Aeromax said:
It's kind of sad, because sex is a necessary part of human nature while violence isn't.
Actualy, think about it like this.
It's perfectly natural for a young child to be a violent killing machine, destroying everything in it's path within its ability to destroy.
How many children do you know, however who would see anything arousing about bathing with someone else?
Violence has never been frowned upon by religion (except by Jesus in the New Testament, but following stuff in the Bible is a pick-and-choose thing for most people). Now sex, on the other hand...
Aeromax said:
Violence has never been frowned upon by religion (except by Jesus in the New Testament, but following stuff in the Bible is a pick-and-choose thing for most people). Now sex, on the other hand...
what do you mean by "violence has never been frowned upon by religion"?i think there's not a single religion that stated killing girls and raping their dead bodies is alright, whether it is christian,jews,islam or buddha. if there are religions that permit such act,then that just wrong.
Depends on how violent is violent, and at what point it's morally reprehensible -- it's a much greyer area than sex. For "sex" to be as broad a term as "violence" then it would be more appropriate to include all forms of physical intimacy, most of which aren't generally commented on as morally unsound or questionable (obvious exceptions exist, naturally).
Now the Jewish law as first foretold to Moses, for example, states rather clearly, from what I understand, "thou shalt not kill". Though of course the Israelites went to war with various other tribes and nations, at the very least the law would certainly imply that violence against fellow tribesmen is not to be condoned. So I don't entirely agree with the sentiment.
It's quite easy to point fingers at various religions for being overly sexually repressive and in some cases this may be deserving, but the mores of the Victorian era in England were not motivated by religion. I believe that it had something to do with closing ones eyes and thinking of the queen, which probably began as a bar bet -- when someone actually did it he found that he no longer could enjoy sex and thus began to get repulsed by it, and the sentiment soon spread throughout the land. But seriously, for all my admittedly light research into the matter I don't see it as overtly religiously motivated.
Sex isn't discussed much in the Bible in negative light other than the parts of Leviticus and the letters of Paul -- the latter of which should be kept in mind as to be from a distinctly different sexual culture which may have at times been overly permissive. By contrast, there's the oft-forgotten Song of Songs of Solomon (or just "Song of Solomon") which is a particularly passionate writing, and the comments of Jesus that amount to saying that prostitutes are human too and deserving of at least a modicum of respect. It's just overemphasized because people are crazy and more impressionable about sex than most things.
muteKi said:
Depends on how violent is violent, and at what point it's morally reprehensible -- it's a much greyer area than sex. For "sex" to be as broad a term as "violence" then it would be more appropriate to include all forms of physical intimacy, most of which aren't generally commented on as morally unsound or questionable (obvious exceptions exist, naturally).Now the Jewish law as first foretold to Moses, for example, states rather clearly, from what I understand, "thou shalt not kill". Though of course the Israelites went to war with various other tribes and nations, at the very least the law would certainly imply that violence against fellow tribesmen is not to be condoned. So I don't entirely agree with the sentiment.
It's quite easy to point fingers at various religions for being overly sexually repressive and in some cases this may be deserving, but the mores of the Victorian era in England were not motivated by religion. I believe that it had something to do with closing ones eyes and thinking of the queen, which probably began as a bar bet -- when someone actually did it he found that he no longer could enjoy sex and thus began to get repulsed by it, and the sentiment soon spread throughout the land. But seriously, for all my admittedly light research into the matter I don't see it as overtly religiously motivated.
Sex isn't discussed much in the Bible in negative light other than the parts of Leviticus and the letters of Paul -- the latter of which should be kept in mind as to be from a distinctly different sexual culture which may have at times been overly permissive. By contrast, there's the oft-forgotten Song of Songs of Solomon (or just "Song of Solomon") which is a particularly passionate writing, and the comments of Jesus that amount to saying that prostitutes are human too and deserving of at least a modicum of respect. It's just overemphasized because people are crazy and more impressionable about sex than most things.
I see not reason why thinking of royalty would destroy your boner.....
You must log in to post.
Yandere Simulator “Could Be Renamed”
Studio FOW Short Totally Tentacular
Phantom World Stretching Expectations
Charming Futaba Nendoroid
How You Wish KyoAni Made Phantom World…
