And the utopia comes full circle

@whipassmt:

Yup, naked bears. :) :) They are pretty trendy now.

It is the opposite of an inanity (if you are arguing that all things are inane then I would disagree with you about the reliability of nihilism as a philosophy to follow). Human sexuality is not only the act of sex, but, as an example, the lifestyles that are designed with that act as a goal (Edit: or as a means to achieve other goals). Your argument is an oversimplification of human sexuality and it would behoove you to better understand it if you would like to criticize others about it.

Going by my logic? My only point was that 'deviancy' was is nothing more than a marketing term for bigots and close minded idiots to oppose things that make them feel uncomfortable (and in no way affect them negatively). Additionally, I never mentioned anything about you NOT being able to discuss this issue, only that your view is nothing more than a rehash of traditional hogwash.

If the only grounds you have is on the premise of decency and deviancy (per your posts in this thread), then its clear you're just a tight wad. Lastly, quit with the pretentious wording of your posts. Using big words for the sake of using them doesn't make you seem informed, just pretentious.

I'm anything but a nihilist; that's an odd conclusion to arrive at based solely on my view on sexuality.

Nevertheless, human sexuality is the act of sex - every other non-medical discourse concerning it is twaddle at best, but more usually amounts to deviancy. You may contend the maladaptation of such deviancy, but it doesn't change the fact that it is deviancy.

It's amusing when people professing to this kind of rhetoric claim the intellectual high-ground without offering anything in return. Let's agree for the sake of the argument that my understanding of human sexuality is the oversimplification of a philistine. Now, since you clearly have a better understanding of it I ask you to educate me on the matter; explaining "the lifestyles that are designed with that act as a goal" is such an opportune start, because I have to be honest with you, my brain almost melted upon reading this phrase.

If you argue that all things are pointless then you are arguing nihilism. I did not say you are, but rather what my response would be if you were.

You are saying that the argument of human sexuality in which I claim it is about more than the act itself is rhetoric even after my assertion that there are lifestyles which are designed with that act as a goal (or as a means to achieve other goals), but you have not explained why it is nonsense, deviancy, or rhetoric.

I wonder if you really do not accept flirting as part of human sexuality or the wide variety of other activities.

Well, you brought up nihilism out of nowhere; it follows that you're at least alluding at the possibility of me being a nihilist, which is a strange conclusion even on the grounds of this discussion.

My comment about nihilism was a direct response to the possibility of its proposition after saying anything is pointless. It seemed like a fair response to saying that something is inane. No offense intended, by the way.

That's faulty reasoning. Nihilism is a philosophy of life - a system of belief - based on the meaninglessness of existence; it's an inadequate proposition to make based on someone's belief that a particular aspect of a particular issue is nonsensical.

None taken, by the way; the proposition is just flawed.

You are saying that when you meant rhetoric, you did not literally and essentially call my comment Sophistry or even like the argumentation utilized by the Sophists. Okay. What did you mean?

But I already stated what I meant: "as by rhetoric I mean the premise you purveyed on human sexuality". Are you even reading my posts in full?

The challenge that you have set is not exactly the correct one for you to understand human sexuality. For one, it is not invisible, but rather something that is viewable if one knows what to look for in certain situations. Flirting, for example, utilizes subtle cues in order to act. The very fact that words are involved is reason enough to recognize that human sexuality is more than simply the act itself, but also the discussions which transpire related to it.

"Would you take offense if I had the gall to plant a kiss on this beautiful shoulder?" "You'll figure that out soon enough after the deed." (poster by Henri Gerbault)

Within this poster, the male initiates flirting by suggesting that he kisses the shoulder of the woman. In response, the female flirts as well. He proposes, and she informs him that the actual act itself is granted. It is only that her response might not be what he expects which allows opportunity not just for the kiss, but for the male to remain in a leading role. An interesting aspect of flirting is that it can be based on sexual interest, but no action need follow the flirting including, in this case, the kiss.

Did that make sense?

Now that qualifies as rhetoric in the strict sense of the word. By invisible I meant the allegedly intangible part of sexuality that transcends sex and its sphere. I specifically stated that when I said "the act of sex and what concerns it".

