A recreational function

November 24th, 2012 at 9:00 am by David Farrar

Heh, I had to laugh at this quote from National MP Chris Auchinvole on the Marriage Bill:

National MP said he understood the importance of pro-creation but could not see how gay marriage was a threat to that.

”Sexual activity is a recreational and emotional function as well as just procreation,” he said.

A very polite way of saying is damn enjoyable :-)

Tags: , ,

44 Responses to “A recreational function”

  1. East Wellington Superhero (1,151 comments) says:

    Once again DPF highlights the important aspects of the debate.

    [DPF: Once again you demonstrate that you need to get some more of the aforementioned recreational function. If you did, I'm sure you'd chill out more]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Fletch (6,296 comments) says:

    Yes, sex is enjoyable (and so it should be), but that is not the main reason for it.

    You could compare it with eating. Eating can be enjoyable too (depending on what you’re eating, of course), but the enjoyment we get from eating is not it’s main purpose either.

    I think that describing sex as “recreational” pretty much cheapens it; these days it’s no longer the “act of making love” (the keyword here being love). Sex has been brought down to the level of just another stimulant; something we enjoy on a Friday night, along with a beer and a cigarette.

    It’s a sad indictment on society that it has come down to being called “recreational”.

    [DPF: Yes sex is needed (for now) for procreation. Most families have two kids. So should they have sex just a few times to produce kids.

    Yes sex with someone you are in love with is fantastic - there is nothing quite like it. But you know what - sex with someone you are not in love with is still bloody good fun. If you have a period in your life where you are not in love with someone, why would you not have fun having sex? It's great!!]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. nasska (11,277 comments) says:

    Fletch

    You’ll die a virgin. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    along with a beer and a cigarette

    thats after the sex Fletch,- mind you if your missus doesn’t mind you doing these things during who am to quibble.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. BeaB (2,119 comments) says:

    Fletch.
    You sad person. For most of us sex has been and always will be for fun (just like beer and cigarettes – many hours of pleasure there too). Otherwise we’d be popping out babies every year like our poor doomed foremothers.
    That dated procreation argument against gay marriages of course leads logically to a fertility test for all engaged couples as marriage shouldn’t be allowed for the sterile.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. David Garrett (7,112 comments) says:

    PEB: Very good Sir…lucky I didn’t have my mouth full of coffee…

    Seriously, anyone who thinks it was EVER just about procreation is either a religious zealot, or a person who has led a very limited life…The Catholic church – of which I was once a reluctant member – has a great deal to answer for…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. East Wellington Superhero (1,151 comments) says:

    @ Beb and DPF
    No serious opponent of SSM thinks it’s all about procreation. Not that anyone reading this blog would be exposed to a serious argument against SSM.
    With regard to Catholics who don’t use contraception “popping out heaps of kids”. Please. Do some fucking reading instead of believing the crap you read in liberal rags or Hollywood.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. David Garrett (7,112 comments) says:

    Superhero: Ah! the rythmn method…as the old joke went, what do you call a woman who uses the rythmn method?

    “Mum”

    Oh and btw, I myself am opposed to Same sex marriage…sorry …”marriage equality”…love to know who dreamed up that spin term…who can be against equality?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Fletch (6,296 comments) says:

    David Garrett, et al – I didn’t say sex was JUST for procreation. But that is one of it’s main reasons. It’s also bringing the man and woman closer together and for their combined enjoyment, but within the confines of marriage.

    I am only talking about being against the one night stand and fornication kind of thing.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. East Wellington Superhero (1,151 comments) says:

    I bet no one here (with the exception of Fletcher maybe) actually knows what the “rhythm method” is, or whether the Catholic Church even officially teaches it. These things tend to be punch lines used by people with entrenched views and prejudices who have no desire to debate the issues, let alone arrive at some answers.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    EWS

    Yep, I do, had the blesssing of being brought up Catholic, your point is?

    What your massive generalisation does is make you sound smug and smarmy, rather like a recently demoted labour hack

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. David Garrett (7,112 comments) says:

    No, I dont think the Church of Cardinal Pell actually teaches the rythmn method…they just let the poor women (literally in many cases) who used to be condemned to producing every year or so know that if they practise that instead of other methods, they won’t go to hell after all….and that, IMO, is even bloody worse…

    Then there’s the local Catholic priest who, in between his own “recreational” activities, tells women that contrary to the rulings of the Grand Pooh Bah in Rome, if they talk to God and between them (the woman and God) they decide the pill is not a sin after all, then that’s OK then….

