'Scientifically wrong'? You must be privy to some kind of science that most sex experts aren't, M. Spector. I didn't think you are the kind of person to bandy about such adverbs without cause and evidence.
Stephen Pinker. Our brains, uniquely among animals, are hard-wired for language.We don't learn language by accident. We are deliberately taught language, most of us, by adults, and we are also born with brains that have evolved to be particularly adapted to learning and using language. No other animals have such brains. Read
This is a bit of an aside, but an instructive one. I don't recall saying that we learn language by accident, but I'm also not sure what that means. And as for the statement--'we are deliberately taught language...by adults'--well, I don't know how you could possibly back up an assertion like that. Do adults sit prelingual children down and teach them the difference between a predicate and an adjectival noun? And of course, language is much more than just grammar. It's about knowing the difference between 'elucidation' and 'clarification', between jet black and midnight black. It carries cultural and social material in its essence. I haven't read Pinker, but I have read Chomsky's Cognitive Linguistics (surely a source text for Pinker), as well as De Saussure, Levi-Strauss, Barthes, Derrida and a great deal of other sources on the subject of language. My research has taught me two things relevant to this discussion: first, that no side can claim definitive authority on the subject, and second, that both explanations really point to the same conclusion. That is, that all of human history has moved us toward our present linguistic culmination. Either through some genomic circuitry or through cultural development. I can say, however, that those on the cultural side provide us with much more useful models on understanding language as a social phenomenon.
So too, with sex. You make--to be honest, rather crude--gestures towards 'animals having sex' as if the urge to procreate, mate or dominate is a correlation for 'sexuality'. Indeed, you castigated Maysie (rather unfairly) for committing the same verbal slip. What kind of pornography do animals enjoy, I wonder. How do you respond to my suggestion that capitalism has altered pornography (and therefore, human sexual response) through the same way it has corrupted labour and social relations in general?
Or in other words all men are pigs, good job! Who gets paid more in the porn industry? Do actors that portray people that are mentally disabled like Tom Hanks did in forest gump also get a taste of your vitriol?If no why not, it's exploitation of the "slow" isn't it. Does anyone seriously think that is normal sex? I don't know anyone that likes 2 dicks in any location. And maye some do...does that make it unreal at that point? But no continue on your morale high horse trying to use capitalism as the straw man arguement
thorin, I'm sorry I offended you, but I did not mean to pass judgement: I'm not immune to the porn industry any more than someone who chooses to 'buy green' invariably encounters an impasse. I'm not sure what else to make of your words, but I urge you to reconsider my earlier post not as an attack on you (I hadn't thought of you at all while writing that post) but rather as a critique of the porn industry and an attack on capitalism.