# What was going through the heads of the very first people to have sex?



## questforself (Sep 6, 2012)

If you never heard or seen anything about sex your entire life, what would make someone think "hey, let's try putting this thing on my crotch inside your thing on your crotch. Let's see what happens." Isn't it weird when you think of it that way? There really isn't anything inherently sexy about putting a penis inside a vagina when you look at it objectively. So I wonder what was going through the minds of the very first people to have sex. What could possibly move people to see what happens when you put a penis inside a vagina?


----------



## NT the DC (May 31, 2012)

Well seeing as humans didn't just pop into existence I am sure they were fully capable of knowing what to do lol.


----------



## Bast (Mar 23, 2011)

INTJ the DC said:


> Well seeing as humans didn't just pop into existence I am sure they were fully capable of knowing what to do lol.


 Hahaha, yep, came here to say this. In addition, humans are animals, and animals know how to reproduce.


----------



## MyName (Oct 23, 2009)

The man was probably thinking about baseball.


----------



## questforself (Sep 6, 2012)

@INTJ the DC @Bast but humans don't have the same level of instincts as other animals. Human babies are more helpless than infants of other animals. We need to be taught to do just about everything we do as adults. It's obvious that the first people figured out what to do but you've never thought about what moved them to do the dirty dirty? Did they watch other animals do it and decide to try it out themselves? Other than breathing, blinking, and digesting and other autonomic physiological processes, we have to learn all our behavior unlike most other animals.


----------



## Ramysa (Mar 22, 2012)

I think it was more like "Geez, I am horny, which one should I pick??" since there were no rules or anything back then..


----------



## questforself (Sep 6, 2012)

INTJ the DC said:


> Well seeing as humans didn't just pop into existence I am sure they were fully capable of knowing what to do lol.


Do you mean to say that the behavior was passed on by evolutionary ancestors? Even when you take that into consideration, at some point human beings developed a level of consciousness and awareness that surpasses even chimpanzees. At that point, we had to have reasons behind all our behaviors meaning that behavior has to be learned and reasoning behind the behavior had become clear. I still think the first **** sapiens didn't just instinctively know how to follow the words of Marvin Gaye (Let's get it oooooon.......)


----------



## nakkinaama (Jun 20, 2012)

i think that the guy ape just came up (no puns intented) to the girl ape and started just raping her xD viciously and hornily. and the girl ape just lays there.


----------



## Bast (Mar 23, 2011)

questforself said:


> @INTJ the DC @Bast but humans don't have the same level of instincts as other animals. Human babies are more helpless than infants of other animals. We need to be taught to do just about everything we do as adults. It's obvious that the first people figured out what to do but you've never thought about what moved them to do the dirty dirty? Did they watch other animals do it and decide to try it out themselves? Other than breathing, blinking, and digesting and other autonomic physiological processes, we have to learn all our behavior unlike most other animals.


 The drive to reproduce is present in all animals. And, like INTJ the DC said, humans didn't just suddenly *POOF!* become humans and loose all instinct to do.... well, anything. Evolution does not work that way. Just because we are ~*~fancy animals~*~ doesn't mean we do not have the same basic drives as all other animals; the drive to reproduce is one of them.


----------



## SlowPoke68 (Apr 26, 2010)

This is such a totally ENTP question. I can't even begin to tell you how fucking ENTP this is. In fact, it is so totally ENTP that it points up a lot of the problems of being an ENTP, the more I think about it. Which is the problem: Thinking too much about it.

Hey, if you were breastfed you didn't need to think about the structure of the nipple and how ideally-shaped it was as a milk delivery device. Your mom put your face there and you started to suck. I know that was a long time ago, but take my word for it: Rationalization had very little to do with that encounter. 

And as adolescents we don't need a knowledge of differential calculus or lectures from Dr. Ruth nor any ratiocinative thought at all to know that there is SOMETHING we are supposed to be doing with our genitals with the opposite sex (in most cases). It takes all the fucked-up-ness of human society to get us away from the purity of that sort of instinctive motion.

