I think secularists, humanists, and atheists have an onus to have better sex more often and to take creative advantage of all the extra options we get when we throw out book based morality.  


Furthermore, I tend to think it would be a great thing to find ways to point this out to non-secularists and faith types because I think where the best quality stuff happens is certainly noteworthy.


But it would not due to overlook the fact that atheism can overlap with progressive views on sexual identity, orientation, and gender equality issues.  We should have more types of better sex in part by remembering to include those people in our plans especially easy to marginalize groups like transvestites and cross dressers.  And also, we should even brag about our more puritanical, extreme monogamy, and asexual atheists as proof that our view is the ultimate for intimacy choices for anyone eighteen and older.

Let's do this or just discuss it or laugh at it or something. 

Views: 359

Replies to This Discussion

atheists have an onus to have better sex more often


I agree, if only I knew how to achieve that. : )


about our more puritanical, extreme monogamy


Nothing puritanical is worth bragging about. But if people are in an honest, consensusal, monogamous commitment, and keep their word to their partner, then there is nothing "puritanical" about that. That is just having integrity.

Fair enough about integrity.  

And I left out monosexuals which might be something I made up but it's like narcissism only with sex involved.  It seems like a category even though I'm not sure how many people are in it.
You mean people who sexually turn themselves on? I suppose there are some people out there like that. Or do you mean asexual -- not interested in sex?
I mean the people who turn themselves on.  It seems different than asexual which I take to mean not interested in sex at all.
I stand corrected.  I'll do a better job of making up words in the future.

I disagree.  I think I see what you're saying.  You certainly get to choose your involvement.  But there is something to celebrate about diversity in a specific sense.  Or at least I think there is an argument to be made that it is a subjective aesthetic I have that has a positive effect. 


You don't have to be othered and poked and prodded because you're trans.  But where are people gonna go to understand issues you have as a trans or common issues if not to a person of that persuasion.  Without that access to somebody, we get naive about things. 


There is a balance to be struck between your individual identity and how the community can use your involvement to understand a wider range of perspectives.  As for me, I'm curious about categories of people, not just in gender and sexual orientation but sub cultures and counter cultures and I like to see representatives of those groups especially ones I don't see too often.

It's possible that we might just have opposing opinions and I can live with that.  I hope I can make sense of the point that you, as an example token trans, is only meaningful to me because it makes more sense asking you how you feel than assuming I know what transes are like and I think that's an awesome kind of conversation to have in a community.

Sure.  It probably looks like that.  But it's actually a slow and steady hobby I've always had.  Find people you overlook and then pay more attention.  I joined the LBGT campus group in college.  Tested my ignorance and ten years later, I'm one of two siblings who knows my dad is gay.  That's relevant because he was one of the dynamic duo that was constantly telling me how wrong that was.  I was the one out there socializing myself regardless.  I think I should look good for that because I think that's a good way to approach life and it paid off magically by adding to his comfort in finding his own self.  So the argument in this paragraph is for better or worse my strategy made things better a little.

That happened recently by the way. It kind of bums me out that a person has to wait 50 years to feel comfortable exploring that.

But I'm not really doing this to make me feel better about people or to look better.  I didn't do it for my dad because I really had no idea.  I do it because I like the novelty of thinking that I have no idea of the gender of that person or I have no idea what that person is like instead of the bullshit tradition nonsense we get all the time that suggests which bathroom we use defines us in terms of masculinity, social standing, and we're all straight.  I like complexity and I get more of it when everyone could and might join into my conversations because I'm in that kind of community.  It's totally selfish but it's not about showing off.  It's about hanging out to me.

Plus I have Rockband.

I guarantee you I'm not done misinterpreting the views of trans neighbors.  But I'm a little newer school than that. 

I tend to view a lot of personal choices as aesthetics since it's obviously not as simple as looking at a person's gender or getting a monosexual answer to what people like romantically or intimately.  And seeing people dressed for business tells you very little about their wardrobe choices of preference.


