Secular Sexuality

(NSFW) A no-taboo approach to sexual education and health.

Members: 670
Latest Activity: on Friday

Sex for fun and non-procreation!

In this world, we can't get away from religion. We've been exposed to false information regarding contraception failure rates and experienced the STD scare tactics. Some of us may even have gone through abstinence-only sex education!

Here in Secular Sexuality we will discuss:

-sexual health in light of peer-reviewed science
-safe for work guides on safe(r) sex (or links)
-questions that would shock the religious

This discussion forum is moderated. Unsophisticared trolls and judging other people will not be tolerated. If you would like to see a topic addressed, or have a question, add it to the comment wall, or message an admin.

Message The Nerd if you want an invite to the X-rated group, for topics not allowed on Atheist Nexus.

Discussion Forum


Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Luara Jul 10. 4 Replies


Started by BJ Saylor. Last reply by Joseph P Jul 7. 17 Replies

Sex Tips

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Grinning Cat Jun 10. 6 Replies

Ezekiel 23:20 – Bible Porn?

Started by Garaidh Mac an tSaoir. Last reply by Gwaithmir May 14. 5 Replies

What do you yell in bed?

Started by Angie Jackson. Last reply by Gwaithmir Mar 24. 137 Replies

Beautiful Cervix

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Craigart14 Mar 21. 7 Replies


Started by Pockets. Last reply by Mink Laubenthal Jan 16. 30 Replies

FREEOK 2013 - Emily Boyer: "Secular Facts on Sexual Acts"

Started by Loren Miller. Last reply by Loren Miller Jul 2, 2013. 2 Replies

gender reveal parties

Started by dr kellie. Last reply by TNT666 Jun 27, 2013. 25 Replies

Men have sex and women make love. Or do they?

Started by Tom Sarbeck. Last reply by dr kellie Jun 24, 2013. 8 Replies

Clits 101

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Jun 18, 2013. 5 Replies

FS: My virginity mistake

Started by A Former Member. Last reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Jun 18, 2013. 3 Replies

On sexual objectification and subjectivication

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Tom Sarbeck May 3, 2013. 18 Replies

Does sex keep you younger?

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Tom Sarbeck May 3, 2013. 9 Replies

Music during sex

Started by Splurgen. Last reply by Glenn Friedman Apr 10, 2013. 48 Replies

How flirty is too flirty for a married person?

Started by Saint Fillan. Last reply by Kevin Boleyn Mar 27, 2013. 9 Replies

Sexual Harassment and Assault at Hooters

Started by EJN. Last reply by Gwaithmir Mar 22, 2013. 21 Replies

In Soviet Russia Orgasm has You

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Joseph P Mar 19, 2013. 1 Reply

Comment Wall


You need to be a member of Secular Sexuality to add comments!

Comment by MaleficVTwin on October 23, 2011 at 10:55pm

TNT: Regarding your last point: I was the learner. At 22-23(I honestly forget how old I was) I had only been with a couple of girls, while this 17 year old had been with over a dozen guys and a couple of girls! She had stared at 12(illegal in any state). When we started seeing each other, she had commented that it seemed that only older guys were interested in her. I told her that she acted older than she was. It was mentioned earlier that age is not indicative of readiness. This girl was certainly mature enough to handle it; she insisted that I wear a condom before I even mentioned that I had a box of them in my nightstand. I've since been with girls older than me who got pissed off that I put one on. Age does not indicate readiness, maturity, or responsibility.


And Tom, excellent point as well as an entirely new can of worms. :)

Comment by TNT666 on October 23, 2011 at 10:45pm
Yep, best be careful of all the artificial inseminations out there, you never know if you're fucking your sibling!
Comment by Tom Sarbeck on October 23, 2011 at 10:36pm

A friend some years ago did a Master's program thesis on the sex laws of the states. Reading it was an education. How close a relative you can marry also varies.


Comment by TNT666 on October 23, 2011 at 10:32pm
@Malefic... exactly why I completely disagree with any concept of universal moralities. We as citizens and societies give ourselves laws, to achieve certain objectives, these objectives vary from group to group. I would theorise that the "objective" of declaring youth sexuality with adults as amoral is because of the religious dogma that requires youth to remain pure/virginal until their marriage...and why this...well... we've discussed this somewhere in these threads... a monogamous family value system functions much better when people have no knowledge of what a crappy mate they have been married to. People with diversified sexual experience tend to marry less, because we are not so blinded by "blind love". Blindness... the opposite of knowledge. Allowing youth to be once again (compared to history) sexually active, with same age or not, with appropriate education by parents, can only make better more knowledgeable human beings. But Christianity must GROW, and so they push reproduction and monogamy, to ensure people have no choice. Once you have children, people become slaves to the corporate/economic system. Stretching that thought a bit further... infantilising youth further ensures youth will turn into subservient adults. Sexualised youth I think are always a bit more rebellious. So the choice then becomes: sexual exploration with an equally inexperienced youth... or sexual exploration with someone they can learn from?
Comment by MaleficVTwin on October 23, 2011 at 10:19pm

Speaking of 'underage', has anyone looked at age-of-consent laws and how they vary state to state? Some states have AOC set as young as 14. This raises an interesting point: does morality change when you cross state lines?


I ask this because when I was in my early 20's, I briefly dated a girl that was 17. I live in NV, where AOC is 16. Cali is a 20 minute drive away, where the AOC is 18. We did things that were totally legal in my state, yet illegal if we did them a short drive down the highway. 


CA would consider it child sex, NV would not. Thoughts?



Comment by TNT666 on October 23, 2011 at 9:56pm

@ Cet:

I had both articles open my browser as well as the original post, all the while; neither is of great scientific interest/value, as the language, as often happens in humanities/psychology/EB papers, is too vague to be considered truly conclusive, grrr.

But overall, I found nothing disturbing in there either. Certainly nothing that validated the crazy name calling and hysteria that ensued. The people who get hysterical over this (female and male, though lacking a uterus :P) I think are simply over influenced by religious morals, stemming from their youth, which are against sex initially for all... then being a 'cool' atheist... sex becomes ok for all those above the 'legal age' but remains 'immoral' for those under the 'legal age', and this gets transferred to only being against sex for underage people. I find that to be an extremely prude behaviour.


The distinction on the topic of consent is knowledge and maturity, not age. Of course a child that is raised in an infantilised bubble probably does not have much going on sexually, but for any youth out there in the real world with non hysterical parents (and I've know a few in the real world too) exploring sexuality is normal at almost any age. Being attracted to older men is the norm for younger females, yet for males it's taboo... I lean with the articles overall, slightly before full fledged puberty is when humans get moving, parents need to be ready.

Comment by TNT666 on October 23, 2011 at 9:40pm
holy shit egan, if only you could stick to the topic instead of personal attacks, that would be so refreshing...
Comment by Susan Stanko on October 23, 2011 at 9:08pm
Anne, the original poster's profile does not exist anymore.  His comment to the group doesn't exist anymore.  I doubt he chose to leave willingly.
Comment by Tom Sarbeck on October 23, 2011 at 9:01pm

Who will now say the human mind governs human emotions?

Thanks, Cet, for reposting the article. I've skimmed parts of it and saw only material that SCOTUS has said has First Amendment protection.


Comment by Anne Gunther on October 23, 2011 at 8:59pm
I don't know why people are assuming they know why, or even if, someone is banned. We atheists get enough crap as it is. Do we really want this chaos?

Members (668)


Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today



Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon



© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service