Pride NYC

malta · 06-28-2005, 09:23 PM

"::and is going to go play some Xenosaga::"

HOT. I just started playing.

thecreeper · 06-28-2005, 09:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by malta

"::and is going to go play some Xenosaga::"

HOT. I just started playing.

prepare to be disappointed, annoyed, and bored.

Plain Old Jane · 06-29-2005, 12:26 AM

choke on a cock, hex

http://www.libchrist.com/bible/history.html
"10,000 to 3,000BC
A family was viewed as belonging to the male as his property. A female in a family had to be monogamous but a male could mate with unattached females..and he sure did! The world's population exploded to over one hundred million by 3,000BC. Women were totally subservient to men - possessions to be used as men wished, in these early civilizations. Some of history's earliest writings contain references to laws against a women having more than one husband."

summation: men were allowed to have many partners, also aludes the reason was fear of disease.

addendum: "One of the most sacred positions for a single women was as a temple prostitute. "Every women..must once come in her life go and sit in the temple and there give herself to a strange man....She is not allowed to go home until a man has thrown a silver coin into her lap and takes her outside to lie with him....The women has no privilege of choice - she must go with the first man who throws her the money. When she has lain with him, her duty to the goddess is discharged and she may go home...Tall handsome women soon manage to get home again, but the ugly ones stay a long time before they can fulfill the conditions which the law demands - some of them, indeed as much as three or four years." (Herodotus, a Persian historian who lived from 484 to 425 B.C.)"

"With an increase in prostitution came an increase in sexually transmitted diseases, living impetus to Puritan desires to (eventually) make it illegal."

Fun factoid cuz it chaps hex's ass:
"As the exploration of the New World began, "civilized man" was introduced to bizarre sexual customs, such as those of the Incas and Mayans, who preferred homosexuality for adults. The Incas also attempted to preserve the purity of their race through incest; the Aztecs practiced polygamy; and the Mexicans perfected the art of prostitution."
"As Europeans game to America, they brought strict puritan views of sex. By the 1800s the woman was more than content to be the weak, vulnerable creature, needing protection by a man. American Doctor Alice Stockholm (a woman) wrote in 1894 that any husband who required marital intercourse except for conceiving children was making his wife into a private prostitute. Sex with a "real" prostitute, however, was fine as long as there was no love or passion involved. Unofficial estimates claim there were over 100,000 prostitutes in Paris by 1900. Philadelphia had about one prostitute for every 60 people."

http://www.people.virginia.edu/~ja8n...obson_2000.pdf

"It has been speculated that Monogamy is an outcome of sexually transmitted disease."

Summation: Later the paper goes on to say in so many words that behavior affects likely hood of transmission, and transmission affects the success of mating, so cutting down on partners was a likely outcome.

On Wealthy Middle Eastern secks: http://www.geocities.com/mollyjoyful/marriage.html

"The Muslim countries of the Middle East, Asia and North Africa often have polygamous marriages. Muslim men are allowed by law to have up to four wives. Polygamy is usually only used by men who are wealthy enough to support more than one wife"

On Same Secks Marriages, completely NOT what this topic was supposed to be about, same site:

"Marriage shifts constantly through time to fit the needs of each individual society. A look at the historical context of marriage shows the myriad forms of marriage that have been socially acceptable, and reveals the likelihood for further fluctuations. Marriage, its purposes and intents, have changed repeatedly over the centuries. It is naive to assume that any one social standard of marriage will stay the same forever."

"The different types of marriages listed above show that marriage is not one set, unchangeable definition. Even in male-female marriage practices, there are many variances in what is acceptable. However, the average American citizen may not have such a global awareness of marriage. This may in part be due to the Christian heritage of the majority of US citizens. This country directs the most marriage exposure to Christian church weddings. It may not occur to many people that there are other traditions of marriage in other countries that are considered equally valid. What this country considers the most natural and normal is not necessarily a universal standard. That the range of acceptable marriage practices may change in the future is not an unprecedented possibility nor is it unrealistic to expect changes. Marriage has never been an immutable and fixed standard."

"Historical marriages documented in the Bible were barbarous, in which women were seized during warfare to become wives. Parents viewed their daughters as child-bearing commodities, and just as frequently sold their children into slavery. Polygamy was frequent, especially in early Biblical marriages, such as the stories of Solomon and his "700 wives, princesses and 300 concubines,

Plain Old Jane · 06-29-2005, 12:34 AM

-continued from last post-

Also on the anthropology of marriage and definition thereof: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage

"Precise definitions vary historically and between and within cultures, but it has been an important concept as a socially sanctioned bond in a sexual relationship. Globally, societies that sanction polygamy as a form of marriage are far less common than those that do not and monogamy is overwhelmingly most widely practiced, followed distantly by polygyny, which is found primarily in tribal cultures; other marriage arrangements are extremely rare. Since the latter decades of the 20th century many of society's assumptions about the nature and purpose of marriage and family have been challenged"

"Other unusual variations include marriage between a living human and a ghost (Taiwan), two or more dead people (Mormonism), a living human and a recently-deceased human with whom they were emotionally involved (France), and between a human being and God (Catholic and Orthodox monasticism)."