My complaint with racists, homophobes, and positions like that (even some I end up noticing I've held), is that a white person's opinion of a black culture is a warped view of a subculture.  Furthermore, that subculture has aesthetics.  There are fashion and pride and self esteem reasons for the choices of expressions people in a culture make.  So instead of arguing that trans shouldn't make sense which is like why rap isn't a good genre, I think people should argue what rap is good rap by paying attention to the history and the shifts in rap.  

That's my metaphor for my policy because as a you, you understand that why you've chosen your path is a mixture of who you are, and where you're at, and what forms of expression resonate with you and you should be seen against those backdrops.  And the same goes for everybody.

I would also advance that gender, orientation and those kinds of choices should be even more immune to having to defend them than your choices in music and fashion because they are more firmly within the realm of things I think should be protected individual choices.

I didn't take that as a personal thing.  I saw it as an attachment to the conversation for people who might want to begin understand trans issues that you've posted. 

And I totally agree with the next part.  We're atheists, mostly I feel like we should be autoprogressive because things like accepting a spectrum of genders is actually simpler than the rigid norm of bible beating America.  It's simpler to me.  I attempt to quite literally treat people on a case by case basis and let them self define. 

I look at people who don't do that and see them missing opportunities to socialize or even more and then they spend a lot of energy defending this opportunity cost of being traditional or naive raised Christian or something like that.

Doesn't it seem easier to let you typecast yourself?  I think you're the choir on this subject.

I have to say the my the wife of 11 years and I experienced our own little sexual revolution about the same time that she came to terms with her lack of belief. Things have opened up for us and we are closer than ever. Nothing is off the table now and we explore every aspect of sexuality that is interesting to us. Nothing is off of the table as long as it is consensual with all involved and people aren't likely to get hurt. Jealousy has been pretty much dispensed with as we trust each other completely. Transparency is key. But we've never been happier.

One could argue coincidence here, but I think when you dispense of unreasonable restrictions based on religious grounds, the world opens .

I'll take a grave risk here and will venture with what must surely come across as inanely provocative, even specious: other than outright fundamentalists, in some regards Christians probably have better sex than Atheists.  How can that be? Have I gone insane?  No, here is the rationale: a large part of "good sex", or "good relationships" in general, concerns getting out there and meeting people, finding common ground, establishing mutual interest, and then exploring the various possibilities of mutual pleasure.  If you are fortunate to share the majority-view of the society in which you live, even if that view is corrosive and inhibiting, your potential pool of dates and mates is that much larger.  You have less cause to defend yourself and your views.  When meeting a potential partner, instead of launching into philosophical diatribe to defend your views, you can make insipid smalltalk eventually leading to romance.  You have easy entry into social interaction through artificial but eminently useful functions such as church.  The bar is simply lower. 

Operating under the assumption that a sexual connection is at least partially predicated on making a personal connection, atheists must search intently to find like-minded people.  They may go for years without finding like-minded persons with whom an intimate connection is possible.  They might have to "settle" for a marriage partner who does not share their views.  The numerical odds for good sex are simply poorer.

Of course, an open-minded worldview is presumably more conducive to an open-minded view on sex, and greater possibility of enjoying sex, assuming that a partner is around.  Religionists are burdened by the taboos of their doctrine and the incessant connection between sex and reproduction.  I do not envy their inhibitions.  But I do envy their ease of finding like-minded people, simply because there are more such people to find.

In my part of the country, Christianity dominates the social ethos.  But individual Christians are reasonably liberal in their sexual mores.  The same people who pray regularly and observe the various ecclesiastical injunctions freely admit their sexual promiscuity and exploration in high school and college.  Now they may be staid family men, but 20 years ago they were - unless they're lying! - quite the frisky stallions.  The point is that many even amongst doctrinaire religionists are more sexually liberated than we might on first impression believe.  Even amongst those who reject Darwinian evolution, many embrace the sexual revolution.



Update Your Membership :




Nexus on Social Media:


© 2017   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service