Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Sounds stupid, I know, but should sex feel painful? Painful enough that it hurts, but not so painful that it's physically impossible to bear?

    Say for the richer countries, some sort of drug/an 'antidote' was freely available to get rid of this 'pain' and make sex feel pleasurable, but in poorer countries - in order to decrease the spread of HIV/AIDS and decrease overwhelming population sizes, sex would be painful enough to act as a deterrent for a significant majority of the populace? That way, it would pave the way for success in terms of a stable population, less disease,marked less rape ..... and then when the countries are stable enough, this 'antidote' could be freely available? But if disease/rape/poverty etc increases again because of the antidote, obviously the 'antidote' will start to become less and less freely available?

    Just a random thought of mine. :o:

    Discuss.

    EDIT: Just to clarify (some can't read) the sex would somehow be NATURALLY painful.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    You're suggesting causing sex to be painful for people because you don't want them to have babies or spread AIDS? That's extremely cruel and inhumane.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Erm, no.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nolongerhearthemusic)
    You're suggesting causing sex to be painful for people because you don't want them to have babies or spread AIDS? That's extremely cruel and inhumane.
    Widespread rape, disgustingly high HIV/STI infection rates, unstable populations sizes are far more cruel and inhumane in my view. If sex is painful for these poorer countries, perhaps it'll help to curb these problems, so that sex is no longer is painful and the countries are more stable?

    In this case, I think painful sex is the lesser of two evils, though you're welcome to disagree.

    And before you all reply with 'no' - explain exactly why please.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Whatever it is you're talking about, the answer is no.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Only if you're taking it up the derriere.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    no and no.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Carter.)
    no and no.
    Why?

    Any intelligent retorts would be much appreciated.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EskimoJo)
    Whatever it is you're talking about, the answer is no.
    Why?

    Intelligent retorts would be much appreciated.

    I know it sounds silly...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hopelessly Hopeful)
    Widespread rape, disgustingly high HIV/STI infection rates, unstable populations sizes are far more cruel and inhumane in my view. If sex is painful for these poorer countries, perhaps it'll help to curb these problems, so that sex is no longer is painful and the countries are more stable?

    In this case, I think painful sex is the lesser of two evils, though you're welcome to disagree.

    And before you all reply with 'no' - explain exactly why please.
    Yeah, let's make the only pleasurable thing that some people have in their lives unpleasant! Great idea! After all, we know what's best, we have stable populations.

    Unbelievable.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Remember: If it don't vex it ain't sex.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    birth control and blood testing is a far better alternative and more natural my friend.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hopelessly Hopeful)
    Widespread rape, disgustingly high HIV/STI infection rates, unstable populations sizes are far more cruel and inhumane in my view. If sex is painful for these poorer countries, perhaps it'll help to curb these problems, so that sex is no longer is painful and the countries are more stable?

    In this case, I think painful sex is the lesser of two evils, though you're welcome to disagree.

    And before you all reply with 'no' - explain exactly why please.
    But most of the sex happening in those countries is just sex between consenting adults. You would be not allowing normal people to have normal relationships. That's extremely cruel and would lead to a lot of problems itself.

    Edit: it's also extremely patronising to people who know how to not have babies or spread AIDS.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    No because it would ruin my entire life.
    Sex is meant to be pleasurable thats why we have g spots and the ability to orgasm. That's basically why we're on the world. Like god said "be fruitful and multiply"
    It would be far better to spend money on giving free contraception to poorer areas/areas with high percentage of cases of HIV, than to go creating antedotes or whatevs.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DC Doberman)
    Yeah, let's make the only pleasurable thing that some people have in their lives unpleasant! Great idea! After all, we know what's best, we have stable populations.

    Unbelievable.
    Or let's leave them in this never ending cycle of death, corruption and poverty + let's throw in a bit of fun orgasms here and there to cancel out all of the negatives, yeah? :rolleyes:

    Just holding back on their orgasmic pleasures for a relatively short while can, theoretically, result in so much positivites for the third world + heck, once their problems are sorted, orgasms can return.

    What I meant by a relatively stable population was a population that is stable in terms of the government/country being able to provide for the basic needs of the population. This is evidently not so in third world countries.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hopelessly Hopeful)
    Or let's leave them in this never ending cycle of death, corruption and poverty + let's through in a bit of fun orgasms here and there to cancel out all of the negatives, yeah? :rolleyes:

    Just holding back on their orgasmic pleasures for a relatively short while can, theoretically, result in so much positivites for the third world + heck, once their problems are sorted, orgasms can return.

    What I meant by a relatively stable population was a population that is stable in terms of the government/country being able to provide for the basic needs of the population. This is evidently not so in third world countries.
    There are better ways than saying "you're not allowed to live a normal life because we said so and we obviously know best!"

    Sex is not just ~orgasmic pleasures~, omg. :rolleyes:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Supslick)
    No because it would ruin my entire life.
    Sex is meant to be pleasurable thats why we have g spots and the ability to orgasm. That's basically why we're on the world. Like god said "be fruitful and multiply"
    It would be far better to spend money on giving free contraception to poorer areas/areas with high percentage of cases of HIV, than to go creating antedotes or whatevs.
    Let's not throw religion into this - it's the cause of so much trouble in this world.

    Perhaps, but seeing as, thus far, contraception + blood testing have had hardly any effect, having sex (somewhow - evolutionary [not realistic at all, btw]) being painful.....

    And do refer to post 15 please too. :yy:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I saw a pretty lame film once where there was this alien race that had to suffer a lot while having "sex" (or whatever that should be called) and could even die by doing so, it was like a sacrifice to assure the existence of their species. I hope you weren't inspired by this.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nolongerhearthemusic)
    But most of the sex happening in those countries is just sex between consenting adults. You would be not allowing normal people to have normal relationships. That's extremely cruel and would lead to a lot of problems itself.

    Edit: it's also extremely patronising to people who know how to not have babies or spread AIDS.
    I'm sure those suffering out there (heck, my family) would sacrifice sexual penetration for this greater good - this good that will ultimately take them out of poverty and enable them to engage in normal sex again...

    That's extremely cruel? Of course, the problems that they're suffering from isn't at all. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hopelessly Hopeful)
    Or let's leave them in this never ending cycle of death, corruption and poverty + let's throw in a bit of fun orgasms here and there to cancel out all of the negatives, yeah? :rolleyes:

    Just holding back on their orgasmic pleasures for a relatively short while can, theoretically, result in so much positivites for the third world + heck, once their problems are sorted, orgasms can return.

    What I meant by a relatively stable population was a population that is stable in terms of the government/country being able to provide for the basic needs of the population. This is evidently not so in third world countries.
    For your own sake, I'm assuming you are a troll, because no one can actually advocate increasing the suffering of a suffering population "for their own good," and claim to possess two brain cells to rub together. Haven't you considered that there are other ways to end the cycle of "death corruption and poverty," and in fact some countries are already doing them?

    What's most offensive about the whole idea is that you want people you find troublesome to suffer because of where they live. Isn't that, well, totally insane?
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.