    You can bet the revelations in Australia will have a domino effect over here….I personally can’t wait…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. wat dabney (3,725 comments) says:

    Fletch’s neighbours’ webcam:

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Fletch (6,296 comments) says:

    The so-called “Rhythm method” is much more effective these days, called SDM.

    ScienceDaily (Sep. 20, 2011) — A simple-to-use, fertility-awareness based method of family planning developed by researchers from the Institute for Reproductive Health at Georgetown University Medical Center so effectively meets the needs of users that they continue to rely on it for years.

    A new study finds that women who follow the Standard Days Method®, are likely to continue using the method and to use it effectively. Results of the large, multi-country study of 1659 women appear in the October 2011 issue of the Journal of Family Planning & Reproductive Health Care.

    The Standards Days Method was established as an effective short-term (one year) family planning method in a study published in 2002. In this earlier study, of which Jennings was the principal investigator, the Standard Days Method was found to be more than 95 percent effective at avoiding pregnancy, with a failure rate of less than 5 percent. This effectiveness rate is higher than other use-directed methods such as diaphragm or condom.

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/09/110920103822.htm

    ScienceDaily (Feb. 21, 2007) — Researchers have found that a method of natural family planning that uses two indicators to identify the fertile phase in a woman’s menstrual cycle is as effective as the contraceptive pill for avoiding unplanned pregnancies if used correctly, according to a report published online in Europe’s leading reproductive medicine journal Human Reproduction today (21 February). [1]

    The symptothermal method (STM) is a form of natural family planning (NFP) that enables couples to identify accurately the time of the woman’s fertile phase by measuring her temperature and observing cervical secretions. In the largest, prospective study of STM, the researchers found that if the couples then either abstained from sex or used a barrier method during the fertile period, the rate of unplanned pregnancies per year was 0.4% and 0.6% respectively. Out of all the 900 women who took part in the study, including those who had unprotected sex during their fertile period, 1.8 per 100 became unintentionally pregnant.

    The lead author of the report, Petra Frank-Herrmann, assistant professor and managing director of the natural fertility section in the Department of Gynaecological Endocrinology at the University of Heidelberg, Germany, said: “For a contraceptive method to be rated as highly efficient as the hormonal pill, there should be less than one pregnancy per 100 women per year when the method is used correctly. The pregnancy rate for women who used the STM method correctly in our study was 0.4%, which can be interpreted as one pregnancy occurring per 250 women per year. Therefore, we maintain that the effectiveness of STM is comparable to the effectiveness of modern contraceptive methods such as oral contraceptives, and is an effective and acceptable method of family planning.”

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/02/070221065200.htm

    The Church doesn’t have anything against these natural methods of family planning (that turn out to be as effective or even more effective than artificial contraception).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Mary Rose (393 comments) says:

    >The symptothermal method (STM) is a form of natural family planning (NFP) that enables couples to identify accurately the time of the woman’s fertile phase by measuring her temperature and observing cervical secretions.

    And it works because doing that is enough to put anyone off sex!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Fletch (6,296 comments) says:

    Mary Rose, actually, it looks like that only needs to be established once, and from then on they use beads to keep track of the days (see pic of beads in 1st link). Not that I know for sure, as I haven’t looked that deeply into it.

    Anything that doesn’t require drugs etc ought to be a good thing i reckon.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. kowtow (8,326 comments) says:

    The “progressive” agenda rolls relentlessly on with political ,academic and legal elites imposing their narrow views on society. A sociiety that is rapidly going down the shitter.
    All the while Abdul and his homebred hordes waiting and watching.
    Demographics , “human rights” and a traitorous political class will do to the west what a thousand years of Moslem invasions couldn’t.

    Laugh all you like at those silly left footers. The last laugh will be Islamic.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. David Garrett (7,112 comments) says:

    “… they use beads to keep track of the days.” = Mum

    Mary Rose, with a handle like that, you are presumably another survivor of the holy mother church?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Mary Rose (393 comments) says:

    Agreed that popping hormones down your throat for years isn’t ideal.
    ‘Your’ system doesn’t do much for spontaneity, though.

