Teaching Sexual Morality

Regarding children, family, and the home.
Richard_G_603
Posts: 172
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2020 1:34 pm
Location: New Hampshire

Teaching Sexual Morality

Post by Richard_G_603 » Thu Mar 24, 2022 3:30 pm

Hi all! Hoping for a discussion with some good insights.
As many might know I came from a serious Christian background. And a Christian sexual Morality is straightforward, no sex outside of marriage, because the Bible says so.
But I was thinking that a cosmotheist sexual Morality is a little more nuanced? And I'm trying to get a full picture in my head so I know fully well what I'm going to teach my daughter.

I understand that on the most basic of levels, there should be a selection of sexual partners with the intention of upbreeding, to produce a generation greater than the previous.
But what about issues like casual sex/general promiscuity/ "one night stands" for non married individuals, monogamy vs polygamy? Just trying to wrap my head around a consistent worldview.

User avatar
Grimork
Posts: 669
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2020 4:34 pm
Location: North Carolina

Re: Teaching Sexual Morality

Post by Grimork » Thu Mar 24, 2022 4:28 pm

I like to frame it as what is best for the family. Our next generation is incredibly important. Unlike Christianity where you are living ashamed as a result of sin, we are free to live within the confines of what is best for the race, because we choose to, not because we are afraid of eternal damnation.

I think it's pretty clear a stable coupling of mother and father is best for the children. Of course, there's always messy situations such as abuse where a couple may need to be de-paired for safety reasons until another suitable union can be found and the family restabilized. I would never advocate "staying a family" when there is danger involved, kind of defeats the purpose of the safety within the family unit.

I think it's best to raise our children not to be promiscuous, but to value their virginity as a gift (It is, and you only get to spend it once). Sex should be used first and foremost for the sacred task of procreation although, it is important to further the bond between married couples. Children obviously have no business contemplating these matters.

Personally, I don't care what an adult does with their body parts with another adult. The major thing that worries me about polygamy is not the multiple sex partners, it's that I don't believe that most men are capable of the upkeep one family, much less multiple. So, let's say a fella knocks up 5 girls, can he meet the needs of 10 people? That's 5 moms and 5 children. Yeah, usually no. Even if you are having sex just for fun, do you think you could meet the emotional needs of 5 women? Good luck. Someone's going to get their feelings hurt.

I think the main thing is that 1) you got to think about what's best for the race or "collective" and under that 2) What you think is right, not because some book told you to, but just using your own judgement.


This is all just my opinion, so take that for what you will.

Robert Burns
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2020 5:48 am

Re: Teaching Sexual Morality

Post by Robert Burns » Fri Mar 25, 2022 2:47 am

It's pretty clear to me that Whites are evolved to be monogamous for the most part. Polygamy appears to work in some cases too, but the important thing in either case is that the man is meant to form a lifelong bond with his mate and be highly invested in the care of his offspring. In contrast, some animals already know how to walk within minutes of being born, and those are the ones who should be more inclined to have many sex partners, because for them it makes evolutionary sense. However, our babies need years of care and 24/7 attention to develop properly, and I think most people would agree that it's ideal for parents to be involved with their kids for their entire lives, not just when they absolutely need them. We are highly social creatures, and a strong and permanent family unit is very important for filling that need for our whole lives.

For this reason, I think "casual sex" is immoral even with all the various forms of birth control and protection. Even though all the serious risks are way down, it's still a spiritual rejection of our nature. We're simply not evolved to go around having sex with every woman (or man) we think looks nice. Christians take the sexual shaming way too far, but I do think that it should be made clear to our children that sex is a sacred act and should not be taken lightly. Aside from being the way we create new life, it also bonds us to our partner emotionally, which is basically meant to make us better parents in the future. I'm convinced that people who have sex with loads of people that they have absolutely no commitment to are damaging their ability to form such a strong bond with a mate later, or they already have some serious attachment issues that should be addressed, or probably both. In any case, I don't believe it is healthy or moral.

I don't think sex always has to be for procreation or that you have to be married, but I think it should at least be with a partner that you have a serious relationship with, not just with some random chick you met at a bar or whatever.