To entertain your rhetoric, flirting has one of two ends in mind: either sex or romantic interest. If it's the former then my point stands; if it's the latter then we're no longer talking about sexuality as romanticism is either psychological - if you're an unwavering realist - or spiritual, if you're spiritual yourself.

However you look at sexuality, there's little ground for stripping naked in academia along with your esteemed professor. In order not to have fallen into your rhetoric, you still haven't provided an intelligent and substantive argument in favor of your conception of sexuality, which remains strangely undisclosed given your alleged superior understanding of sexuality. Unless you're going to address either, please refrain from equivocation and drivel.

@GazaAli: What the hell does that mean? Can you alternatively share a dark secret or something?

God damn this liberalism

There, there brotha', let me plant a kiss on your beautiful shoulder.

yup. while to me it sounds silly ( i'm not an art person ) 1) the syllabus is there for a reason and 2) the students are adults if they're in college and can make adult decisions

Ah it's been a while since someone resorted to that petty argument.

Nevertheless, let's do that: let's compare the homicide rate, rape rate, crime rate - and all the usual metrics that give us a window to the moral fabric of a society - where I live to that of the place with the naked class; you'll realize that the numbers aren't your ally. As it stands, the only argument you have is "but they can be butt naked, even in class!", and we all know just how pivotal that is.

Really now? Should we go down the list of education? Poverty rate? Health care? Overall wealth? No what I am trying point out is the triviality of the matter of a voluntary class compared to real problems in the world and the United States.. Because I guarantee you the vast majority of people would rather live in the United States than where you live.. No one here is saying the United States is amazing to live in, there are numerous REAL problems in the country.. But this is really sounding like a fat guy having the balls to tell us what being healthy is. And if you really think that this is some how the guiding example of unraveling "morals" and not the rampant corruption, greed, treatment of poor, prison system etc etc in the United States, then I would say you have some really fucked up priorities which idk really says something about your upbringing in where you live more than anything else..

Don't mistake prosperity for uprightness;

Ah yes Gaza, because your some how the authority what is right or wrong..

a comparison between where I live and where that class is taught in terms of deviant behavior isn't related to the prosperity metrics you cited.

Sure it is.. Many portions of that region your from women are treated like property.. Women who do not cover up are looked down upon to being beaten.. This includes in your region in which the Hamas through out the late 2000's til 2014 was trying to enforce Islamic laws. So yes, "deviant" behavior as you so put it is a huge difference what YOU think it is and what others think it is in the west.. Furthermore we already know you have STRONG feelings against things like homosexuality which you would most likely class as deviant, this yet again illustrates YOUR difference in view points.. You seem not to comprehend that your views are not some how the authority on the matter..

Therefore, your classy analogy remains flawed. More importantly, your reasoning reveals your belief that wherewithal and morality are correlated, a belief that is morally barren and quite reactionary.

Besides, don't equivocate; in nowhere in this topic did I make any of the assumptions you spoke of. You, on the other hand, are persistently trying to derail the discussion in their direction. My guess is that you can't argue in favor of something you endorse aimlessly.

I neither endorse nor condemn this class, what I find offensive is that you are some how quantifying it directly and indirectly as some how the disintegration of western culture and morals.. I mean that was pretty obvious with your topic title.. That things like pornography, this class, gays all illustrate that we are clearly just a bunch of deviants over here that don't value "your uprightness" as it is..

If an ailment dwindles in significance in comparison to another, it doesn't cease to be an ailment and its discussion remains justifiable, though I wouldn't trivialize such behavior taking place in academia in the first place - but hey, that's just me.

You have yet to prove that it is ailment to begin with.. What most of us see here is a bunch of consenting adults agreeing to something that is optional for a class they were given full information to beforehand..

Now you're taking shots at my upbringing too? How petty.

Yep sure do buddy.. When your throwing around the idea of a moral superiority of a place you most likely have never been in how the culture is supposedly falling apart, might want to look around where you live buddy.. Because to the outside viewer when we are having clashing ideas and values, they are going to look at the two sides and see which one is ultimately more successful... Where does that "uprightness" get you? Seriously lets look at the places in the world in which things like this are allowed, pornography exists and gays are allowed to marry.. Keeping that in mind lets look at areas in the world where this "uprightness" is enforced.. Are we seeing pattern here?