    DG: nah.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. East Wellington Superhero (1,151 comments) says:

    @ Pauleastbays

    My point is that spurious arguments are rife in this debate, and when they don’t get the desired results, jokes (and/or bullying) are then deployed.

    Granted, this is only a blog, so my expectations shouldn’t be too high (I’m just here til washing load is done then i’m off to enjoy the Auckland sun) but DPF (who I largely respect) likes to adopt the rationalist high-ground when criticising his opponents. But on this issue he throws that out the window.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Harriet (4,857 comments) says:

    Do you not have your glasses on today DPF?

    ”Sexual activity is a recreational and emotional function as well as just procreation,”

    ‘AS WELL’

    Sodomy is NOT procreation……..Gays are trying as usual to confuse people by suggesting that ‘sex’ is the same as ‘sexual activity’!

    But just because someone F….. a sheep does NOT mean it is ‘sex’ – but according to Auchinvol it is ‘sexual activity’ so then it must be sex? LOL DPF …..Auchinvol is taking the piss or he is F……. in the head!

    Sodomy is the same as a sheep. It’s a backside!

    You should start thinking for yourself DPF rather than being a follower of the Gay Religion Flock! :cool:

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. David Garrett (7,112 comments) says:

    EWS: bullying? On a BLOG? How old are you man; harden up! No-one is making you sit in front of the screen if it all becomes too much……

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. nasska (11,277 comments) says:

    Harriet

    If the only thing stopping you from trying interspecies sex is the thought that it is all gay & smacks of sodomy let me set your mind to rest.

    If you choose carefully it should be possible to select a female sheep. Although they don’t all have pink ribbons in their wool the fact that they lack balls & a penis should offer a clue. A little further inspection should indicate to you that ewes have an arsehole & a vaginal opening which will at least offer you a choice.

    Obviously as a town dwelling papist you have lived a sheltered life but you have a 50/50 chance of getting it right the first time. With a little effort you should get the hang of it so good luck & all the best for the future. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    Good to see you managed to get “sodomy ” in before Chuck turned up Harriet.

    What is this fixation with sodomy you have, the thread was rocking along not causing any world problems to be solved and you “slip it in” as it were. You must get over this fetish.

    And Fletch those beads you mention are available at Peaches and Cream”, stores on K Road and a bigger one in Cuba Mall.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Harriet (4,857 comments) says:

    “……You can bet the revelations in Australia will have a domino effect over here….I personally can’t wait…”

    Can you name any individual or organisation other than the Catholic Church that has been paying abuse victims 10’s and 100’s of Thousands of dollars?

    And also paying for ‘therapy’?

    I can’t think of any neighbour, uncle, sports coach, teacher, scout master or any organisation that they worked for while abusing children, who have gone to that trouble……unless the court has ordered them too!

    Why are scouts, sports clubs etc immuned from paying…….the abusers from places like these operated exactly the same as priests ….on their OWN!

    As Pell has said “Lot’s of lies are being said.” [I read that in the Australian]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. David Garrett (7,112 comments) says:

    PEB: You are on form today…must be nice late spring weather in the Bay?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Harriet (4,857 comments) says:

    PEB#

    “…..What is this fixation with sodomy you have…”

    I’m not gay so I don’t HAVE a fixation with sodomy!

    Why do people like you have a fixation with thinking that ‘sodomy is EQUAL to penis/vagina sex’ ?

    As I pointed out -via a sheep- all sexual activity is NOT equal!

    Sodomy is not in the natural order of things! You could also included blowjobs etc too!

    Here is an ABSOLUTE TRUTH – Not all relationships are equal either! :cool:

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    Harriet

    I was just wondering why its always you and old Chuck that always bring it up?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. freemark (569 comments) says:

    So, I have 2 beautiful children that were conceived in love, by a couple of great fucks. Their mother and I no longer love each other – or at least we can no longer live together – yet the girls get ample love.
    I meet and have sex with many women in a similar situation – normal sex, oral sex, anal sex, you name it.. I am snipped.
    Is there some moral problem with any of this? The sex is purely for fun, should I be celibate?
    Please keep your moral judgements (or sexual jealousies) to yourselves.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Scott (1,780 comments) says:

