But the sense of accomplishment and victory over one's desires. Not many people can say that they have attained that status.

Besides, I get enough pleasure reading the posts and posting here. :_)

Like in ancient Mesopotamia, the birth of civilisation? And yet you called them savages when I showed you that they practiced same-sex marriage. — Michael

There's a reason why those were the beginnings of civilisation. Alas, I don't take much concern with same-sex marriage, my concern is with promiscuity. Chastity has nothing to do with same-sex marriage.

However, there is ample historical evidence that early humans were promiscuous, and chastity developed along with civilisation. Even Marx and Engels recognised this.

But the sense of accomplishment and victory over one's desires. Not many people can say that they have attained that status. — Question

Not many people would want to have attained that status.

Not many people would want to have attained that status. — Michael

And is that good or bad?

Why do you suppose virginity applies only to women? — Agustino

This should be obvious. 1) Men do not have a hymen which can be breached, thus providing evidence of virginity or not. 2) Women were sexual property of men, not visa versa. 3) Men were expected to have sexual experiences prior to marriage, women were not. You have heard of the double standard?

Of course, a man can be a "virgin", not that it was much of a virtue.

Actually chastity is precisely one characteristic that is specific of civilisation, not of savagery. — Agustino

I think Michael was making a joke which you didn't get.

Besides, chastity can be taken on, whereas virginity once lost can not be regained. Nuns and monks who have had sex (even a great deal of sex) can become chaste, poor, and obedient, if they have nothing better to do with their time.

And is that good or bad? — Agustino

Probably good, as I seem to recall psychologists saying that it's harmful to suppress sexual desire.

Then, I'm not many people then. This is funny, people are arguing that I should indulge in self pleasure. Self-pleasure is evil.

1) Men do not have a hymen which can be breached, thus providing evidence of virginity or not — Bitter Crank

Oh dear... how does this square with what I have said that virginity isn't physical?! The hymen can break without intercourse.

2) Women were sexual property of men, not visa versa — Bitter Crank

Not in all societies. There were matriarchies as well.

3) Men were expected to have sexual experiences prior to marriage, women were not — Bitter Crank

Only in the relatively more modern period.

You have heard of the double standard? — Bitter Crank

Yes that's Victorian England.

Of course, a man can be a "virgin", not that it was much of a virtue. — Bitter Crank

:-d

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chastity

Right, please study this link and note how in all societies, as evidenced by their religions, chastity was recommended (as a virtue) REGARDLESS of gender.

Probably good, as I seem to recall some psychologists saying that it's harmful to suppress sexual desire. — Michael

Not having sex or masturbating isn't the same as suppressing the desire. There is suppression, expression and sublimation. I advocate that third option.

Self-pleasure is evil. — Question

It ain't.

That's what everyone says. See, there is never any level of satisfaction achieved with self-pleasure. It's like telling a drug addict his or her habits are wrong.

Now do you guys think that all these people - were the retards to think chastity was a virtue?! >:O

See, there is never any level of satisfaction achieved with self-pleasure. — Question

Yes there is. But even if there wasn't, that wouldn't make it evil.

It's like telling a drug addict his or her habits are wrong.

Their addictions are harmful, and this harm can be empirically measured. There isn't any harm in self-pleasure (unless it, too, is an addiction). Unless you want to bring in the utterly nonsense notion of "spiritual harm".

Now do you guys think that all these people - were the retards to think chastity was a virtue?! — Agustino

Not necessarily retarded. Just misguided.

Yes there is. But even if there wasn't, that wouldn't make it evil. — Michael

Most religions recognize that self-pleasure leads to the path of unhappiness. And, quite frankly my excessive (previous) indulgence in pornography has made me quite unhappy.

Most religions recognize that self-pleasure leads to the path of unhappiness. — Question

That doesn't make it true. I would say that religions are prone to falsehoods.

And, quite frankly my excessive (previous) indulgence in pornography has made me quite unhappy.

That wouldn't make it evil. And I think the key term there is excessive. Anything that's excessive is a problem, e.g. excessive eating. The key is moderation. Outright avoidance can be just as problematic as indulging too much.

Praise be! Thank Christ that my moderated indulgence of cannibalism hasn't become too excessive! :D

My neighbor fell in love with my wife. Question, was it you?! :-O

That doesn't make it true. I would say that religions are prone to falsehoods. — Michael

They are prone to falsehoods; but, they are right in some regards. Whether they take things to excess is another matter.

That wouldn't make it evil. And I think the key term there is excessive. Anything that's excessive is a problem, e.g. excessive eating. The key is moderation. Outright avoidance can be just as problematic as indulging too much. — Michael

No, it would not make it evil; but, it exposes oneself unnecessarily to the vices and dark elements of human nature. How do you know how much self-pleasure is enough? You don't.

You have a wife? I'm sorry but I thought you were too mad of a fool to have one. :_)

virginity isn't physical — Agustino

Sorry. Psychic virginity does not compute.

matriarchies — Agustino

Please list the extant matriarchies where men are considered property the way women are considered property under patriarchy (as if there were such a thing as matriarchy and patriarchy).