And now, back to the ENTP thing: Many of our problems come down to just overthinking the shit out of everything, and not just going with it and letting it be. Our rational maze fucks up our life experience all the time. 

So your question was a good one, but maybe not in the way you expected.


----------



## questforself (Sep 6, 2012)

Ramysa said:


> I think it was more like "Geez, I am horny, which one should I pick??" since there were no rules or anything back then..


But what got them to figure out what to do about being horny?


----------



## questforself (Sep 6, 2012)

Bast said:


> The drive to reproduce is present in all animals. And, like INTJ the DC said, humans didn't just suddenly *POOF!* become humans and loose all instinct to do.... well, anything. Evolution does not work that way. Just because we are ~*~fancy animals~*~ doesn't mean we do not have the same basic drives as all other animals; the drive to reproduce is one of them.



_







Originally Posted by *INTJ the DC* 
Well seeing as humans didn't just pop into existence I am sure they were fully capable of knowing what to do lol.

_

Do you mean to say that the behavior was passed on by evolutionary ancestors? Even when you take that into consideration, at some point human beings developed a level of consciousness and awareness that surpasses even chimpanzees. At that point, we had to have reasons behind all our behaviors meaning that behavior has to be learned and reasoning behind the behavior had become clear. I still think the first **** sapiens didn't just instinctively know how to follow the words of Marvin Gaye (Let's get it oooooon.......)


----------



## Bast (Mar 23, 2011)

questforself said:


> _
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Evolution influencing behavior is a current debate amongst scientists. But that aside... Ok, from your logic, every behavior needs a reason since humans are special. So... "I eat because I'm hungry", "I sleep because I'm tired", "I have sex because I need to pass on my genes". Biological imperatives are different from learned behavior. I think this is where this conversation is breaking down.


----------



## Raain (Jan 3, 2012)

questforself said:


> @_INTJ the DC_ @_Bast_ but humans don't have the same level of instincts as other animals. Human babies are more helpless than infants of other animals. We need to be taught to do just about everything we do as adults. It's obvious that the first people figured out what to do but you've never thought about what moved them to do the dirty dirty? Did they watch other animals do it and decide to try it out themselves? Other than breathing, blinking, and digesting and other autonomic physiological processes, we have to learn all our behavior unlike most other animals.


did we need to learn to eat?

or was it instinct?

I'd say animals and humans aren't that different really, humans are animals, animals have instinct, humans have instinct, why is this hard to understand or believe?

Humans evolved from animals, animals evolved from other animals from lesser life from bacteria from cells, from stardust this is the law and will of the Universe and it can not be disobeyed, humans like everything else will answer to it.

but if you need a really simple explanation perhaps they decided to get naked and cuddle then decided 'hey you know this might feel extra good inside there' meh happens........ :tongue:


----------



## nakkinaama (Jun 20, 2012)

and how do you know what the girl ape does when she is horny? does she just start digging her vagina with a stick? im sure they did that for a long time before they even needed the guy apes penis. just use a stick, or a rock or your hand!


----------



## questforself (Sep 6, 2012)

SlowPoke68 said:


> This is such a totally ENTP question. I can't even begin to tell you how fucking ENTP this is. In fact, it is so totally ENTP that it points up a lot of the problems of being an ENTP, the more I think about it. Which is the problem: Thinking too much about it.
> 
> Hey, if you were breastfed you didn't need to think about the structure of the nipple and how ideally-shaped it was as a milk delivery device. Your mom put your face there and you started to suck. I know that was a long time ago, but take my word for it: Rationalization had very little to do with that encounter.
> 
> ...


I'm INFP actually. If I never had heard anything about sex and felt the biological urge to have sex, I still wouldn't be able to block out my cognitive processes. I'd still think "why am I feeling this way, and what do I do about it?" Just because you feel a biological urge, it's not going to take away the cognitive awareness of your situation.


----------



## questforself (Sep 6, 2012)

Bast said:


> Evolution influencing behavior is a current debate amongst scientists. But that aside... Ok, from your logic, every behavior needs a reason since humans are special. So... "I eat because I'm hungry", "I sleep because I'm tired", "I have sex because I need to pass on my genes". Biological imperatives are different from learned behavior. I think this is where this conversation is breaking down.