The whole religious reasons just ring a tad BS to me. They say between a man and a woman for reproductive reasonings, but by that reasoning, sterile people, post op transsexuals, and full and partial AIS (XY chromosomal, context is visibly female marrying male, most full AIS dont know they are XY.) sufferers shouldnt be able to marry, but they are.
By the same token. AIS suffers who wish to marry females are not allower even though by court law they're considered male in some states. Or Post Ops who want to marry another female even though by some state laws they're considered male. (though thankfully, one can have a new birth cert issued and have your records sealed so that sort of thing wont be a problem.)

anyway, back to the definition of marriage:
"Couples usually seek social sanction for their marriages, and many societies require official approval of a religious or civil body. Sociologists thus distinguish between a marriage ceremony conducted under the auspices of a religion and a state-sanctioned civil marriage."

"Under the principle of church-state separation, libertarians criticize the government regulation of and the state's involvement in marriage, because many now consider marriage a religious institution. The libertarian view is that if government must recognize marriage at all, it should be treated as a contract like any other between two freely consenting parties, which would essentially reduce family law to a subset of contract law. The religious aspects should remain the province of one's church and that church's ecclesiastical courts (if it has them). Relatively new legal developments like palimony have already tilted certain governments slightly in this direction."

stfu, hex

In conclusion, xenosaga in my opinion is... too pretty... too many animations, too many characters, too much unexplained minutia, too much minutia in general. I like minutia, but dayum...

Times are changing, and we arent THAT far from segregation, slavery, and the absence of womens rights, why should we stop when we're so close to utopia and true equality that the USA was founded to enact, true equality, true freedom, true class mobility.

::resists saying anything about how the bushies' are taking that all away through legislative consolidation and striking up the bickering between the religious right and liberal left::
(hes not even republican anymore, he's trancended politics into pure evil...)

dont ever tell me i dunno what I'm talking about...

06-28-2005, 09:23 PM	#1
malta Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: buffalo Posts: 442	"::and is going to go play some Xenosaga::" HOT. I just started playing. Last edited by malta : 06-28-2005 at 11:23 PM.

06-29-2005, 12:26 AM	#3
Plain Old Jane i hate vagina Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 841	choke on a cock, hex http://www.libchrist.com/bible/history.html "10,000 to 3,000BC A family was viewed as belonging to the male as his property. A female in a family had to be monogamous but a male could mate with unattached females..and he sure did! The world's population exploded to over one hundred million by 3,000BC. Women were totally subservient to men - possessions to be used as men wished, in these early civilizations. Some of history's earliest writings contain references to laws against a women having more than one husband." summation: men were allowed to have many partners, also aludes the reason was fear of disease. addendum: "One of the most sacred positions for a single women was as a temple prostitute. "Every women..must once come in her life go and sit in the temple and there give herself to a strange man....She is not allowed to go home until a man has thrown a silver coin into her lap and takes her outside to lie with him....The women has no privilege of choice - she must go with the first man who throws her the money. When she has lain with him, her duty to the goddess is discharged and she may go home...Tall handsome women soon manage to get home again, but the ugly ones stay a long time before they can fulfill the conditions which the law demands - some of them, indeed as much as three or four years." (Herodotus, a Persian historian who lived from 484 to 425 B.C.)" "With an increase in prostitution came an increase in sexually transmitted diseases, living impetus to Puritan desires to (eventually) make it illegal." Fun factoid cuz it chaps hex's ass: "As the exploration of the New World began, "civilized man" was introduced to bizarre sexual customs, such as those of the Incas and Mayans, who preferred homosexuality for adults. The Incas also attempted to preserve the purity of their race through incest; the Aztecs practiced polygamy; and the Mexicans perfected the art of prostitution." "As Europeans game to America, they brought strict puritan views of sex. By the 1800s the woman was more than content to be the weak, vulnerable creature, needing protection by a man. American Doctor Alice Stockholm (a woman) wrote in 1894 that any husband who required marital intercourse except for conceiving children was making his wife into a private prostitute. Sex with a "real" prostitute, however, was fine as long as there was no love or passion involved. Unofficial estimates claim there were over 100,000 prostitutes in Paris by 1900. Philadelphia had about one prostitute for every 60 people." http://www.people.virginia.edu/~ja8n...obson_2000.pdf "It has been speculated that Monogamy is an outcome of sexually transmitted disease." Summation: Later the paper goes on to say in so many words that behavior affects likely hood of transmission, and transmission affects the success of mating, so cutting down on partners was a likely outcome. On Wealthy Middle Eastern secks: http://www.geocities.com/mollyjoyful/marriage.html "The Muslim countries of the Middle East, Asia and North Africa often have polygamous marriages. Muslim men are allowed by law to have up to four wives. Polygamy is usually only used by men who are wealthy enough to support more than one wife" On Same Secks Marriages, completely NOT what this topic was supposed to be about, same site: "Marriage shifts constantly through time to fit the needs of each individual society. A look at the historical context of marriage shows the myriad forms of marriage that have been socially acceptable, and reveals the likelihood for further fluctuations. Marriage, its purposes and intents, have changed repeatedly over the centuries. It is naive to assume that any one social standard of marriage will stay the same forever." "The different types of marriages listed above show that marriage is not one set, unchangeable definition. Even in male-female marriage practices, there are many variances in what is acceptable. However, the average American citizen may not have such a global awareness of marriage. This may in part be due to the Christian heritage of the majority of US citizens. This country directs the most marriage exposure to Christian church weddings. It may not occur to many people that there are other traditions of marriage in other countries that are considered equally valid. What this country considers the most natural and normal is not necessarily a universal standard. That the range of acceptable marriage practices may change in the future is not an unprecedented possibility nor is it unrealistic to expect changes. Marriage has never been an immutable and fixed standard." "Historical marriages documented in the Bible were barbarous, in which women were seized during warfare to become wives. Parents viewed their daughters as child-bearing commodities, and just as frequently sold their children into slavery. Polygamy was frequent, especially in early Biblical marriages, such as the stories of Solomon and his "700 wives, princesses and 300 concubines, __________________ Scary Monsters and Nice Sprites.