User avatar
fluxmaster
Posts: 87
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2021 11:00 pm

Re: Teaching Sexual Morality

Post by fluxmaster » Fri Mar 25, 2022 11:01 am

Grimork wrote:
Thu Mar 24, 2022 4:28 pm
Children obviously have no business contemplating these matters.
They need to know the basic facts, and, knowing those facts, they will contemplate whatever they choose to contemplate. There can be no forbidden thoughts, only forbidden actions.

User avatar
Grimork
Posts: 669
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2020 4:34 pm
Location: North Carolina

Re: Teaching Sexual Morality

Post by Grimork » Fri Mar 25, 2022 11:48 am

fluxmaster wrote:
Fri Mar 25, 2022 11:01 am
Grimork wrote:
Thu Mar 24, 2022 4:28 pm
Children obviously have no business contemplating these matters.
They need to know the basic facts, and, knowing those facts, they will contemplate whatever they choose to contemplate. There can be no forbidden thoughts, only forbidden actions.
Sorry I like my children to not be thinking on sex and instead focusing on being children, you can raise your kids however you like. There's a lot more important things such as building relationships before even getting to an adult point.

User avatar
fluxmaster
Posts: 87
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2021 11:00 pm

Re: Teaching Sexual Morality

Post by fluxmaster » Fri Mar 25, 2022 12:56 pm

Grimork wrote:
Fri Mar 25, 2022 11:48 am
fluxmaster wrote:
Fri Mar 25, 2022 11:01 am
Grimork wrote:
Thu Mar 24, 2022 4:28 pm
Children obviously have no business contemplating these matters.
They need to know the basic facts, and, knowing those facts, they will contemplate whatever they choose to contemplate. There can be no forbidden thoughts, only forbidden actions.
Sorry I like my children to not be thinking on sex and instead focusing on being children, you can raise your kids however you like. There's a lot more important things such as building relationships before even getting to an adult point.
Childhood is a time when children learn about the world and develop theories about how the world works. This is especially true of an intelligent child with a scientific mind, who will spend much of his time contemplating the world and theorizing about how things work.

When I was a child, my parents didn't want me to know about sex. It was made clear to me that some things children were forbidden to know and forbidden to talk about. I was an obedient child who respected his elders, so I never sought to obtain any forbidden knowledge or ask about it. I trusted that I would learn those things when I was ready.

What I did know as a child was that a boy had a penis, that a girl didn't, and that a boy used his penis for urinating, so my understanding of human sexuality was that it was all about urination. The difference between boys and girls was that boys urinated one way, and girls urinated another way. So a lot of the attitudes that boys had about girls and that men had about women made no sense to me. Why would someone treat a certain class of people a certain way because of the way they urinated? I also knew that women got pregnant and not men, but that seemed rather odd to me, because a baby developed in his mother's stomach, and both men and women had stomachs. To me, sexuality was all about mode of urination.

Differences in mode of urination was not on the list of forbidden things to talk or think about. Girls would and frequently did complain about how it was so much easier for boys to urinate while, for example, taking a walk in the woods, then it was for girls. This reinforced in me the notion that sexuality was all about mode of urination.

Since I had a theoretical mind, I theorized about why there were two different modes of urination. I reasoned that, since men, in primitive societies, went out in the woods to hunt for food, while women stayed home to cook and take care of the house, men needed penises to urinate in the woods, while women didn't. I reasoned that there should theoretically be four sexes, one sex with two penises, a front penis for urinating and a back penis for defecating, one sex with a penis in back for defecating but none in front for urinating, and the existing two sexes.

In school I was the most intelligent child in my class by far. The other children were all morons who always said and did ridiculous things. When I was six years old, one of the boys tried to explain to me how to beget a child, but I didn't understand what he was talking about. I thought he was saying that a man urinated in a woman's rectum. He appeared to be saying that humans are formed by mixing together urine and feces. I told him that that was ridiculous, that he was making it all up. We were taught in catechism that we were created by God, not formed by mixing together urine and feces.

I was literally the only child in my school who didn't know what sex was. For the next eight years, the children would repeatedly try to explain to me what sex was, but I didn't believe them and kept telling them that they were making it all up. One boy would draw pictures of sexual acts and show them to me. Another boy bragged about sexual acts he had supposedly had with adult women and provided graphic descriptions of such acts. To me, they were all just acting silly.

Much of human behavior makes no sense whatsoever without a basic understanding of sex. An intelligent child with a healthy curiosity about the world will come up with some strange notions about human behavior if he doesn't have a basic understanding of sex. Also, children do experience sexual arousal. Lacking knowledge of sexuality, I thought that arousal was caused by a need to urinate, so I never could understand why I could not urinate when I was sexually aroused.

