Talk:Sexual intercourse/Archive 1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
YIKES! I came here from the Prostitution page - surely we have to qualify the 'for reproduction' part of the statement if it's linked to prostitution! And what about all those - ahem - other activities. Not to mention homosexuality. If we keep this definition the way it is, prostitution should link to something else!
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Seems to serve perfectly fine for that at least, although it DOES need some more content (notably homesexual intercourse). Feel free to add! :-) (oh, and by the way, it's dry and factual on purpose, in order to avoid bias)---Anders Törlind
Well, it's exactly that kind of attitude that had some people wondering what Bill Cllinton actually MEANT by sexual contact! --MichaelTinkler
I'm sorry that i have offended you, although i know not what i have done. Please accept my aplogies. --Anders Törlind
Not at all, Anders! I neglected to insert a smiley. The narrowness of Bill's definition of "what sexual contact is" is what it reminded me of. Procreation is obviously too narrow for the human, maybe the primate, and maybe even just plain mammalian description, homosexuality aside.
Sexual intercourse page revamped 5 November 2001
Shouldn't the use of fuck as a swear-word be mentioned here or somewhere else instead of just redirecting ?
The only reason I put that redirect there was because a vandal had created the page, the contents were subsequently deleted, and empty pages are an affront to my sense of aesthetics. It seemed like the correct article to redirect it to at the time, but feel free to change that.
I see from the article that "Health care professionals suggest that condoms should always be used...." I guess that health care professionals will soon be extinct. May I remind the writers that some perverts actually use sexual intercourse for reproduction?
- Your point is taken, but perhaps the fact that issues of preganancy were discussed in the preceding paragraph while the one you mention discussed sexually transmitted diseases makes the point plain. Also, I think it's more helpful to other Wikipedia users to try to make useful rather than "cute" edits.
Removed the word "fuck" as, in my view, the usage I removed adds nothing to the article. Wikipedia is not a dictionary.
Removed the following:
- Most people agree that sexual intercourse should only take place in a loving relationship.
As a counterexample, what fraction of the male population in Western countries have visited a prostitute? How about in Thailand (to choose an obvious example). In any case, it's a discussion that should be left for the sexual morality article. --Robert Merkel 00:33 16 Jul 2003 (UTC)
Passage about age of consent and rape gives only a vague view and should be rewritten to explain concept of statutory rape. --Daniel C. Boyer 21:53, 28 Aug 2003 (UTC)
I'm wondering about the statement near the end of the article:
"It is said that dolphins, bonobos, and humans are the only animals that have sex for pleasure."
Who says this? I've long been under the impression that most, if not all, animals have sex for pleasure.
- I think the idea is that the three of us are the only animals that get the urge when babies will not result -- and humans at least will in fact often go to some lengths to ensure that. --♥ «Charles A. L.» 07:10, Apr 18, 2004 (UTC)
- Except there are humans that do not know (a priori) that fertilization occurs through sexual intercourse. We didn't always have this figured out, so how could animals?
- They don't have to have it figured out; it's evolutionary instinct.
- But snopes is now listing this legend as "true". I think there may be some truth to the point. --Chinasaur 19:36, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)