06-29-2005, 12:34 AM	#4
Plain Old Jane i hate vagina Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 841	-continued from last post- Also on the anthropology of marriage and definition thereof: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage "Precise definitions vary historically and between and within cultures, but it has been an important concept as a socially sanctioned bond in a sexual relationship. Globally, societies that sanction polygamy as a form of marriage are far less common than those that do not and monogamy is overwhelmingly most widely practiced, followed distantly by polygyny, which is found primarily in tribal cultures; other marriage arrangements are extremely rare. Since the latter decades of the 20th century many of society's assumptions about the nature and purpose of marriage and family have been challenged" "Other unusual variations include marriage between a living human and a ghost (Taiwan), two or more dead people (Mormonism), a living human and a recently-deceased human with whom they were emotionally involved (France), and between a human being and God (Catholic and Orthodox monasticism)." The whole religious reasons just ring a tad BS to me. They say between a man and a woman for reproductive reasonings, but by that reasoning, sterile people, post op transsexuals, and full and partial AIS (XY chromosomal, context is visibly female marrying male, most full AIS dont know they are XY.) sufferers shouldnt be able to marry, but they are. By the same token. AIS suffers who wish to marry females are not allower even though by court law they're considered male in some states. Or Post Ops who want to marry another female even though by some state laws they're considered male. (though thankfully, one can have a new birth cert issued and have your records sealed so that sort of thing wont be a problem.) anyway, back to the definition of marriage: "Couples usually seek social sanction for their marriages, and many societies require official approval of a religious or civil body. Sociologists thus distinguish between a marriage ceremony conducted under the auspices of a religion and a state-sanctioned civil marriage." "Under the principle of church-state separation, libertarians criticize the government regulation of and the state's involvement in marriage, because many now consider marriage a religious institution. The libertarian view is that if government must recognize marriage at all, it should be treated as a contract like any other between two freely consenting parties, which would essentially reduce family law to a subset of contract law. The religious aspects should remain the province of one's church and that church's ecclesiastical courts (if it has them). Relatively new legal developments like palimony have already tilted certain governments slightly in this direction." stfu, hex In conclusion, xenosaga in my opinion is... too pretty... too many animations, too many characters, too much unexplained minutia, too much minutia in general. I like minutia, but dayum... Times are changing, and we arent THAT far from segregation, slavery, and the absence of womens rights, why should we stop when we're so close to utopia and true equality that the USA was founded to enact, true equality, true freedom, true class mobility. ::resists saying anything about how the bushies' are taking that all away through legislative consolidation and striking up the bickering between the religious right and liberal left:: (hes not even republican anymore, he's trancended politics into pure evil...) dont ever tell me i dunno what I'm talking about... __________________ Scary Monsters and Nice Sprites.