    Couple of points from me. There is a large number of people who support this legislation because they want the sexual licence that comes with legislation like this. We appear to have abandoned any standard of morality and decency with regards to sexual matters. Sadly the concepts of monogamy and and self control and moral restraint which are essential to actual marriage have largely fallen by the wayside.
    Secondly the National MP’S are like tits on a bull. They are not running the select committee. It is being chaired by Ruth Dyson Labour and is supported by Kevin Hague of the Greens who are engaged in this committee in a whole hearted manner. Labour has ostensibly lost the last 2 elections. But on this vital issue they have ceded control to Labour. It is really like Helen Clark was still the prime minister. The progressive agenda rolls on. Meanwhile the national government is asleep at the wheel.

    [DPF: Just to be clear, when you refer to moral restraint, does that mean you think two unmarried adults should not have sex with each other? Or masturbate? How about kissing? Or third base?]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Scott (1,780 comments) says:

    Just to be clear-moral restraint is not a difficult concept. It involves saving oneself for marriage. When people do so they give themselves the best possible chance of getting married and staying married. It means they care enough to save themselves for the one they love. It was the type of moral framework practiced by our grandparents.
    For those wanting more information a look at Downton Abbey would probably help :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    Scott

    the servant girls of Downtown abby will have been plucked fucked and re-bored, gotten pregnant by the master , tag teamed by the sons and then kicked out of the house.

    if you are that naive that you think this was not so and pre-marital sex started circa 1981, please don’t vote

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. nasska (11,277 comments) says:

    Scott

    You religious fruitloops sure have ways to make life difficult for yourselves. No sex before marriage, bugger all sex after marriage, no wanking, cold showers & potassium bromide in the salt shaker.

    Go & have a decent root before it’s too late…..we won’t tell. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Griff (7,520 comments) says:

    And neither scott will the sheep :grin:

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Scott (1,780 comments) says:

    Pauleastbay, nonsense. It was not uncommon in the past for people of our grandparents generation to save themselves for marriage. While of course some fell short of the market, still there was a mark. A shared understanding of common decency in word and deed. A common decency that appears to have eluded the rest of the comments following yours.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    Righto Scott, dear oh dear

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. David Garrett (7,112 comments) says:

    Ah, yes….and girls didn’t “go up north for a while”, become “land girls” for seven months or so, or die from illegal abortions. And brothels only emerged about thirty years ago because so many men were “saving themselves” that there just wasn’t any demand for them.

    Have you ever heard of a certain Mary Magdalene Scott? Or the temple prostitutes? What exactly WERE the citizens of Sodom and Gomorrah doing that displeased the old testament God so much? (It was the older testament version wasn’t it?)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Viking2 (11,417 comments) says:

    Scott (1,099) Says:
    November 24th, 2012 at 7:46 pm

    Pauleastbay, nonsense. It was not uncommon in the past for people of our grandparents generation to save themselves for marriage. While of course some fell short of the market, still there was a mark. A shared understanding of common decency in word and deed. A common decency that appears to have eluded the rest of the comments following yours.
    ———————————
    If you say so Scott. Ever done any real geneology? Amazing what you can uncover from under the covers!

    Anyway on things tradition and modern and recreational sex life of Lord Nelson.

    Nelson at Trafalgar 2012
    Nelson: “Order the signal, Hardy.”

    Hardy: “Aye, aye sir.”

    Nelson: “Hold on, this isn’t what I dictated to Flags. What’s the meaning of this?”

    Hardy: “Sorry sir?”

    Nelson (reading aloud): „ England expects every person to do his or her duty, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious persuasion or disability.’ – What gobbledygook is this for God’s sake?”

    Hardy: “Admiralty policy, I’m afraid, sir. We’re an equal opportunities employer now. We had the devil’s own job getting ” England ” past the censors, lest it be considered racist.”

    Nelson: “Gadzooks, Hardy. Hand me my pipe and tobacco.”

    Hardy: “Sorry sir. All naval vessels have now been designated smoke-free working environments.”

    Nelson: “In that case, break open the rum ration. Let us splice the main brace to steel the men before battle.”

    Hardy: “The rum ration has been abolished, Admiral. Its part of the Government’s policy on binge drinking.”

    Nelson: “Good heavens, Hardy. I suppose we’d better get on with it full speed ahead.”

