Category Archives: sexual ethics

Woman wants to marry her father

Posted on by
2

From here:

Yes. I want it to represent our uniqueness, so we aren’t doing a white wedding. The color scheme is black and purple, and we are both going to wear Converse tennis shoes. He’s wearing jeans and a nice dress shirt. He says he’s not wearing a bow tie, but it’s my wedding and I am saying that he is. My best friend will be my maid of honor and she’ll be dressed in purple. My grandmother and grandfather — my fiancé’s parents — are going to attend and my grandpa will give me away. The tables will have bouquets of trees without leaves to represent our marriage, which will be like a growing tree. My dress will be black.

Having already redefined marriage to mean almost anything – and consequently, almost nothing – how could the Anglican church turn this father daughter couple down? Gene Robinson could come out of retirement and preside at the ceremony. His purple shirt would match the bridesmaid’s: what could be more apt?

Ottawa sex exhibition/child pornography extravaganza gets NDP support

Posted on by
5

The NDP, champion of the disadvantaged and those who cannot fend for themselves – well, except for unborn babies – is supporting a publicly funded Ottawa sex exhibition aimed at children; and paedophiles. The theory is, apparently, that the younger a child is told about sex the older he will be before he tries it for himself, a contention so ludicrous that it should be beyond even the NDP’s embrace – but no.

From here:

Controversy over a raunchy sex exhibit at an Ottawa museum erupted in the House of Commons Thursday.

The Museum of Science and Technology is hosting the program, Sex: A Tell-All Exhibit, a show crafted for school trips by the Montreal Science Centre and costing $800,000. It’s on loan to the capital for a year.

An NDP MP accused the ruling Tories, who have criticized the exhibit’s content and cost, for being “prudish.”

The exhibit includes a climax room with a round leather bed, red drapes, and a video showing aroused genitals while audio plays of a man describing an orgasm.

There’s also a naming post asking students for alternative terms for penis and vagina. Words like c— and p—y are used for women’s genitalia, and c–k and d–k are used for men’s. The words are displayed in large text on a screen.

Wooden dildos sporting various condoms include descriptions like “for the chocolate lover” for flavoured ones, and “for those long winter nights” for ones that heat up.

Listening posts offer advice to students on everything from anal sex to getting abortions without parental knowledge. The show was created for those 12 years old and older with input from sexologists.

Here is what Michael Coren thinks about it:

The evolution of the e-card

Posted on by
Reply

I’ve always thought e-cards were a bit strange. Now they have become quite a bit stranger: you can send a “you may have caught an STD from me” e-card to your friend, bishop, whatever.

For the immoderate sower of wild STD oats, you can send a card to six people at once, along with a personal message –  something touching like “Thank you for being part of my life and if you’ve seen any unusual lumps or sores, lately, I might know why.”

From here:

The e-cards, which can be sent anonymously, are pithy and to the point.

“Sometimes there are strings attached,” reads one. “I got diagnosed with STDs since we were together. Get checked out soon.”

Another says: “It’s not what you brought to the party, it’s what you left with. I left with an STI. You might have, too. Get checked out soon.”

E-cards can be sent to up to six partners at a time, and users have the option of including a personal message.

 

 

What is the final taboo?

Posted on by
Reply

Prudery, of course. Former UK MP, Ann Widdecombe refused to present an award to the owner of a – nudge, wink – lingerie website owner.

The tut-tutting, how could you do such a judgemental thing, article is here:

Former MP Ann Widdecombe waltzed away from handing a lingerie website owner a business award claiming it was against her strict Catholic principles.

The Strictly Come Dancing star, 64, was presenting gongs at the Women of Worth Awards when winning entrepreneur Emily Bendell, 30, was called to the stage.

But Miss Widdecombe, a self-confessed virgin, said her saucy website www.BlueBella.com was against her religious principles – and handed the gong to another judge to present.

Oxford graduate Miss Bendell said: ‘As I walked down to the stage she must have said she didn’t want to give me the award and I noticed a kerfuffle as she handed it over.

‘It was a real surprise that it happened at an event that was meant to celebrate the success of women. It certainly took the shine out of the day for me.

‘Ann is a great proponent of women getting ahead by their own merits so I would have hoped that she would have recognised my achievements.’

Ann Widdecombe, as a self-confessed virgin, is in the most despised of society’s sub-cultures, whereas, the cool, sexually uninhibited Emily, on BlueBella.com, has achieved the pinnacle of pornography-chic by marketing the tasteful “suede flogger”, “sweetheart nipple tassels”, “pocket pinky love cuffs”, “supersex beginner’s bondage  tape double pack” and “supersex luxury stroker”. Perhaps one day Anne will see the light and acquire her own supersex luxury stroker.

As the article notes, the only way that you can now shock a person is to show some reluctance in endorsing their assorted sweetheart nipple tassels:

When Miss Bendell later asked what had happened she was shocked to hear that Miss Widdecombe had shunned her due to the nature of her business.

Personally, I find the supersex beginner’s bondage tape double pack very handy for extemporaneous repairs to my ageing MX-5’s soft-top.

The obvious incest question

Posted on by
Reply

From here:

The attorney for David Epstein, a Colombia university professor charged with incest with his adult daughter, is defending sex between family members by appealing to homosexual “rights” as a precedent.

Epstein’s lawyer, Matthew Galluzzo, told ABC News that “It’s OK for homosexuals to do whatever they want in their own home. How is this so different? We have to figure out why some behavior is tolerated and some is not.”

“What goes on between consenting adults in private should not be legislated. That is not the proper domain of our law,” Galluzo told the Huffington Post, which publishes Epstein’s articles. “If we assume for a moment that both parties are consenting, then why are we prosecuting this?”

I would like to see one of the Anglican denominations that is advocating the legitimacy of same-sex marriage make a defence of why an incestuous relationship between consenting adults is not equally legitimate. I don’t expect to see it soon, though: since the ACoC and TEC have discarded Biblical injunctions against homosexual activity, any appeal to a similar prohibition against incest would be beyond the practiced sophistry of even the most senior bishops.