But biological imperatives do not take away your conscious awareness. Even if you feel a biological urge to do something, your conscious brain is still functioning and you're still thinking about what you're doing.


----------



## Ramysa (Mar 22, 2012)

questforself said:


> But what got them to figure out what to do about being horny?


I bet they touched themselves first and then they discovered the rest. Just a thought of mine.. But then again.. other animals do it. Same we could ask ourselves, how did they learn that they have to eat when they are hungry? It's all abt animal instinct. I read a book once where it said that we start masturbating at the age of 2 . I don't remember anything :d ....


----------



## UnderGroundKingz (Sep 3, 2012)

People have always known how to have sex, but according to an article I read they didn't always know that sex made babies.

Reference: Why Women Aren't Funny | Vanity Fair

2nd page, second article above the big red H


----------



## UnderGroundKingz (Sep 3, 2012)

--EDIT, I accidentally posted the story two times.


----------



## questforself (Sep 6, 2012)

INTJ the DC said:


> LOL you're still going on about this?
> You seem to be confusing two different concepts about two entirely different things.
> 
> Your hypothetical questions are not a representation of reality: If a human had no previous knowledge of sex what would sex be like? What would they think about getting sexual urges? How would they learn how to have sex?
> ...


You make good points but we can only speculate on changes in conscious ability during evolutionary changes. We can't study this in a lab because it's already the past. I don't appreciate your condescending attitude in your responses. I'm not sure you understand the difference between factual evidence and speculation, possibly backed by some evidence but still speculation in the end.


----------



## NT the DC (May 31, 2012)

questforself said:


> You make good points but we can only speculate on changes in conscious ability during evolutionary changes. We can't study this in a lab because it's already the past. I don't appreciate your condescending attitude in your responses. I'm not sure you understand the difference between factual evidence and speculation, possibly backed by some evidence but still speculation in the end.


We determine brain changes via looking at skulls and determining the evolution of the brain including the evolution of the frontal lobe of the brain. You don't need to study any claim I made in a lab to infer that it's true, you can simply look at the fossil records to know that evolution has been a longstanding process. You can look at life as it is today and understand that life doesn't miraculously appear without parents. And you can look at modern animals to understand that every mammal and others has some sort of social structure and criteria to select their mate.

What you are talking about as the alternative explanation has no rationality behind it. How can you speculate that humans forgot what the society and social structure taught them just because they were later classified by us as "the first humans"? It makes no sense.


----------



## StElmosDream (May 26, 2012)

milti girl said:


> Why so much hostility towards the OP? :shocked: I think this is a perfectly valid thing to wonder about. I've often wondered about it myself. Sex in today's world is such a learned behaviour that we have to stop and ask ourselves, "when did it become this way?"


Very true, research even suggests that masturbation is a developed world behaviour, with many tribal peoples not even having a word or comprehension of the matter even when demonstrated or explained to forest or nomadic peoples.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

StElmosDream said:


> Bit of an inconsiderate question to ask someone don't you think?


No, not really. It could be taken as such, but his suggestion that a person wouldn't even figure it out makes me wonder if his thinking is so abstract and socially maladapted that he personally can't conceive of how practically instinctive these actions are. Males get aroused even looking at female vaginas, so pretty sure they know where to stick it. 

These questions are over-analyzing the obvious, but to someone who has different sorts of thought patterns (and his thought patterns don't seem schizophrenic to me, for example) I guess this question to be vexing. I think it's not quite normal for this question to be so vexing to him.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

questforself said:


> i'm not refuting that sexual urges exist. People get horny, that's an obvious fact, I just don't think people would know exactly what to do down to the detail if they never heard anything about sex. I've never said that people wouldn't have been able to figure it out on their own, but I believe they first would have had to experiment to see what works first. If someone never heard anything about sex and they got real horny, they would want to investigate with this horniness. So they would investigate the source of this feeling and would learn to figure out what do about that feeling but not without trying different things to see what works. It's obvious the first people did figure out what to do, but I believe it would have been a trial and error approach to see what works in relieving their sexual urges. My OP was asking what was going through their heads as they were feeling their sexual urges and how they figured out what to do about it.
> 
> What's wrong with you to be have to be so mean spirited about it?