Having a basic understanding of sex would have spared me all of this. At a minimum, every child, by the time he is six or seven, needs to know that the reason that a boy has a penis has nothing to do with urination, that, as a man, he will use his penis to beget children. He can learn all the fine details when he is ready, but he must understand why, at a basic level, a boy's body is different from a girls, and that it has nothing to do with urination.

Robert Burns
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2020 5:48 am

Re: Teaching Sexual Morality

Post by Robert Burns » Fri Mar 25, 2022 1:30 pm

I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with teaching kids about "adult" matters, in fact I think it's better to teach them early about a number of things that most parents seem to think is not for them to know. I think you just have to cater the way you teach them about such things to their age. You don't have to go into all the nitty gritty stuff nor should you, but to leave them totally in the dark comes with its own problems. Kids are curious, and they will seek information that you don't want them to know, especially if they know there's something you don't want them to know.

My thinking is that if a kid seems curious about something, no matter what it is, some teaching about it should probably be done, and of course the proper timing will be individual to that child. Again, there's no need to just hit them with a bunch of stuff they didn't even want to know, but sheltering them too much can make them feel alienated. My parents left me to figure so much out on my own, and I don't think it preserved my innocence at all. If anything, it had the opposite effect: I just ended up seeking answers anyway but in a much less safe and controlled environment and from people who had no business being the ones to teach me such things, and in the process I was exposed to a lot of stuff that no child should ever be exposed to.

User avatar
Grimork
Posts: 669
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2020 4:34 pm
Location: North Carolina

Re: Teaching Sexual Morality

Post by Grimork » Fri Mar 25, 2022 1:58 pm

Riley wrote:
Fri Mar 25, 2022 1:30 pm
My thinking is that if a kid seems curious about something, no matter what it is, some teaching about it should probably be done, and of course the proper timing will be individual to that child. Again, there's no need to just hit them with a bunch of stuff they didn't even want to know, but sheltering them too much can make them feel alienated. My parents left me to figure so much out on my own, and I don't think it preserved my innocence at all. If anything, it had the opposite effect: I just ended up seeking answers anyway but in a much less safe and controlled environment and from people who had no business being the ones to teach me such things, and in the process I was exposed to a lot of stuff that no child should ever be exposed to.
The problem is, is that you were growing up in a corrupt society where sex is pushed in all media, this is what causes the "curiosity." I don't think in a Cosmotheist society this would be an issue. Of course, questions should be answered but I think it's best if the topic doesn't come up at all until they are ready to start having those types of relationships on their own. Sex education has not reduced the number of teen parents like it was supposed to. :roll:

I don't even let my daughter watch TV or play on the internet and that's not going to change. She will be home-schooled and I will control the kids she is around as I will know what type of parents they have, therefore I can preserve her innocence for a very long time. Till she is a young lady at least and that's the way I want it. I think our near ancestors had a similar protective rearing when it came to sex. Any type of period media will show you that there was an extended courtship to be expected before that type of relationship. I think that's the way it should be. Call me old fashioned if you want.

User avatar
fluxmaster
Posts: 87
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2021 11:00 pm

Re: Teaching Sexual Morality

Post by fluxmaster » Fri Mar 25, 2022 2:22 pm

Grimork wrote:
Fri Mar 25, 2022 1:58 pm
Riley wrote:
Fri Mar 25, 2022 1:30 pm
My thinking is that if a kid seems curious about something, no matter what it is, some teaching about it should probably be done, and of course the proper timing will be individual to that child. Again, there's no need to just hit them with a bunch of stuff they didn't even want to know, but sheltering them too much can make them feel alienated. My parents left me to figure so much out on my own, and I don't think it preserved my innocence at all. If anything, it had the opposite effect: I just ended up seeking answers anyway but in a much less safe and controlled environment and from people who had no business being the ones to teach me such things, and in the process I was exposed to a lot of stuff that no child should ever be exposed to.
The problem is, is that you were growing up in a corrupt society where sex is pushed in all media, this is what causes the "curiosity." I don't think in a Cosmotheist society this would be an issue. Of course, questions should be answered but I think it's best if the topic doesn't come up at all until they are ready to start having those types of relationships on their own. Sex education has not reduced the number of teen parents like it was supposed to. :roll:
Not all curiosity is caused by the media. Normal, healthy children have a natural curiosity about the world and how things work.

