If anybody feels like their AB side is unnatural, remember this.

A helpful thought that I think is important to remember if you apply it to your AB side. I don't mean for this to be an attack on religion, but rather a perspective on culture vs nature.


"How can we distinguish what is biologically determined from what people merely try to justify through biological myths? A good rule of thumb is ‘Biology enables, Culture forbids.’ Biology is willing to tolerate a very wide spectrum of possibilities. It’s culture that obliges people to realise some possibilities while forbidding others. Biology enables women to have children –some cultures oblige women to realise this possibility. Biology enables men to enjoy sex with one another –some cultures forbid them to realise this possibility.

Culture tends to argue that it forbids only that which is unnatural. But from a biological perspective, nothing is unnatural. Whatever is possible is by definition also natural. A truly unnatural behaviour, one that goes against the laws of nature, simply cannot exist, so it would need no prohibition. No culture has ever bothered to forbid men to photosynthesise, women to run faster than the speed of light, or negatively charged electrons to be attracted to each other.

In truth, our concepts ‘natural’ and ‘unnatural’ are taken not from biology, but from Christian theology."

From Yuval Noah Hariri, Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind

*Hugs Tyger* Thank you for that peace of mind.

Seems like it can be applied to a lot of things that society doesn't find acceptable. If a AB/DL isn't going parading themselves around in public to store up as fap material for themselves latter on, then I think "It's just diapers, plushies, pacifiers, bottles, etc." and it's pretty innocuous stuff.

Tridem said:

*Hugs Tyger* Thank you for that peace of mind.

Click to expand...

*Hugs back*

I understand why we are culturally conservative. It saves time not having to reinvent the wheel each new generation to start from an accepted basis. Still, I wish we'd be a little more flexible regarding strangeness, since most of it doesn't really matter in the larger scheme of things and some of it might turn out useful. If we could freely share our insights without expecting condemnation, we might see some unexpected benefits.

One off the top of my head is better adult diapers with a user base that is genuinely interested in the features of the product. We have a group bias in favor of thick ones but that can be controlled for and has some merit anyway. What other benefits might society see if we were more open to unusual perspectives without worrying too much about their source?

I wonder how I would have processed that if I were stoned? Anyway....yeah. I thought the same as Trevor. Living in the South, I hear to many people who are products of their antebellum southern culture. I don't argue with them because that goes nowhere, especially in the Southern Baptist culture. It's frustrating for me.

Dogboy, there's a line from an old Rod Stewart song that applies in our situation: "Ain't no use in talking when there's nobody listening."

I don't disagree with Yuval Noah Hariri's point, but there seems to be an implication that since anything that can be done is natural that is should also be permited. When people describe an act as "unnatural" they are often doing so from the positions that it should be forbidden. This often seems hypocritical when you consider how many "unnatural" things most people do or make use of. Sombody may forbid gay mariage on the grounds that it is unnatural, and yet they drive a car, use the internet, wear glasses, take medication, and make a living turning trees into decidedly non-treelike objects. All of those things are "unnatural" and yet few people would condemn those acts on those grounds.

On the other hand, there are many acts we can observe in nature that are simply deplorable. For example, infantiside is quite common in the animal kingdom. When times are tough many species of rodent will eat their own young. Territorial males will also kill the young of other males in order to free up resources for their own future offspring. Should we then say that these behaviours are acceptable in human society? I don't think so. There is still a place for social norms that limit what we can or cannot do, but weather or not an act is natural is irrelevant to the conversation. Rather, we should assess the effect an action and create rules around it to reduce harm and maximize prosperity and well-being.

Tyger said:

A helpful thought that I think is important to remember if you apply it to your AB side. I don't mean for this to be an attack on religion, but rather a perspective on culture vs nature.


"How can we distinguish what is biologically determined from what people merely try to justify through biological myths? A good rule of thumb is ‘Biology enables, Culture forbids.’ Biology is willing to tolerate a very wide spectrum of possibilities. It’s culture that obliges people to realise some possibilities while forbidding others. Biology enables women to have children –some cultures oblige women to realise this possibility. Biology enables men to enjoy sex with one another –some cultures forbid them to realise this possibility.

Culture tends to argue that it forbids only that which is unnatural. But from a biological perspective, nothing is unnatural. Whatever is possible is by definition also natural. A truly unnatural behaviour, one that goes against the laws of nature, simply cannot exist, so it would need no prohibition. No culture has ever bothered to forbid men to photosynthesise, women to run faster than the speed of light, or negatively charged electrons to be attracted to each other.

In truth, our concepts ‘natural’ and ‘unnatural’ are taken not from biology, but from Christian theology."

From Yuval Noah Hariri, Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind

Click to expand...

Hi Tyger

I am going to respond to this, but I won't to do it Justice. At the I am not able to do that does of work commitments.
When time allows I will put my thoughts to this.

It to juicy to pass up. But next time I prefer it cut into triangles. Hee, hee.

Thanks

Sisi

Tyger said:

from a biological perspective, nothing is unnatural.

Click to expand...

Not only unnatural. I think everything is posible. In rest, completely agree.

I'll repeat the same like sometimes before: Selfbeating because social prejudice isn't a solution. Is really better enjoy your secret part, always when you're not limiting others. Keep secret ? - If necessary (and not only for me still it is.)

I agree that nothing is unnatural if you look at it from that point. However, just because something isn't unnatural doesn't mean it should be allowed. Should murder be allowed just because it isn't unnatural? Should stealing be allowed just because it isn't unnatural? Just something to think about. AB/DL is harmless so I feel like there shouldn't be this...I don't know what to call it...Stigma? attached to it.

Tyger said:

A helpful thought that I think is important to remember if you apply it to your AB side. I don't mean for this to be an attack on religion, but rather a perspective on culture vs nature.


"How can we distinguish what is biologically determined from what people merely try to justify through biological myths? A good rule of thumb is ‘Biology enables, Culture forbids.’ Biology is willing to tolerate a very wide spectrum of possibilities...

In truth, our concepts ‘natural’ and ‘unnatural’ are taken not from biology, but from Christian theology."

From Yuval Noah Hariri, Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind

Click to expand...

An excellent quote. We should keep in mind the source of what is deemed "natural" and "unnatural". There is just one detail I would like to clarify. "Christian Theology" is not the source of most of these concepts. What is done in the name of "The Church" is often the opposite of what should be Christian doctrine. Christ accepted everyone who would come to him; religious leaders reject those "unworthy". Jesus Christ said "Love your neighbor." The apostles said "love your neighbors." Some church leaders teach something different.

Just because some church leaders say it does not make it "gospel truth". Galileo was put under house arrest for suggesting the earth revolves around the sun instead of what the Pope had taught. Many people have been executed for sharing Bibles with others. Where does the narrow mind originate? Narrow minded people who do not want to love their neighbors, but instead desire to condemn and convict their neighbors.

Now then, what is the natural state of humans? I would argue that the natural state is to hate any who do not conform. Skin pigment not right? Condemnation. Clothes not matching? Condemnation. Different interests in the bedroom? Condemnation. Never met the person before? Condemnation. Would the unnatural state then be to accept everyone in the world as they are and as our close neighbors with love and care? No, that could not be right! Those people do not conform to <insert arbitrary and random rule here> and must be condemned!

For us, diapers are natural. Diapers fill a need in our life. It would be unnatural to give up diapers. Let us get our padding on and get on with our lives.