Better safe than sorry...

We don't tell kids, "Don't drive! People get hurt and get killed in horrible car accidents!" We teach kids how to drive safely, and we use seatbelts and air bags.

... why [comprehensive, reality-based] sex education in schools is so important...

Some highlights from a professor live-tweeting from her son's abstinence-based "sex education" class:

I feel like raising my hand and saying "Can I tell my sexual history, which involves a lot of pleasure before and during marriage?" And how I've had a lot of lovers and have never gotten pregnant by accident?

She mentioned drop of pregnancy rates. And didn't mention teens having sex is UP.

I would teach that sex should be pleasurable and respectful. He said, "WHAT ABOUT DISEASE PREVENTION?" I said that's part of respect, duh.

Teacher says to me "I agree that sex is good in a loving relationship." I said it can be plenty terrific without. He looked shocked. Shocked

I just want to grab all those kids after school and say HERE IS THE TRUTH. SEX FEELS GOOD. THAT'S WHY YOU SEEK IT. TAKE CARE & HAVE FUN.

(a reply) "Sex feels good. Emotions can and will get involved. Be kind to each other. Be safe. Be respectful." BOOM.

(Read more about Alice Dreger and her son's class!)

These things are the age old problem of the church trying to impose an unnatural ideological asceticism on a natural species of human beings.

It seems she is saying that we have been fed too high expectations for sex. Reproductive sex is pretty mundane, all animals do it.

Even the pink pill is driven more by ideology than by science.

http://www.science20.com/pfired_but_still_kicking/fda_stiffs_go_sof...

On the other hand, A[m]ericans are too focused on sex. They think everyone needs to be young and sexually alluring and have a vigorous libido until they are 97 years old.

Daniel, your first hand did well. Your other hand screwed up.

How many Americans did you survey to get that piece of BS?

How many were on their 90s? 80s? 70s? Etc?

I think what the original poster means by sex being "unnatural" is that it has to be learned. There is no pill or right time in life that suddenly you become sexually active and you know everything and are also such a great sexual pleaser. Pills of any kind do not make male or female a master of sex. The very idea leads to promiscuity which could open you up for diseases. Once a person with newfound sexuality learns that there are no whistles and bells and perfect technique they are able to make the best of what they have and can please themselves and their partner. This is then because of sexual maturity.

A now rather outdated book on sex in my time was "Sexology." I say outdated because it may not be as important today. In the 1960's a lady friend of mine loaned me the book (published monthly) so I could learn about sex and the human body. This book literally taught sex education when nobody else in my area did - in a classroom or otherwise. Unfortunately my step father burned a couple of copies on me because he found them and said my friend was "teaching me pornography." The publication was graphic, yes, but there is nothing pornographic about it.

I don't think it has to be taught, Michael. Children can teach themselves to read, write, solve puzzles, learn math etc. and if left alone, yes, they will learn to masturbate from a very young age. It's how we're wired, and there's nothing wrong with it.

http://www.med.umich.edu/yourchild/topics/masturb.htm

I said "learned" rather than "taught." Sex is a learned process through many means. I had originally said that Sexology "taught sex education" but the truth is that sex is learned. The publication was just one of many ways to learn. If you learn by playing with yourself the book might help with that also. The magazine was there to prevent sexual ignorance.

It's good that a book is there to fill in the gaps, but even if it wasn't there, chlidren would learn how to have sex without the need for external input.

Or to put it another way, if teenagers follow their instinct, they'll know exactly what to do.

Gerald, Freethinker31, jay H, Daniel W, and Michael. I agree with you all. What a rare happenstance. :)

The only real problem ascetics have with sex is that it's enjoyable. Although a bit of a voyeuristic nightmare, it's a fact that many people find vomiting or defecation far milder on the minds eye than sex. The mind boggles.

RSS

About

line

Update Your Membership :

Membership

line

line

Nexus on Social Media:

line

© 2018   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service