If you could have the type of society that you want, with undesirable elements eliminated, and with everyone more or less on the same page as to what information should be given to children, then exactly what information should children be given without asking for it?

At a minimum, they would know the following:
  1. Boys and girls have different anatomy. They would see this when a baby's diaper is changed, and it would be nearly impossible to hide this from them.
  2. Women get pregnant, and men don't. Again, it would be nearly impossible to hide this from them.
  3. A woman's breasts are used for feeding babies and, perhaps, toddlers. There would be no good reason to hide breastfeeding from them, especially since they would be breastfed themselves.
Would you fail to tell them the following information unless directly asked about it:
  1. Why a boy has a penis and testicles, and what their primary use it? If you hide this information from them, you will have a situation where a woman's sexual functions, gestation, birth, and breastfeeding, are well understood, but a man's are a total mystery.
  2. The significance of sexual arousal. Boys do get aroused, and, without a proper understanding of why, they will be running to the bathroom and not understanding why they are unable to urinate.
  3. The facts of menstruation. If a girl isn't properly prepared for menstruation, it can be frightening when it happens to her. There was even a case of a girl who committed suicide when she began to menstruate because she didn't understand what was going on.
In the absence of proper information, children will theorize about these things and talk about these things among themselves. They will either come up with weird explanations for them, or someone will present the facts, probably in a crude way with many errors. It will also lead them to distrust adults. None of these consequences are beneficial.

Robert Burns
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2020 5:48 am

Re: Teaching Sexual Morality

Post by Robert Burns » Fri Mar 25, 2022 8:58 pm

Grimork wrote:
Fri Mar 25, 2022 1:58 pm
Riley wrote:
Fri Mar 25, 2022 1:30 pm
My thinking is that if a kid seems curious about something, no matter what it is, some teaching about it should probably be done, and of course the proper timing will be individual to that child. Again, there's no need to just hit them with a bunch of stuff they didn't even want to know, but sheltering them too much can make them feel alienated. My parents left me to figure so much out on my own, and I don't think it preserved my innocence at all. If anything, it had the opposite effect: I just ended up seeking answers anyway but in a much less safe and controlled environment and from people who had no business being the ones to teach me such things, and in the process I was exposed to a lot of stuff that no child should ever be exposed to.
The problem is, is that you were growing up in a corrupt society where sex is pushed in all media, this is what causes the "curiosity." I don't think in a Cosmotheist society this would be an issue. Of course, questions should be answered but I think it's best if the topic doesn't come up at all until they are ready to start having those types of relationships on their own. Sex education has not reduced the number of teen parents like it was supposed to. :roll:

I don't even let my daughter watch TV or play on the internet and that's not going to change. She will be home-schooled and I will control the kids she is around as I will know what type of parents they have, therefore I can preserve her innocence for a very long time. Till she is a young lady at least and that's the way I want it. I think our near ancestors had a similar protective rearing when it came to sex. Any type of period media will show you that there was an extended courtship to be expected before that type of relationship. I think that's the way it should be. Call me old fashioned if you want.
But sex education is also not done remotely in the way that I'm suggesting. It leaves a lot of important stuff out, which is exactly my point. There's no explanation of sex as an act of bonding, the importance of finding the right mate for such bonding, how all that plays into later on raising a family with your mate, etc.

They basically just give you a one hour seminar where they show you some gross pictures of STDs, hand out little pamphlets about pubic hair and wet dreams, tell you not to even think about sex beyond what they've told you because you're still too young to be considering it, and then they never bring it up again. I hardly consider that education, more just a thing they do to say they did it because so many parents don't even teach their kids that much.

Also, to be quite frank, I don't at all understand how being taught about sex, particularly in the way I'm suggesting, would rob a child of their innocence. Maybe you can explain it to me. I've seen this trope in media of parents being terrified to teach their kids about sex and of the kids being utterly shocked and disturbed when they learn what it is, and I guess it is meant to be this comically relatable experience for the parents watching, but it has always seemed utterly absurd to me and I've never really seen that play out in real life. I don't get why a parent would be scared to talk about something so normal and integral to our existence, or why a kid would be traumatized or have their life ruined by learning about it before they're already well into puberty.

Post Reply