I'm not being mean-spirited. I really think your thought patterns are overly abstract and socially maladapted.

It's crazy to me that you even imagine that you learned to masturbate from porn. Infants and small children touch themselves and hump things, and this is normal, I'm not talking about children who have been molested or exposed to R rated movies, I'm talking about average, run-of-the-mill children.

I think you must be kind of socially oblivious if you actually had to learn masturbation from porn, and maybe are so disconnected from your own body that you think this question even requires analyzation.

The human sexual mind isn't as complex as you're making it out to be, and this can be easily observed by watching children, even children who have been sheltered from sexual stimuli.

If anything, the sexual response has to be repressed out of people, not be taught to them.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

INTJ the DC said:


> LOL you're still going on about this?
> You seem to be confusing two different concepts about two entirely different things.
> 
> Your hypothetical questions are not a representation of reality: If a human had no previous knowledge of sex what would sex be like? What would they think about getting sexual urges? How would they learn how to have sex?
> ...


Seriously, not only that, but if anything their sexual response would be more authentic, they'd probably start experimenting as children (as children do, anyhow) and probably simply not know it resulted in babies...but this is also highly unlikely since people have been farming with domesticated animals and even using companion animals for so long that they'd easily watch the dogs hump each other in the yard, and watch the horses mount one another, and then produce babies not too long later.

I think this isn't a difficult question for anyone who was raised around animals and other children, and maybe the reason why I think it's so absurd is because I can't fathom someone who was so repressed by their parents that they honestly imagine that they learned to masturbate from porn. I remember touching myself when I was three. I remember my sister humping pillows. As a teenager I baby-sat a BABY, he was like less than a year old, who would touch himself, and ... yeah.

There's a reason why it's called the birds and the bees. Even if your parents were sadistic enough to beat (metaphorically or literally) your own sexual response from you, you'd pretty easily draw conclusions from watching animals around you.

Even if you were on an island separated from other humans, you'd feel horny, feel butterflies around the opposite sex, and you'd find that you were inexplicably aroused by the sight, for example, of the females genitals. It's really not a complicated thing. 

No one actually learns to masturbate from porn, and if they did, something is unusual or abnormal about their thought patterns (unless by learn you mean how to prolong the orgasm, etc, or learn advanced techniques)...but not the actual touching of the self. No one needs to learn that if they are a normal person, they just feel it and do it on auto-pilot.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

milti girl said:


> Why so much hostility towards the OP? :shocked: I think this is a perfectly valid thing to wonder about. I've often wondered about it myself. Sex in today's world is such a learned behaviour that we have to stop and ask ourselves, "when did it become this way?"


Sex is not a learned behavior. Safe sex is a learned behavior.


----------



## Kynx (Feb 6, 2012)

Apart from evolution. For arguments sake, if nobody taught people about sex, they wouldn't have needed teaching. Before nudity, exposed genitals and touching your own or other people's genitals, masturbating and having sex in front of others, even in front of children, all became socially unacceptable? Before private parts became private? I don't think it would have taken long to figure out what was enjoyable, do you? 

You seem to be assuming that a time when they had limited capacity to understand or communicate, that they were already wearing underwear and using separate changing rooms. 

They wouldn't have been raised not to be 'rude' and such like. And what they would have been doing would probably disgust us today. They would have known what went where long before they'd even stopped drinking breast milk. What else are they going to do for entertainment without a TV or a ps3? 

Those social rules didn't come about until people were already fully aware of sex and all its implications. That's why society would have begun to impose the modesty rules and norms in the first place.


