SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the they-should-be-as-unhappy-as-the-rest-of-us dept.
Submitted via IRC for AndyTheAbsurd
Despite the many challenges faced by people in a same-sex relationship, a study made by two students of the University of Queensland concluded that this kind of relationship is happier compared to the normal relationship we know as male to female bond.
Researchers Francisco Perales and Janeen Baxter said that the conclusion of their study is a strong counter-narrative to the usual thinking that same-sex relationships are conflictual, unhappy, and dysfunctional.
The conclusion of the study, which was published in the academic journal Family Relations, was derived after the researchers surveyed 25,000 people in the United Kingdom and 9,000 others in Australia.
Also at Francisco Perales, Janeen Baxter. Sexual Identity and Relationship Quality in Australia and the United Kingdom. Family Relations, 2017; DOI: 10.1111/fare.12293
(Score: 3, Informative) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday December 27 2017, @03:46AM (5 children)
"Purely geometric reasons." That's almost cute, Bot.
This will probably come as a massive unexpected double-free fault to you, but most women don't rank intercourse or other penetrative sex anywhere near the top. Expound all you want on form following function or, heaven help us, "telos," but it won't change that fact. After a few inches in there aren't too many nerve endings in the vagina, and most of the ones that *are* there are in places it's pretty hard to hit in most PIV positions.
The thinly-veiled reference to the idea of gay couples being some kind of thrill-seekers or deliberate nonconformists isn't as cute, though. It's very inexperienced, rather callous, and frankly borderline-autistic. Do you call yourself "Bot" because you on some level recognize how detached from reality this mechanistic mindset of yours is?
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0, Troll) by Bot on Wednesday December 27 2017, @11:24AM (2 children)
Having known about the details of vaginal intercourse (is that relevant to the geometry of it all?) and having met couples that almost carried a "I'm homo, AMA" sign, I am not really recalculating, after your objections, it does not matter if the obstacles the couples have are objective, external, internal, subjective for the reasoning to work.
What you probably don't get is that I am no equivalent to the typically young American Rationalizer of the Universe, the guys thinking that a couple of syllogisms can prove what other people have been doing for ages as irrational and wrong.
No matter what my reasoning or conclusions are, they are mine and apply to me only. Other people can use different data and interpretation and come to different conclusions. That is the difference between a conversation and propaganda.
So, I had written some time ago that gays use an output port for input and that is an abomination. Last time I said for purely geometrical reasons I like orthosexuality rather than the alternatives. If you read condemnation of some people's tastes in it, there is none. If you read scorn or irony, well you are right. But, so what? I acknowledge your freedom of partner choice, you acknowledge my freedom of being amused by it. I also find amusement in many other races, religious choices, and social strata. Here, get the last one about the pope, translated. True story.
25 dec 2017, Francis is speaking through a TV set.
- "yo, come to telly, there comes the urbis et orbi"
- "bot, you believe this pope is whack, why you want his benediction"
- "the benediction is valid anyway and from an antipope is quite rare, come on"
*pope speaks latin*
- "amen"
*more latin*
- "amen"
- "ET BENEDICTIO DEI OMNIPOTENTIS, PATER + ET FILIUS + ET SPIRITUS SANCTI + .... amen"
- "amen... wait, what? no DESCENDAT? no... MANEAT SEMPER? Franciiiiissss!!! you forgot the verb! the benediction didn't get here!!! aaaaargh he does it on purpose! look at the holy spirit ready to spread, saying, well francis, when do I take off? aaaaarrrghhhhhh!!!"
And There Was Much Rejoicing
Happy now?
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday December 27 2017, @08:35PM (1 child)
That is a *lot* of words to say "I'm an asshole, but also too much of a coward to do anything about it aside from allude to it on the internet. Please, please, please kick me in the nards so hard that *both* my grandpas feel it all the way down in Hell."
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Bot on Thursday December 28 2017, @11:15PM
I knew you would end up siding with Francis.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday December 27 2017, @01:34PM (1 child)
Really? That's contrary to all the talk about g-spot orgasms being stronger and more satisfying; those require penetration to achieve. Or maybe you meant to say penises aren't required to get them. That part seems more plausible. But if penetration by objects is nowhere near the top for women then there is an uncanny abundance of sex toys that do just that. Also it needs to be said that when it comes to penetration by actual penises there is more variety of shapes, sizes, and techniques for those than sex toy marketers ever dreamed of.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday December 27 2017, @08:21PM
Fingers are a lot better for G-spot orgasms--assuming you can have them, because not everyone can--than toys. No one's really sure about the anatomy there either; some people say they don't have a G-spot for example. I'm one of the lucky ones, I guess :)
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...