Yes that's Victorian England — Agustino

Victorian England, he says. Double standards preceded Victoria Regina and survive into the 21st century.

chastity — Agustino

Chastity schmastity.. My guess is that chastity has been honored everywhere more in the breach than in the observance.

And, quite frankly my excessive (previous) indulgence in pornography has made me quite unhappy. — Question

My take on us people is that we are much more alike than we are different, and that we tend to be unhappy a lot because we think we have failed to live up to society's high standards (and have made the unobtainable social ideals our own). A lot of us beat ourselves over the head for failing to live up to both our own, (and society's) often quite unreasonable expectations.

Everything connected with sex tends to be connected to some sort of high ideal, high standard, or religious rigamarole. It's easy to fail with sex. We either had too much; too little; were too casual about it or too serious; didn't do it the right way or didn't do it with the right people; took too long, didn't take long enough, and so on ad nauseum.

Try forgiving yourself more and do more of what makes you happy.

Not necessarily retarded. Just misguided. — Michael

That's a bit pretentious of you

Sorry. Psychic virginity does not compute. — Bitter Crank

I recommend a change of operating system ;)

Please list the extant matriarchies where men are considered property the way women are considered property under patriarchy (as if there were such a thing as matriarchy and patriarchy). — Bitter Crank

First please tell me what is the way women are considered property under patriarchy...

Victorian England, he says. Double standards preceded Victoria Regina and survive into the 21st century. — Bitter Crank

Nope, that's double application of a single standard, not double standards.

Chastity schmastity.. My guess is that chastity has been honored everywhere more in the breach than in the observance. — Bitter Crank

No no, don't laugh at it. This is a very historical point. It doesn't matter if chastity was ALWAYS broken and not observed, the historical fact, which is undeniable, regardless of what you say, is that people have thought that chastity is important. That's why they have created moral codes in which chastity was a virtue for male and female alike all over the world and independently. You obviously don't quite like this. However, your dislike of it doesn't change the historical facts.

Try forgiving yourself more and do more of what makes you happy. — Bitter Crank

Philosophy, as Marcus Aurelius would say to guide one's steps and path in such a torturous world full of lust, desire, and evil.

Marko would say something like that, of course, and no matter how you slice it, the way through the world is tortuous. Whether lust and desire are the deepest, most dangerous pits into which we might fall while we traverse this veil of tears) is open to dispute. Lust, in particular, is quite dangerous and finds its objects in wealth (avarice), food and comforts (gluttony), vengeance (wrath), or achievement (pride) as well as S*E*X.

Desire is pitched much higher. We don't 'lust' after the good, we desire the good. We desire love--eros, philia, agape, storge, ludus, pragma, philautia, of which eros (sex) is but one (albeit double-edged) form.

Love in all ways:

Philia, or deep friendship
Ludus, or playful love
Agape, or love for everyone
Eros, or sexual passion
Pragma, or longstanding love
Philautia, or love of the self
Storge, or familial love

If we only aim for eros which is the easiest love -- hard wired by nature to assure our continued existence -- then we are more likely to get tripped up. But there are other forms of love that are compatible with eros which will keep us balanced.

Self-pleasure is evil. — Question

Pfft! And your reasons for this are "most religions say so", and "I excessively watched porn and this made me unhappy"?

Wow.

@Michael, your replies to Question and Agustino are spot on. Took the words right outta my mouth.

Chastity schmastity... — Bitter Crank

My thoughts exactly.

Why can't manual/genital involve a partner?

It could, obviously, unless one were doing it alone.

As Irving Berlin says,

if you've got something that must be done
And it can only be done by one
There is nothing more to say.
But I hope whatever you've got to do
Is something that can be done by two
For she'd really like to stay glued to you
And would be so happy to be doing you, dude...

You probably didn't know Old Berlin used "dude". He was way ahead of his time.

Philosophy, as Marcus Aurelius would say to guide one's steps and path in such a torturous world full of lust, desire, and evil. — Question

There's probably a half-way house between Marcus Aurelius's iron self control and Bitter's permissiveness (if I can call it that - BC has been fairly conservative in his advice actually). That's to say, the likely result of fetishizing self-denial as a means to avoid the evil in oneself is a psychological magnification of this "evil" into an unjustifiable level of threat i.e. you end up in a state of underlying fear that you can never shake. On the other hand, disregarding the potential damage that following your desires can do to your mental and physical health is likely to lead to a degeneration of both. The way out probably is to exhaust most of your energy in worthwhile work and to allow yourself to funnel what's left into the satisfaction of basic desires. In other words, make it so you don't need an iron will to combat your desires because there isn't enough surplus psychic energy for them to redirect in a damaging way.

There's probably a half-way house between Marcus Aurelius's iron self control — Baden

But, it's Marcus Aurelius. The philosopher king! The only that ever existed. The good emperor as his populace called him.

You all must attend a virtual university and watch:


Please report back when you have done so! (Y) :D That will be all for today class. You are dismissed!