----------



## NT the DC (May 31, 2012)

fourtines said:


> Seriously, not only that, but if anything their sexual response would be more authentic, they'd probably start experimenting as children (as children do, anyhow) and probably simply not know it resulted in babies...but this is also highly unlikely since people have been farming with domesticated animals and even using companion animals for so long that they'd easily watch the dogs hump each other in the yard, and watch the horses mount one another, and then produce babies not too long later.
> 
> I think this isn't a difficult question for anyone who was raised around animals and other children, and maybe the reason why I think it's so absurd is because I can't fathom someone who was so repressed by their parents that they honestly imagine that they learned to masturbate from porn. I remember touching myself when I was three. I remember my sister humping pillows. As a teenager I baby-sat a BABY, he was like less than a year old, who would touch himself, and ... yeah.
> 
> ...


True story -
I was running when I was little boy and my pants got my junk just right and I felt orgasm for the first time
I found out I could sometimes run and get a sense of pleasure in my junk
I later was climbing and it happened to rub my junk and the same thing happened.
I put two and two together rubbing that area felt good.
I had orgasms before I could make sperm.

Learned to be a stroke-man-stoke-man-STROKE.... much later ;P

I remember thinking females were attractive before kinder.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

INTJ the DC said:


> True story -
> I was running when I was little boy and my pants got my junk just right and I felt orgasm for the first time
> I found out I could sometimes run and get a sense of pleasure in my junk
> I later was climbing and it happened to rub my junk and the same thing happened.
> ...



When I was 9 I remember feeling a near-orgasm response by doing chin-ups/pull-ups on a swing set bar. I also remember feeling giggly around older boys as young as about 7, like just this giggly response, no other way to describe it; it wasn't a full-on sexual response at that age, I wouldn't call it being horny, as I was pre-pubescent, but it was the "butterfly" feeling. I have a gay friend who says he knows he's always been gay because as a little boy of about the same age he would feel shy around his brothers and uncles friends, and he thought they were cute and smelled good, and they would be like "hey kid why you so shy" and try to just do horseplay with him like two heterosexual males would do, but he couldn't overcome the shy, butterfly feeling he felt around these boys/young men who were not his family members. 

I believe if we must analyze this, by the time sex became more social and less instinctive, so many generations of humans had been living in societies via evolution that nothing would have seemed unusual about it. It would have been such a gradual transition that it wouldn't even be obvious to these people.

Also, in human development we learned that certain things in the human body aren't "instincts" per se, but there's another word for things we do like breathing, eating and sex, that's not instinct in the classified sense of the word, but it also is not socialization. For all intents and purposes, though, I think we can safely, as laymen, say breathing, eating and sex are instincts, though the word instinct implies something more complex, like how birds have imprinted genetic memory of how to build nests without being taught, it's something that goes beyond the mere impulse to breathe, eat and have sex.


----------



## NT the DC (May 31, 2012)

fourtines said:


> When I was 9 I remember feeling a near-orgasm response by doing chin-ups/pull-ups on a swing set bar. I also remember feeling giggly around older boys as young as about 7, like just this giggly response, no other way to describe it; it wasn't a full-on sexual response at that age, I wouldn't call it being horny, as I was pre-pubescent, but it was the "butterfly" feeling. I have a gay friend who says he knows he's always been gay because as a little boy of about the same age he would feel shy around his brothers and uncles friends, and he thought they were cute and smelled good, and they would be like "hey kid why you so shy" and try to just do horseplay with him like two heterosexual males would do, but he couldn't overcome the shy, butterfly feeling he felt around these boys/young men who were not his family members.
> 
> I believe if we must analyze this, by the time sex became more social and less instinctive, so many generations of humans had been living in societies via evolution that nothing would have seemed unusual about it. It would have been such a gradual transition that it wouldn't even be obvious to these people.
> 
> Also, in human development we learned that certain things in the human body aren't "instincts" per se, but there's another word for things we do like breathing, eating and sex, that's not instinct in the classified sense of the word, but it also is not socialization. For all intents and purposes, though, I think we can safely, as laymen, say breathing, eating and sex are instincts, though the word instinct implies something more complex, like how birds have imprinted genetic memory of how to build nests without being taught, it's something that goes beyond the mere impulse to breathe, eat and have sex.