    Hardy: “I think you’ll find that there’s a 4 knot speed limit in this stretch of water.”

    Nelson: “Damn it man! We are on the eve of the greatest sea battle in history. We must advance with all dispatch. Report from the crow’s nest, please.”

    Hardy: “That won’t be possible, sir.”

    Nelson: “What?”

    Hardy: “Health and Safety have closed the crow’s nest, sir. No harness; and they said that rope ladders don’t meet regulations. They won’t let anyone up there until proper scaffolding can be erected.”

    Nelson: “Then get me the ship’s carpenter without delay, Hardy.”

    Hardy: “He’s busy knocking up a wheelchair access to the foredeck Admiral.”

    Nelson: “Wheelchair access? I’ve never heard anything so absurd.”

    Hardy: “Health and safety again, sir. We have to provide a barrier- free environment for the differently abled.”

    Nelson: “Differently abled? I’ve only one arm and one eye and I refuse even to hear mention of the word. I didn’t rise to the rank of admiral by playing the disability card.”

    Hardy: “Actually, sir, you did. The Royal Navy is under- represented in the areas of visual impairment and limb deficiency.”

    Nelson: “Whatever next? Give me full sail. The salt spray beckons.”

    Hardy: “A couple of problems there too, sir. Health and safety won’t let the crew up the rigging without hard hats. And they don’t want anyone breathing in too much salt – haven’t you seen the adverts?”

    Nelson: “I’ve never heard such infamy. Break out the cannon and tell the men to stand by to engage the enemy.”

    Hardy: “The men are a bit worried about shooting at anyone, Admiral.”

    Nelson: “What? This is mutiny!”

    Hardy: “It’s not that, sir. It’s just that they’re afraid of being charged with murder if they actually kill anyone. There are a couple of legal-aid lawyers on board, watching everyone like hawks.”

    Nelson: “Then how are we to sink the Frenchies and the Spanish?”

    Hardy: “Actually, sir, we’re not.”

    Nelson: “We’re not?”

    Hardy: “No, sir. The French and the Spanish are our European partners now. According to the Common Fisheries Policy, we shouldn’t even be in this stretch of water. We could get hit with a claim for compensation.”

    Nelson: “But you must hate a Frenchman as you hate the devil.”

    Hardy: “I wouldn’t let the ship’s diversity coordinator hear you saying that sir. You’ll be up on disciplinary report.”

    Nelson: “You must consider every man an enemy, who speaks ill of your King.”

    Hardy: “Not any more, sir. We must be inclusive in this multicultural age. Now put on your Kevlar vest; it’s the rules. It could save your life”

    Nelson: “Don’t tell me – Health and Safety. Whatever happened to rum, sodomy and the lash?”

    Hardy: As I explained, sir, rum is off the menu! And there’s a ban on corporal punishment.”

    Nelson: “What about sodomy?”

    Hardy: “I believe that is now legal, sir.”

    Nelson: “In that case………………. Kiss me, Hardy.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Viking2 (11,417 comments) says:

    DG, apparently the older generations didn’t have as many raging hormones when they were young.

    Must be right after all the world population has gone from 1 billion in 1900 to 5.5 billion today. Cause they all saved themselves eh?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Viking2 (11,417 comments) says:

    Now modern days.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Viking2 (11,417 comments) says:

    Still we can blame these.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Viking2 (11,417 comments) says:

    Support Your People.
    New Jewish Channel. Apparently

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Scott (1,780 comments) says:

    David Garrett and others, sure there was the things you are talking about in days gone by. But let’s get some proportion please. Society has changed massively over the last 50 years. And much of that has been in the area of sexual liberalisation. That point is obvious surely? And our grandparents had different standards including no sex before marriage. Now they may not have all lived up to that standard but many did. I think this point is so obvious that it is hardly worth arguing. Gay marriage is another nail in the coffin for a decent society with decent morals. Marriage does require decent morals if it is to work. Another obvious point which regrettably seems to be lost on many of you.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. chiz (1,135 comments) says:

    EWS:Not that anyone reading this blog would be exposed to a serious argument against SSM.

    If no one reading this blog has been exposed to a serious argument against SSM its probably because none of the opponents of SSM will post one. Instead they just keep posting silly arguments against it. Perhaps they should try posting one of these serious arguments sometime.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.