Your analysis is more accurate. 
Are you referring to the Primal Brain? Primal urges?
That usually refers to the limbic system as that is the part of the brain that evolved millions of years ago and said to be primarily responsible for sexual urges. 

It's more accurate to say that the neocortex suppresses sexual urges/primal urges then it is to say "they are lost" as our brain evolved.


----------



## questforself (Sep 6, 2012)

INTJ the DC said:


> We determine brain changes via looking at skulls and determining the evolution of the brain including the evolution of the frontal lobe of the brain. You don't need to study any claim I made in a lab to *infer* that it's true, you can simply look at the fossil records to know that evolution has been a longstanding process. You can look at life as it is today and understand that life doesn't miraculously appear without parents. And you can look at modern animals to understand that every mammal and others has some sort of social structure and criteria to select their mate.
> 
> What you are talking about as the alternative explanation has no rationality behind it. How can you speculate that humans forgot what the society and social structure taught them just because they were later classified by us as "the first humans"? It makes no sense.


The hominid fossil records are far from complete. Scientists still have to speculate to put it all together. You said so yourself, you have to 'infer' to come to your conclusion about human sexual behavior. Inferences suggests speculation and not complete hard evidence. You make it seem like your opinions are all set in stone and that it was dumb of me to ask the OP. You could google search it, plenty of people wonder the same thing. Fossil records only prove that those fossils once belonged to a living organism/animal, you'd have to make an inference/speculation that they are evolutionary ancestors of human beings. That doesn't even begin to the further speculation that has to connect the fossil evidence to sexual behavior. Plenty of people would agree that it isn't clear cut as you make it out to be, so clear cut enough to mock my question.


----------



## questforself (Sep 6, 2012)

fourtines said:


> I'm not being mean-spirited. I really think your thought patterns are overly abstract and socially maladapted.
> 
> It's crazy to me that you even imagine that you learned to masturbate from porn. Infants and small children touch themselves and hump things, and this is normal, I'm not talking about children who have been molested or exposed to R rated movies, I'm talking about average, run-of-the-mill children.
> 
> ...


 Umm "what is wrong with the OP?" "do you have aspergers syndrome?" was not meant to suggest that there is something wrong with me? You could google search the question and you will find that plenty of people who wonder the same thing and they don't seem to suffer from aspergers syndrome. 

Did you watch the very first time that the infants and small children touched themselves or humped things? Did they know they liked it before never having tried it out? I doubt you watched these behaviors from a controlled study observation room. That would be ethically questionable at the least. They must first experimented to see that they liked it. They didn't know they'd like it from the get go. Unless you yourself had never anything about sex before the first time you had sex, your claim that people would instinctively know that a penis goes into a vagina without experimenting to see what works is pretty far fetched speculation. And I say good day.........meany


----------



## NT the DC (May 31, 2012)

questforself said:


> The hominid fossil records are far from complete. Scientists still have to speculate to put it all together. You said so yourself, you have to 'infer' to come to your conclusion about human sexual behavior. Inferences suggests speculation and not complete hard evidence. You make it seem like your opinions are all set in stone and that it was dumb of me to ask the OP. You could google search it, plenty of people wonder the same thing. Fossil records only prove that those fossils once belonged to a living organism/animal, you'd have to make an inference/speculation that they are evolutionary ancestors of human beings. That doesn't even begin to the further speculation that has to connect the fossil evidence to sexual behavior. Plenty of people would agree that it isn't clear cut as you make it out to be, so clear cut enough to mock my question.


By your logic pretty much all is "speculation". From atoms to the universe, anything that cannot be directly observed is thus speculative. You cannot be sure that you had a great great great great great grandfather since you did not actually meet him, perhaps he was an alien. If you can't trace every single ancestor you had back 2000 years without a break then that means the record is incomplete and should be dismissed.

Hopefully you see the weakness of your counterpoint with that example.

The fossil record being incomplete has nothing to do with supporting your alternative explanation.
Which is the basis of making any speculative scientific claims.
Nothing you've said supports the idea that as neocortex evolved the ability to understand what needs to be done in order to have sex was relinquished.
You've also offered no explanation as to why a human who came from parents not classified as humans would be unable to learn from their parents about sex.


----------



## infpaul (May 2, 2012)

@questforself There was no 'first modern human' as evolution is such a gradual process that there would be no exact point where we became such. You're approaching this from completely the wrong angle, the urge to procreate has always been there we are just the vehicle which carries it regardless of whether we were ape, Neanderthal or man.

If this wasn't the case we'd have died out long ago. Is it any wonder that the most successful species on earth is also the horniest? 

Like several of the posters above, I knew exactly what I wanted to do way before puberty or sex ed, but our social construct is such that we are only expected to become sexual beings at the start of our 16th year (or 18th depending on where you live). Because of these social conditioning pre adolescent sexuality just isn't spoken about; not in the least because of implied pedo connotations.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

questforself said:


> Umm "what is wrong with the OP?" "do you have aspergers syndrome?" was not meant to suggest that there is something wrong with me? You could google search the question and you will find that plenty of people who wonder the same thing and they don't seem to suffer from aspergers syndrome.
> 
> Did you watch the very first time that the infants and small children touched themselves or humped things? Did they know they liked it before never having tried it out? I doubt you watched these behaviors from a controlled study observation room. That would be ethically questionable at the least.


I am now seriously beginning to wonder if you are mentally ill. I saw my sister hunch pillows and so forth, and I've seen infants masturbate, which is something women often see in childcare. Ethically questionable? Controlled study observation room?

THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH YOU.





> They must first experimented to see that they liked it. They didn't know they'd like it from the get go. Unless you yourself had never anything about sex before the first time you had sex, your claim that people would instinctively know that a penis goes into a vagina without experimenting to see what works is pretty far fetched speculation. And I say good day.........meany


A far fetched speculation? Not really, weirdo. And that to match your "meany" what are you, six?


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

infpaul said:


> @_questforself_ There was no 'first modern human' as evolution is such a gradual process that there would be no exact point where we became such. You're approaching this from completely the wrong angle, the urge to procreate has always been there we are just the vehicle which carries it regardless of whether we were ape, Neanderthal or man.
> 
> If this wasn't the case we'd have died out long ago. Is it any wonder that the most successful species on earth is also the horniest?
> 
> Like several of the posters above, I knew exactly what I wanted to do way before puberty or sex ed, but our social construct is such that we are only expected to become sexual beings at the start of our 16th year (or 18th depending on where you live). Because of these social conditioning pre adolescent sexuality just isn't spoken about; not in the least because of implied pedo connotations.


He's clearly not going to listen to realistic reason if he thinks child masturbation should only be observed in a controlled observation room, and not as a baby-sitter, aunt, mother, or other childcare provider.

He mad he gonna be told he wrong.

/thread


----------



## Falling Leaves (Aug 18, 2011)

I'm pretty sure the female was thinking "Ow... this is kinda painful... I wonder if he feels the same way about me as I do him? I think doing this will really strengthen the bond between u- Oww! Slow down damn it!"

And I'm pretty sure the male was thinking "SEIDOFJSSAODFIHSDOFIPOFGJEOFLFJSPOIFDJSEFPOJ SEX!"


----------



## Blacktide (Sep 16, 2012)

questforself said:


> There really isn't anything inherently sexy about putting a penis inside a vagina when you look at it objectively.


Not sure if I agree with that statement, if sex isn't sexy, then what IS sexy?  God I sound like some second rate philosopher now.


----------



## NT the DC (May 31, 2012)

fourtines said:


> He's clearly not going to listen to realistic reason if he thinks child masturbation should only be observed in a controlled observation room, and not as a baby-sitter, aunt, mother, or other childcare provider.
> 
> He mad he gonna be told he wrong.
> 
> /thread


I don't think it's that.
IMO it sounds like he just took some science class and learned about the scientific method.
Perhaps someone said the gold standard for showing cause and effect is the controlled study.
Clearly has a poor understanding of how we write textbooks in biology and physics and he thinks that an argument from ignorance is good logic.


----------

